This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
Author's personal copy
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 33 (2009) 432–436
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijantimicag
Pharmacokinetics of once-daily dosing of ertapenem in critically ill patients
with severe sepsis
A.J. Brink a,∗ , G.A. Richards b , V. Schillack c , S. Kiem d , J. Schentag d
a
Department of Clinical Microbiology, Ampath National Laboratory Services, Milpark Hospital, Johannesburg, South Africa
Department of Intensive Care, Johannesburg Hospital and University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
c
Department of Esoteric Sciences, Ampath National Laboratory Services, 614 Pretorius str, Pretoria, South Africa
d
School of Pharmacy, University at Buffalo, and CPL Associates, LLC, Buffalo, New York, USA
b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 25 September 2008
Accepted 2 October 2008
Keywords:
Ertapenem
Once daily
Pharmacokinetics
Severe sepsis
Albumin
a b s t r a c t
Adequate data on the pharmacokinetics of once-daily administration of ertapenem in critically ill patients
are largely lacking. This single-centre, prospective, open-label study was performed on a cohort of eight
critically ill patients with severe sepsis with normal renal function treated with 1 g of ertapenem once
daily. Samples of venous blood and urine were collected before infusion and at specific time points in the
24-h post-infusion period. Plasma and urine ertapenem levels were determined by reverse-phase highperformance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with ultraviolet detection. The non-protein-bound fraction
was determined in the filtrate by HPLC using a Centrifree device. The current study showed a lower maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) (52.3.0 mg/L vs. 253 mg/L) and area under the concentration–time
curve from 0 h to infinity (AUC0–∞ ) (188 mg h/L vs. 817 mg h/L) but higher volume of distribution at steady
state (Vss ) (26.8 L vs. 5.7 L) compared with those observed in young healthy volunteers. For unbound
ertapenem, geometric means of Cmax and AUC0–∞ were 29.5 mg/L and 103.5 mg h/L, respectively, and
correlated negatively with hypoalbuminaemia. Unbound levels failed to exceed a minimum inhibitory
concentration of 1 mg/L for more than 7.1 h (30%) of the dosing interval in two patients. The highly variable and unpredictable intersubject pharmacokinetic parameters documented in this study resulted in
suboptimal unbound concentrations in some patients. This raises the question as to whether ertapenem
is an appropriate agent for initial use in critically ill patients with severe sepsis.
© 2008 Elsevier B.V. and the International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Ertapenem is a parenteral broad-spectrum carbapenem with
in vitro activity that includes extended-spectrum -lactamase
(ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae such as Klebsiella pneumoniae [1]. In this regard, the increased use of carbapenems is driven
by accumulation of cephalosporin and fluoroquinolone resistance
amongst such Enterobacteriaceae [2]. Ertapenem is deemed a
suitable and ‘tailored’ alternative for directed therapy of ESBL
infections and is also considered a valid empirical option in
the treatment of community-acquired intra-abdominal infections,
community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and early-onset hospitalor ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) where risk factors for
non-fermentative pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa are
not present [3,4].
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +27 11 726 6260; fax: +27 11 482 3361.
E-mail address: brinka@ampath.co.za (A.J. Brink).
Ertapenem is a time-dependent antibiotic, requiring the
unbound fraction to exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration
(MIC) for >20% and >40% of the dosing interval to ensure bacteriostatic and maximal bactericidal effect, respectively [5].
However, the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of once-daily administration of ertapenem in patients in the critical care setting is
largely unavailable. In patients with VAP, the unbound ertapenem
serum and epithelial lining fluid concentrations exceed the MIC90
(the MIC for 90% of the organisms) of most pathogens over 50–100%
of the dosing interval [6]. In contrast, Burkhardt et al. [7] recently
estimated that the unbound plasma concentration of ertapenem in
critically ill patients with early-onset VAP exceeds a MIC90 of 2 mg/L
for only 6 h (25% of the dosing interval) after infusion and advocated
shortening of the dosing interval or continuous infusion to ensure
optimal free concentrations in these patients. The same author had
previously documented that the mean maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) and area under the concentration–time curve from
0 h to infinity (AUC0–∞ ) of ertapenem in the plasma of patients
undergoing lung surgery was much lower than those values documented for healthy young or elderly volunteers [8–10].
