Cefepime versus cefpirome: The importance of creatinine clearance

Standard dosage recommendations for beta-lactam antibiotics can result in very low drug levels in intensive care (IC) patients without renal dysfunction. We compared the pharmacokinetics of two fourth-generation cephalosporins, cefepime and cefpirome, and examined the relationship of drug clearance (CL) to creatinine clearance (CLCR). Two separate but similar pharmacokinetic studies (which used 2 g twice daily for each antibiotic) were conducted. Blood was sampled after an initial and a subsequent antibiotic dose. Drug plasma concentrations were measured, and pharmacokinetic analyses were conducted and compared. The pharmacokinetics of cefepime and cefpirome are similar in IC patients. Any differences in drug CL can largely be attributed to differences in CLCR. Despite normal plasma creatinine concentrations, 54% of patients' antibiotic concentrations were less than the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) (4 mg/L) for >20% of the dosing interval. Thirty-four percent of patients had CLCR >144 mL/min (20% higher than the expected maximum of 120 mL/min). Only CLCR was an independent predictor of antibiotic CL. Time above MIC was predicted only by CLCR. Some IC patients have a very large CLCR which results in very low levels of studied antibiotics. Either shortening the dosage interval or using continuous infusions would prevent low levels and keep troughs above the MIC for longer periods. In view of the lack of bedside measurement of cephalosporin levels, we suggest that more frequent use be made of CLCR to allow prediction of small concentrations clinically.

Comparison of the Berman Intubating Airway and the Williams Airway Intubator for fibreoptic orotracheal intubation in anaesthetised patients

Sixty patients with no clinical indicators of a difficult airway were selected to undergo a fibreoptic assessment after induction of general anaesthesia using both the Berman Intubating Airway and the Williams Airway Intubator. The bronchoscopic view and ease of railroading a tracheal tube during fibreoptic orotracheal intubation were studied. The bronchoscopic views obtained by the Berman Airway and the Williams Airway were significantly different (p < 0.008, test of symmetry). The estimated odds ratio of obtaining an obstructed path was 3.06 times higher for the Berman than the Williams Airway. However, if the glottis could be reached with the bronchoscope, there was no significant difference in the degree of ease of intubation between the two airways.

The clinical implication of the vocal cords-carina distance in anaesthetized Chinese adults during orotracheal intubation

Background. Previous studies have identified no strong correlation between patients' height and tracheal length in anaesthetized patients. We have attempted to compare vocal cords-carina distance (VCD) in Chinese patients with the dimensions of five commonly used tracheal tubes. In addition, we attempted to find a surface anatomy measurement that would identify patients with 'short tracheas'. Methods. We measured VCD in 130 anaesthetized Chinese patients with a fibreoptic bronchoscope. Also measurements were obtained of the distal ends of five commonly used tracheal tubes. We undertook various surface anatomy measurements on the patients' chest and neck region to predict those patients with short tracheas. Results. VCD averaged 12.6 ((SD) 1.4) cm. In seven patients (5%) this distance was particularly short (between 8.8 and 10.4 cm). Many of the commonly used tracheal tubes would be placed close to or beyond the carina when the black intubation guide mark(s) is (are) at the level of the vocal cords. The VCD of

Practical sources of error in measuring pulmonary artery occlusion pressure: a study in participants of a special intensivist training program of The Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI)

BACKGROUND: Physiological data obtained with the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) are susceptible to errors in measurement and interpretation. Little attention has been paid to the relevance of errors in hemodynamic measurements performed in the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this study was to assess the errors related to the technical aspects (zeroing and reference level) and actual measurement (curve interpretation) of the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP). METHODS: Forty-seven participants in a special ICU training program and 22 ICU nurses were tested without pre-announcement. All participants had previously been exposed to the clinical use of the method. The first task was to set up a pressure measurement system for PAC (zeroing and reference level) and the second to measure the PAOP. RESULTS: The median difference from the reference mid-axillary zero level was - 3 cm (-8 to + 9 cm) for physicians and -1 cm (-5 to + 1 cm) for nurses. The median difference from the reference PAOP was 0 mmHg (-3 to 5 mmHg) for physicians and 1 mmHg (-1 to 15 mmHg) for nurses. When PAOP values were adjusted for the differences from the reference transducer level, the median differences from the reference PAOP values were 2 mmHg (-6 to 9 mmHg) for physicians and 2 mmHg (-6 to 16 mmHg) for nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of the PAOP is susceptible to substantial error as a result of practical mistakes. Comparison of results between ICUs or practitioners is therefore not possible.

[Neuromonitoring and neuroprotection in cardiac anaesthesia. Nationwide survey conducted by the Cardiac Anaesthesia Working Group of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine]

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this nationwide survey carried out in department of cardiac anesthesia in Germany was to identify current practice with regard to neuromonitoring und neuroprotection. METHODOLOGY: The data are based on a questionnaire sent out to all departments of cardiac anesthesia in Germany between October 2007 und January 2008. The anonymized questionnaire contained 26 questions about the practice of preoperative evaluation of cerebral vessels, intra-operative use of neuromonitoring, the nature und application of cerebral protective measures, perfusion management during cardiopulmonary bypass, postoperative evaluation of neurological status, and training in the field of cerebral monitoring. RESULTS: Of the 80 mailed questionnaires 55% were returned and 90% of department evaluated cerebral vessels preoperatively with duplex ultrasound. The methods used for intra-operative neuromonitoring are electroencephalography (EEG, 60%) for type A dissections (38.1%), for elective surgery on the thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aorta (34.1% and 31.6%, respectively) and in carotid surgery (43.2%) near infrared spectroscopy (40%), evoked potentials (30%) and transcranial Doppler sonography (17.5%), with some centers using combined methods. In most departments the central nervous system is not subjected to monitoring during bypass surgery, heart valve surgery, or minimally invasive surgery. Cerebral protective measures used comprise patient cooling on cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB 100%), extracorporeal cooling of the head (65%) and the administration of corticosteroids (58%), barbiturates (50%) and antiepileptic drugs (10%). Neuroprotective anesthesia consists of administering inhalation anesthetics (32.5%; sevoflurane 76.5%) and intravenous anesthesia (20%; propofol and barbiturates each accounting for 46.2%). Of the departments 72.5% cool patients as a standard procedure for surgery involving cardiovascular arrest and 37.5% during all surgery using CPB. In 84.6% of department CPB flow equals calculated cardiac output (CO) under normothermia, while the desired mean arterial pressure (MAP) varies between 60 and 70 mmHg (43.9%) and between 50 and 60 mmHg (41.5%), respectively. At body temperatures less than 18 degrees C CPB flow is reduced below the calculated CO (70%) while 27% of departments use normothermic flow rates. The preferred MAP under hypothermia is between 50 and 60 mmHg (59%). The results of intra-operative neuromonitoring are documented on the anesthesia record (77%). In 42.5% of the departments postoperative neurological function is estimated by the anesthesiologist. Continuing education sessions pertaining to neuromonitoring are organized on a regular basis in 32.5% of the departments and in 37.5% individual physicians are responsible for their own neuromonitoring education. CONCLUSION: The present survey data indicate that neuromonitoring and neuroprotective therapy during CPB is not standardized in cardiac anesthesiology departments in Germany. The systemic use of available methods to implement multimodal neuromonitoring would be desirable.