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.

Atividade antimicrobiana in vitro da cefpiroma em comparação com outros beta-lactâmicos de amplo espectro contra 804 amostras clínicas de nove hospitais brasileiros

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a atividade in vitro da cefalosporina de quarta geração, cefpiroma em comparação com ceftazidima, ceftriaxona, cefotaxima e imipenem em um estudo multicêntrico envolvendo nove hospitais de seis cidades em quatro estados. MATERIAL E MÉTODOS: Foram estudadas 804 amostras clínicas isoladas em pacientes internados em unidades de terapia intensiva ou unidades de oncohematologia. As amostras foram coletadas no período de junho a novembro de 1995, isto é, antes da cefpiroma estar disponível comercialmente no Brasil, e testadas através do método de microdiluição em placas conforme descrito pelo National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). Todas as amostras resistentes à cefpiroma foram retestadas utilizando-se o E-test. RESULTADOS: Contra as amostras de enterobactérias (n= 344), a cefpiroma apresentou atividade de 2 a 32 vezes superior àquela apresentada pelas cefalosporinas de terceira geração (CTGs) e semelhante àquela apresentada pelo imipenem. As porcentagens de enterobactérias sensíveis foram: 88% para a cefpiroma, 69% para as CTGs e 96% para o imipenem. O espectro de ação da cefpiroma foi maior ou igual ao do imipenem contra as espécies Citrobacter freundii, E. aerogenes, Morganella morganii e Serratia marcescens. Contra Acinetobacter sp. (n=77), a cefpiroma foi ligeiramente mais ativa que a ceftazidima, porém as porcentagens de resistência foram muito altas para esses compostos (84% e 88% respectivamente). As atividades da cefpiroma, ceftazidima e imipenem foram semelhantes contra Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n=128), com MIC50/porcentagem de sensibilidade de 8/59%, 8/62% e 4/62% respectivamente. Contra bactérias aeróbias gram-positivas, a cefpiroma foi de 4 a 16 vezes mais ativa que as CTGs. Contra S. epidermidis e outras espécies de estafilococos coagulase-negativos a cefpiroma foi ligeiramente superior ao imipenem, porém, contra as outras espécies de bactérias gram-positivas avaliadas, o imipenem apresentou atividade um pouco superior. CONCLUSÃO: Os resultados desse estudo sugerem que, no Brasil, a cefpiroma apresenta espectro de ação superior ao das CTGs contra bactérias gram-negativas (Enterobacteriaceae e não-fermentadares) e gram-positivas e semelhante ao do imipenem contra algumas espécies de enterobactérias e contra P. aeruginosa.

Avaliacao da atividade da nova cefalosporina de quarta geracao cefpiroma contra amostras clinicas isoladas em unidades de terapia intensiva e unidades de oncoematologia de varios hospitais brasileiros

Objective: To evaluate the in vitro activity of the fourth-generation cephalosporin cefpirome in comparison to that of ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime and imipenem in a multicenter study involving nine hospitals from six cities (four states). Material and methods: A total of 804 isolates from patients hospitalized in either intensive care units or Oncology/Hematology units was evaluated. The isolates were collected between June and November of 1995, i.e. before cefpirome became commercially available in Brazil, and susceptibility tested by broth microdilution following the NCCLS procedures. All isolates resistant to cefpirome were retested by B-test. Results: Against Enterobacteriaceae (n = 344), cefpirome demonstrated an activity 2 to 32-fold higher than that of the third-generation cephalosporins (TGCs) and similar to that of imipenem. The percentages of Enterobacteriaceae susceptible were: 88%, 69% and 96% for cefpirome, TGCs and imipenem, respectively, The cefpirome spectrum were greater or equal to that of imipenem against Citrobacter freundii, Enterobacter aerogenes, Morganellao morganii and Serratia marcescens. Against Acinetobacter sp. (n = 77), cefpirome was slightly more active than ceftazidime; however, the percentages of isolates resistant to these compounds were high (84% and 88%, respectively). The activities of cefpirome, ceftazidime and imipenem were very similar against P. aeruginosa isolates (n = 128), with MIC50 (μg/ml) percent susceptible of 8/59%, 8/62% and 4/62% respectively, Against aerobic gram-positive bacteria, the cefpirome activity was 4 to 16-fold higher than that of TGCs but 2 to 8-fold lower than that of imipenem. Conclusion: The results of our study suggest that, in Brazil, cefpirome has a spectrum of activity which is higher than that of the TGCs against aerobic gram-negative (Enterobacteriaceae and non-Enterobacteriaceae) and gram-positive bacteria and similar to that of imipenem against some Enterobacteriaceae species and P. aeruginosa.

Atividade comparada da cefepima, cefpiroma e amicacina em amostras bacterianas hospitalares

The objective of this study was to evaluate the in vitro activity of cefepime, cefpirome and amikacin against the most prevalent nosocomial bacteria. Initially a prospective study was designed to compare the bacterial susceptibility to the three drugs using 1,022 pathogenic strains. The strains were isolated from hospitalized patients of the Hospital das Clinicas - Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, SP, from March to December of 1996, by using the Bauer-Kirby susceptibility diffusion controlled method. The activity of cefepime by the Kirby-Bauer method was significantly higher (χ2, p ≤ 0.05) than cefpirome and amikacin for the following bacteria: P. aeruginosa (72% x 56% x 64%, respectively), Enterobacter cloacae (98% x 88% x 80%) and total strains (79.5% x 74.3% x 76.8%). Cefpirome exhibited higher activity than cefepime only to Enterococcus faecalis (42% x 23%). In the 12 other bacterial groups studied the sensibility of the three drugs was similar (χ2, p ≥ 0.05). The minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) for 127 bacterial strains - Enterobacter cloacae (12), Citrobacter sp (15), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (50), Acinetobacter baumannii (12), BGNF others (22) and Enterococcus faecalis (16)-from the same origin previously described and isolated during 1997, was determined by E-test. Ranges of MIC intervals, MIC(50%), MIC(90%) and the proportion of the sensitive bacterial strains were determined and permitted the following analysis: the activity of cefepime against Gram-negative bacteria was 2 or more times higher than that of cefpirome and amikacin, specially when CIM(90%) was considered; the activity of cefpirome was higher only against E. faecalis. This information must be considered in the rational use of antibiotic, specially in patients with nosocomial infections.