0924-8579/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. and the International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.10.005
Author's personal copy
A.J. Brink et al. / International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 33 (2009) 432–436
The aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of ertapenem in critically ill patients with severe sepsis and
to determine whether the current registered daily dosing of 1 g
once daily provides adequate unbound plasma concentrations for
antibacterial efficacy.
2. Patients and methods
2.1. Study design
This single-centre, prospective, open-label study was performed in the Department of Critical Care, Johannesburg Hospital,
Johannesburg, South Africa. Subjects consisted of eight critically ill patients with severe sepsis. Written informed consent
was obtained either from the patient or, when appropriate,
from their closest relative. At the discretion of the physician,
all patients received 1 g of intravenous ertapenem (Invanz® ;
Merck, Sharp & Dohme, Midrand, South Africa) over 30 min once
daily for indications that included directed therapy for Gramnegative intra-abdominal or urinary infections, empirical therapy
for community-acquired and early hospital-acquired pneumonia
or community-acquired intra-abdominal infection associated with
features of severe sepsis. Criteria for the latter included: clinical
evidence of acute infection; temperature >38.8 ◦ C or <35.6 ◦ C; heart
rate >90 beats/min; tachypnoea >20 breaths/min; evidence of organ
dysfunction or inadequate organ perfusion [including hypotension
(systolic blood pressure of <90 mmHg or a decrease in baseline
blood pressure of >40 mmHg after adequate fluid resuscitation)];
systemic acidosis; blood lactate ≥4 mmol/L; oliguria; or acute alteration of mental status. Patients with suspected -lactam allergy,
pregnancy, lactation or co-morbid disease that may interfere with
the study and those with hepatic and renal impairment were
excluded. Serum creatinine concentrations were determined at the
same time as the sampling for ertapenem analysis. Creatinine clearance (CLCr ) was calculated by means of the Cockcroft–Gault formula
and patients were considered to have normal renal function if the
CLCr was >50 mL/min.
The following information was recorded: demographic data
including age and weight; clinical details including underlying
co-morbid illnesses; microbiology (in cases of directed therapy); duration of ertapenem treatment and outcome; concomitant
antibiotics and dosages; Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores; serum biochemistry; serum creatinine;
liver function tests; 24-h urine volume; urine creatinine concentration; and adverse events.
2.2. Sampling and analysis
Samples (10 mL) of venous blood were collected before and 0.5,
1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18 and 24 h after the start of the ertapenem infusion. Samples were centrifuged and plasma was stored at −70 ◦ C
for later analysis. Urine specimens were collected pre dose and
for the periods 0–2, 2–4, 4–6, 6–8, 8–12, 12–18 and 18–24 h. All
urine passed during each period was pooled, mixed thoroughly,
measured and stored at 2–8 ◦ C. Subsequently, a 10 mL aliquot was
removed and stored at −70 ◦ C after a stabiliser [equal volumes
of urine and the buffer 0.1 M 2-ethanesulfonic acid salt (pH 6.5)]
had been added at the study site. Plasma and urine ertapenem
levels were determined at the Department of Esoteric Sciences,
Ampath National Laboratory Services, Pretoria, South Africa, by
reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)
with ultraviolet detection without the column switching option
used for high-volume throughput of samples, as described by Musson et al. [11]. The non-protein-bound fraction of ertapenem was
433
determined by HPLC after filtration with a Centrifree device [12].
The limit of quantification for bound and unbound ertapenem was
determined as 0.5 mg/L, with a linearity range of 0.5–100 mg/L,
regression (r2 ) of 0.9983, precision <10% coefficient of variation
(n = 5) and accuracy of 50.0 ± 6% based on nominal concentrations
of 1.0 mg/L and 50 mg/L.
2.3. Pharmacokinetic analysis
PK analysis was done by the School of Pharmacy, University at Buffalo, and CPL Associates, LLC, Buffalo, New York, USA.
