↓ Skip to main content

Piperacillin concentration in relation to therapeutic range in critically ill patients – a prospective observational study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
65 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Piperacillin concentration in relation to therapeutic range in critically ill patients – a prospective observational study
Published in
Critical Care, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1255-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johannes Zander, Gundula Döbbeler, Dorothea Nagel, Barbara Maier, Christina Scharf, Mikayil Huseyn-Zada, Jette Jung, Lorenz Frey, Michael Vogeser, Michael Zoller

Abstract

Piperacillin levels after standard dosing have been shown frequently to be subtherapeutic, especially when renal clearance was augmented. Here, we aimed to determine if piperacillin was in its therapeutic range in a typically heterogeneous intensive care unit patient group, and also to describe target attainment dependent on daily dosage, creatinine clearance, and renal replacement therapy (RRT). Sixty patients with severe infections were included in this monocentric prospective observational study. Patients received 4.5 g of piperacillin-tazobactam two to three times daily by intermittent infusion depending on renal function according to clinical guidelines. Over 4 days, multiple serum samples (median per patient, 29; in total, 1627) were obtained to determine total piperacillin concentrations using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. A high heterogeneity of patient characteristics was observed (e.g., on day 1: creatinine clearance 2-233 mL/min and ten patients on RRT). Piperacillin trough levels showed inter-individual variation from 123 to >1785-fold on different study days. Each day, approximately 50 % and 60 % of the patients had piperacillin levels below the target ranges 1 and 2, respectively [defined for the calculated unbound piperacillin fraction according to the literature as 100 % time above MIC (100 %fT > MIC) (target range 1) and ≥ 50 %fT > 4 × MIC (target range 2); MIC = 16 mg/L]. Whereas only the minority of patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam three times daily (TID) reached target 1 (38 % on day 1), most patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam only twice daily (BID) because of severely impaired renal function reached this target (100 % on day 1). Patients with RRT had significant higher percentages of fT > MIC. Zero percent, 55 % and 100 % of patients without RRT who received antibiotics TID reached target 1 when creatinine clearance was > 65 mL/min, 30-65 mL/min and < 30 mL/min, respectively. In patients with causative strains only sensitive to piperacillin-tazobactam of all antibiotics given to the patient, piperacillin levels negatively correlated with CRP concentrations of day 4 (p < 0.05). A dosage of 4.5 g piperacillin-tazobactam TID seems to be frequently insufficient in critically ill patients, and also in patients where renal function is mildly to moderately impaired. For these patients, prescription of 4.5 g piperacillin-tazobactam four times daily could be considered. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01793012 . Registered 24 January 2013.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 65 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 17 15%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 26 23%
Unknown 19 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 40%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 28 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 29 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2016.
All research outputs
#955,547
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#737
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,748
of 314,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#18
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.