The AUC0–∞ was calculated by the log-linear trapezoidal rule
until the time of last quantifiable plasma concentration and then
extrapolated to infinity using the quotient of the last measurable
concentration to the rate constant (K). The first-order rate constant (K), estimated from the slope of the exponential phase of
the logarithmic plasma concentration–time profile, was used. The
rate K was estimated from the slope of the exponential phase of
the logarithmic plasma concentration–time profile. The elimination half-life (t1/2 ) was determined as 0.693/K. Total body clearance
(CLT ) was determined as dose/AUC0–∞ . The volume of distribution
at steady state (Vss ) was calculated as dose·AUMC/(AUC0–∞ ), where
AUMC is the area under the first moment curve from time zero to
infinity. The urine drug concentration and urine volume data were
used to calculate urinary excretion. To calculate total urinary excretion (Xu ), the quotient of the last average measurable excretion
rate to the rate K was added to the amount of drug cumulatively
excreted in urine up to the time of the last quantitation of urine
concentration. The fraction of the dose cumulatively excreted into
urine and renal clearance (CLR ) were determined as Xu /dose and
Xu /plasma AUC0–∞ , respectively. The Cmax was obtained directly
from actual measured data. The time (h) above each of the following plasma concentrations (0.06, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 8.0 mg/L) for both
total and unbound ertapenem was calculated from the equation
log C = log C0 −K /2.303 × t. For all variables, arithmetic mean value,
standard deviation (S.D.) and geometric mean were calculated, with
the exception of time above the MIC (T > MIC), for which median is
given.
3. Results
3.1. Patient characteristics
Eight patients with severe sepsis were recruited over an 18month period. Their demographic data are shown in Table 1.
Reasons for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission included
severe CAP (n = 3), post-surgical intra-abdominal sepsis (n = 3),
Guillain–Barré syndrome with urinary sepsis (n = 1) and a case of
malaria with Gram-negative sepsis (n = 1). The microbiological aetiology was established in three patients: Escherichia coli from blood
culture and urine and Morganella morganii from a tracheal aspirate.
Three patients had low serum protein (range 41–90 g/L), and all
except one had hypoalbuminaemia (range 16–46 g/L, mean ± S.D.
26.9 ± 9.0 g/L). No patient had impaired renal function. No serious
adverse advents were noted and all patients survived.
3.2. Pharmacokinetic profile
Considerable intersubject variability was documented in this
study (Table 2). The mean ± S.D. and geometric mean total
ertapenem PK data for the eight patients are given in Table 3.
The geometric mean total Cmax and AUC0–∞ were 52.3 mg/L and
188 mg h/L, respectively. The Vss , CLT and CLR were all elevated at
26.8 L, 88.6 mL/min and 33.2 mL/min, respectively. The elimination
half-life was recorded as a geometric mean of 4.5 h. For unbound
Author's personal copy
434
A.J. Brink et al. / International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 33 (2009) 432–436
Table 1
Patient characteristics at enrolment (n = 8; 5 female, 3 male).
Patient
Age (years)
Weight (kg)
APACHE II
score
Creatinine
(mol/L)
CLCr (mL/min)
Protein
(g/L)a
Albumin
(g/L)b
ICU admission
Pathogen/source
1
2
43
40
55
60
8
9
89
56
63
132
90
75
32
25
Severe CAP
Severe CAP
3
43
43
15
64
131
42
23
4
56
80
4
51
158
41
16
5
21
60
4
67
122
79
46
Post-surgical IA
sepsis
Post-surgical IA
sepsis
Guillain–Barré
N/A
Morganella
morganii,
tracheal aspirate
N/A
6
42
75
7
134
68
46
22
7
8
24
24
60
50
18
6
147
103
50
50
85
73
24
27
Mean ± S.D.
Median
Range
36.6 ± 12.3
41
21–56
60.4 ± 12.2
60
43–80
8.9 ± 5.1
8
4–18
88.9 ± 36.3
78
51–147
96.8 ± 43.3
95
50–158
66.4 ± 20.1
74
41–90
26.9 ± 9.0
25
16–46
Post-surgical IA
sepsis
Malaria
Severe CAP
N/A
Escherichia coli,
urine
N/A
E. coli, blood
N/A
APACHE, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation; CLCr , creatinine clearance; ICU, intensive care unit; CAP, community-acquired pneumonia; N/A, not available; IA,
intra-abdominal.
a
Normal range 60–83 g/L.
b
Normal range 35–52 g/L.
Table 2
Total ertapenem pharmacokinetic data after a single 1 g infusion in eight critically ill patients with severe sepsis.
Parameter
t1/2 (h)
Vss (L)
CLT (mL/min)
CLR (mL/min)
fu (% of dose)
AUC0–∞ (mg h/L)
Cmax (mg/L)
Patient number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
3.3
7.3
28.9
9.5
33.0
577.3
146.9
1.4
11.9
101.6
35.0
34.4
164.0
87.7
6.6
77.4
356.5
272.8
76.5
46.8
10.3
3.5
23.1
70.0
44.3
64.5
238.0
89.9
5.6
11.8
32.5
7.8
24.3
512.8
212.2
4.2
258.0
910.7
176.8
19.4
18.3
5.5
17.2
78.0
82.6
12.3
13.2
201.8
22.6
3.9
7.3
21.3
21.2
97.7
782.4
177.3
t1/2 , elimination half-life; Vss , volume of distribution at steady state; CLT , total body clearance; CLR , renal clearance; fu , urinary recovery; AUC0–∞ , area under the
concentration–time curve from 0 h to infinity; Cmax , maximum plasma concentration.
ertapenem, the following geometric mean parameters were noted:
t1/2 of 4.8 h, Cmax of 29.5 mg/L and AUC0–∞ of 103.5 mg h/L, respectively (Table 4).
3.3. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile
Calculations of the time unbound ertapenem would exceed certain plasma concentrations are shown for each patient individually
and also as a median in Table 5. Unbound ertapenem did not exceed
the MIC breakpoint of 2 mg/L for Enterobacteriaceae for >40%
(9.6 h) of the 24-h dosing interval in four patients. The required
bacteriostatic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target of >20%
(4.8 h) was also not achieved in two patients with post-surgical
intra-abdominal infections (Tables 1 and 5; patients 3 and 6). For
a MIC of 1 mg/L, levels did not exceed the dosing interval for more
than 7.1 h (30%) of the time in both of these patients.
4. Discussion
Dosing regimens are based primary on PK profiles from healthy
volunteers rather than from critically ill patients where antibiotic disposition is variable and unpredictable due to alterations in
Table 3
Comparison of total ertapenem pharmacokinetic data after a single 1 g infusion obtained in critically ill patients with severe sepsis versus published data for critically ill
patients with early-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia [7] and healthy volunteers [9,17].
Parameter
t1/2 (h)
Vss (L)
CLT (mL/min)
CLR (mL/min)
fu (% of dose)
AUC0–∞ (mg h/L)
Cmax (mg/L)
Burkhardt et al. [7] (n = 17)a
This study (n = 8)
Mean ± S.D.
Geometric mean
5.7
59.4
200.5
72.5
45.1
317.7
94.1
4.5
26.8
88.6
33.2
36.7
188.0
52.3
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
4.9
85.7
306.9
98.3
30.3
274.6
79.0
4.15
14.8
43.2
31.8
54.8
418.5
90.5
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
1.33
3.78
23.7
23.3
19.09
171.6
26.1
Majumdar et al. [9] (n = 16)a
Pletz et al. [17] (n = 10)b
3.8
8.2 ± 1.5
29.5 ± 3.4
12.9 ± 4.3
44.4 ± 14.8
572.1 ± 68.6
154.9 ± 22.0
4.5 (23)
5.7 (18)
20.4 (18)
9.38 (37)
45.1 (36)
817 (20)
253 (15)
S.D., standard deviation; t1/2 , elimination half-life; Vss , volume of distribution at steady state; CLT , total body clearance; CLR , renal clearance; fu , urinary recovery; AUC0–∞ ,
area under the concentration–time curve from 0 h to infinity; Cmax , maximum plasma concentration.
a
Data reported as mean ± S.D.
b
Data reported as geometric mean [coefficient of variation (%)].
Author's personal copy
435
A.J. Brink et al. / International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 33 (2009) 432–436
Table 4
Comparison of unbound ertapenem pharmacokinetic data after a single 1 g infusion obtained in critically ill patients with severe sepsis versus published data for young
adults [9] and healthy elderly subjects [10].
Parameter
This study (n = 8)
t1/2 (h)
Vss (L)
CLT (mL/min)
CLR (mL/min)
AUC0–∞ (mg h/L)
Cmax (mg/L)
Mean ± S.D.
Geometric mean
10.1
89.9
316.2
147.5
180.6
46.4
4.8
54.3
161.0
63.4
103.5
29.5
±
±
±
±
±
±
18.2
92.3
374.3
219.2
167.4
40.5
Majumdar et al. [9] (n = 16)a
Musson et al. [10] (n = 8)a
–
123.1
513.6
223.3
33.2
12.9
4.7
–
–
122.4 ± 28.6
55.40 ± 7.6
–
±
±
±
±
±
37.2
80.8
67.8 6
5.5
3.2
S.D., standard deviation; t1/2 , elimination half-life; Vss , volume of distribution at steady state; CLT , total body clearance; CLR , renal clearance; AUC0–∞ , area under the
concentration–time curve from 0 h to infinity; Cmax , maximum plasma concentration.
a
Data reported as mean ± S.D.
intravascular volume, composition of plasma proteins, and renal
and hepatic function [13]. As a consequence of these variables, variations in PK characteristics have been demonstrated for antibiotics
such as ciprofloxacin [14], vancomycin [15] and imipenem [16].
The current study shows lower Cmax and AUC0–∞ and higher Vss ,
CLT and CLR for total ertapenem compared with those observed
in young healthy volunteers [9,17]. This confirms results obtained
from a recent study performed in critically ill patients with earlyonset VAP [7]. However, compared with critically ill patients with
severe sepsis in this study, the Vss , CLT and CLR were much higher
(59.4 L vs. 14.8 L, 200.5 mL/min vs. 43.2 mL/min and 72.5 mL/min
vs. 31.8 mL/min, respectively) than for those patients with earlyonset VAP. The Cmax and AUC0–∞ of unbound ertapenem were
much higher than those in healthy elderly or young adult volunteers and this could be explained by the low serum albumin
concentrations that are indicative of the severity of illness in these
patients (range 16–46 g/L, mean ± S.D. 26.9 ± 9.0 g/L). Similar findings for ertapenem were previously reported by Burkhardt et al.
[7]. Ertapenem has concentration-dependent protein binding of
between 84% and 96% [7]. This implies that as the level of albumin
decreases the unbound Cmax and AUC0–∞ increase and that the Vss ,
CLT and CLR would also change as a consequence. Similar effects of
hypoalbuminaemia on PK parameters in critically ill patients have
been reported by Joynt et al. [18] with ceftriaxone and by Pea et al.
[19], with teicoplanin.
Unique to the current study is the extreme variability of the PK
parameters between patients with severe sepsis. Factors other than
hypoalbuminaemia, such as the altered pathophysiological conditions present in severe sepsis as well as iatrogenic interventions,
may also have substantially influenced the distribution and elimination of ertapenem. These may have included the presence of
ascites, post-surgical fluid losses, fluid resuscitation and pleural
Table 5
Calculated time (h) of unbound plasma ertapenem above certain concentrations in
critically ill patients with severe sepsis after 1 g 30-min infusions.
Patient
Concentration (mg/L)
0.06
0.5
1
2
4
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
31.9
14.2
18.1
22.8
48.3
27.6
367.8
41.4
21.5
9.6
9.8
14.1
31.9
8.8
199.4
29.3
18.2
8.1
7.1
11.2
26.5
2.6
144.3
25.3
14.8
6.6
4.4
8.4
21.2
0.0
89.3
21.3
11.4
5.1
1.7
5.5
15.8
0.0
34.2
17.4
8.0
3.6
0.0
2.6
10.4
0.0
0.0
13.4
Median
Min.
Max.
29.8
14.2
367.8
17.8
8.8
199.4
14.7
2.6
144.3
11.6
0.0
89.3
8.4
0.0
34.2
3.1
0.0
13.4
Min., minimum; Max., maximum.
effusions. Unbound ertapenem failed to exceed a MIC of 1 mg/L for
more than 7.1 h (30%) of the dosing interval, specifically in two of
the patients with abdominal sepsis who also had the highest Vss ,
CLT and CLR . The enhanced CLR documented may have been as a
result of the use of haemodynamically active drugs or the hyperdynamic conditions associated with severe sepsis. It is also possible
that considerable amounts of the antibiotic may be lost in surgical
patients as it is strongly bound to protein and up to 2 g of nitrogen
(12.5 g of protein) per litre may be lost in any patient with an open
abdomen [20]. In addition to the above possibilities, renal function
is an important factor contributing to interpatient PK variability as
ca. 80% of ertapenem is excreted in the urine (38% unchanged and
37% metabolised in the kidney to an open-ring form). CLCr in this
cohort of patients ranged from 50 mL/min to 158 mL/min, which
would be sufficient to influence partially the recorded parameters.
A population PK analysis had previously indicated CLCr as a significant covariate explaining the intersubject variation of ertapenem
in the critical care setting [7].
In a comparative PK and pharmacodynamic target attainment
study in normal weight, obese and extremely obese adults, Chen et
al. [21] reported that the standard 1 g ertapenem dose may not provide adequate drug exposure for any body mass index for MICs in
excess of 0.25–0.5 mg/L. Similarly, the results of this study suggest
that 1 g of ertapenem as a single daily infusion would not suffice in
all critically ill patients with severe sepsis. This is in accordance
with the findings of Burkhardt et al. [7], who recently recommended shortening of the dosage interval or continuous infusion as
options to increase T > MIC. The same authors have also previously
performed Monte Carlo simulations comparing the probability of
pharmacodynamic target attainment in healthy volunteers versus
ICU patients with early VAP. In this study they found that at a MIC
of 1 g/L, the probability of attaining a bacteriostatic target T > MIC of
20% was <70% in the ICU population [22]. However, whereas higher
or more frequent doses might optimise bacterial outcome, they may
as an unintended consequence theoretically select for resistance to
imipenem, meropenem and doripenem in nosocomial pathogens
such as P. aeruginosa that are frequent colonisers in critically ill
patients. Although recent ecological studies have refuted concerns
that ertapenem may select for carbapenem cross-resistance in this
pathogen, these studies were performed in hospital wards [23]
or the percentage use of ertapenem in the critical care setting
was not stipulated [24]. This concern should also be directed to
the treatment of infections due to fermentative pathogens such as
ESBL-producing K. pneumoniae in ICU patients with sepsis. It has
previously been documented that use of ertapenem in this setting
has been associated with a 3- and 8-fold increase in imipenem and
meropenem MICs, respectively [2].
Limitations of this study include the fact that a very heterogeneous group was studied and therefore the numbers may be too
small to reflect fairly the characteristics of the drug. Also, patients
Author's personal copy
436
A.J. Brink et al. / International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 33 (2009) 432–436
with hepatic or renal dysfunction were specifically excluded and as
a consequence this detracts from extrapolating these results to all
patients with severe sepsis. These factors, similar to other agents
studied in this patient population, do not provide sufficient data to
allow specific dosing recommendations. However, the important
concerns that are raised and the highly variable and unpredictable
intersubject pharmacokinetics documented raise the question as to
whether ertapenem is an appropriate and suitable agent to use as
initial therapy for critically ill patients with severe sepsis, particularly in those with significant loss of protein from the abdomen.
Funding: The study was funded by Merck & Co., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Competing interests: AJB has received recent research funding
from sanofi-aventis, acted on the advisory board of MSD, Wyeth and
Pfizer and has served on speaker’s bureaus for Astra-Zeneca, Abbott
Laboratories, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, sanofi-aventis
and Wyeth pharmaceuticals. GAR has served on advisory boards
for MSD, Pfizer, Abbott Laboratories, Fresenius Kabi and Roche, has
received research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, and served on
speaker’s bureaus for Merck, sanofi-aventis, Roche, Astra-Zeneca,
Pfizer, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Wyeth, Boehringer and Fresenius
Kabi. All other authors have no competing interests to declare.
Ethical approval: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
References
[1] Livermore DM, Sefton AM, Scott GM. Properties and potential of ertapenem. J
Antimicrob Chemother 2003;52:331–44.
[2] Elliott E, Brink AJ, Van Greune J, Els Z, Woodford N, Turton G, et al. In-vivo
development of ertapenem resistance in a patient with pneumonia caused
by Klebsiella pneumoniae with extended-spectrum -lactamase. Clin Infect Dis
2006;42:e95–8.
[3] Brink AJ, Feldman C, Grolman DC, Muckardt D, Pretorius J, Richards GA, et al.
Appropriate use of the carbapenems. S Afr Med J 2004;94:857–61.
[4] American Thoracic Society/Infectious Disease Society of America. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilatorassociated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med
2005;171:388–416.
[5] Drusano GL. Antimicrobial pharmacodynamics: critical interactions of ‘bug and
drug’. Nat Rev Microbiol 2004;2:289–300.
[6] Boselli E, Breilh D, Saux M, Gordien J, Allaouchiche B. Pharmacokinetics and
lung concentrations of ertapenem in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Intensive Care Med 2006;32:2059–62.
[7] Burkhardt O, Kumar V, Katterwe D, Majcher-Peszynska J, Drewelouw B,
Derendorf H, et al. Ertapenem in critically ill patients with early-onset
ventilator-associated pneumonia: pharmacokinetics with special consideration of free-drug concentration. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007;59:277–84.
[8] Burkhardt O, Majcher-Peszynska J, Borner K, Mundkowski R, Drewelouw B,
Derendorf H, et al. Penetration of ertapenem into different pulmonary compartments of patients undergoing lung surgery. J Clin Pharmacol 2005;45:659–65.
[9] Majumdar AK, Musson DG, Birk KL, Kitchen CJ, Holland S, McCrea J, et al. Pharmacokinetics of ertapenem in healthy young volunteers. Antimicrob Agents
Chemother 2002;46:3506–11.
[10] Musson DG, Majumdar A, Holland S, Birk K, Xi L, Mistry G, et al. Pharmacokinetics of total and unbound ertapenem in healthy elderly subjects. Antimicrob
Agents Chemother 2004;48:521–4.
[11] Musson DG, Birk KL, Cairns AM, Majumdar AK, Rogers JD. High-performance
liquid chromatographic methods for the determination of a new carbapenem
antibiotic, L-749,345, in human plasma and urine. J Chromatogr B Biomed Sci
Appl 1998;720:99–106.
[12] Musson DG, Birk KL, Kitchen CJ, Zhang J, Hsieh JY, Majumdar AK, et al. Assay
methodology for the quantitation of unbound ertapenem, a new carbapenem
antibiotic, in human plasma. J Chromatogr B Biomed Analyt Technol Biomed
Life Sci 2003;783:1–9.
[13] Pea F, Viale P, Furlanut M. Antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients: a
review of pathophysiological conditions responsible for altered disposition and
pharmacokinetic variability. Clin Pharmacokinet 2005;44:1009–34.
[14] Lipman J, Scribante J, Gous AGS, Hon H, Tshukutsoane S. Pharmacokinetic profiles of high-dose intravenous ciprofloxacin in severe sepsis. The Baragwanath
Ciprofloxacin Study Group. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998;42:2235–9.
[15] Gous AGS, Dance MD, Lipman J, Luyt DK, Mathivha R, Scribante J. Changes in
vancomycin pharmacokinetics in critically ill infants. Anaesth Intensive Care
1995;23:678–82.
[16] McKindley DS, Boucher BA, Hess MM, Croce MA, Fabian TC. Pharmacokinetics
of aztreonam and imipenem in critically ill patients with pneumonia. Pharmacotherapy 1996;16:924–31.
[17] Pletz MWR, Rau M, Bulitta J, De Roux A, Burkhardt O, Kruse G, et al. Ertapenem
pharmacokinetics and impact on intestinal microflora, in comparison to those
of ceftriaxone, after multiple dosing in male and female volunteers. Antimicrob
Agents Chemother 2004;48:3765–72.
[18] Joynt GM, Lipman J, Gomersall CD, Young RJ, Wong ELY, Gin T. The pharmacokinetics of once-daily dosing of ceftriaxone in critically ill patients. J Antimicrob
Chemother 2001;47:421–9.
[19] Pea F, Brollo L, Viale P, Pavan P, Furlanut M. Teicoplanin therapeutic drug
monitoring in critically ill patients: a retrospective study emphasizing the
importance of a loading dose. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003;51:971–5.
[20] Cheatham ML, Safcsak K, Brzezinski SJ, Lube MW. Nitrogen balance, protein
loss, and the open abdomen. Crit Care Med 2007;35:127–31.
[21] Chen M, Nafziger AN, Drusano GL, Ma L, Bertino JS. Comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic target attainment of ertapenem in
normal-weight, obese and extremely obese adults. Antimicrob Agents
Chemother 2006;50:1222–7.
[22] Burkhardt O, Derendorf H, Welte T. Ertapenem: the new carbapenem 5
years after first FDA licensing for clinical practice. Expert Opin Pharmacother
2007;8:237–56.
[23] Carmeli Y, Lidji S, Shabtai E, Navon-Venezia S, Schwaber MJ. The effects of group
1 vs. group 2 carbapenems on imipenem resistant (IMP-R) P. aeruginosa (PA):
ecological study. In: Abstracts of the 47th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC). Washington, DC: ASM Press; 2007.
Abstract K396.
[24] Goff DA, Mangino JE. Ertapenem: no effect on aerobic Gram-negative susceptibilities to imipenem. J Infect 2008;57:123–7.