Advertisement
Table 3 Characteristics of studies comparing outcome for continuous versus intermittent administration of cephalosporins
| Study | Drug | Patient population | Dosage | Study type | Outcome measure | Outcome | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bodey 1979 [36] | Cefamandole (+ carbenicillin 6 x 5 g/d) | FUO in neutropenic patients | 12 g/d CI (n = 74) vs. 4 x 3 g/d II (n = 92) | RCT | Clinical cure | NS | Significant difference in clinical cure (in favor of CI) only in subpopulation with persistent neutropenia (p = 0.03) |
| *Hanes 2000 [28] | Ceftazidime | Nosocomial pneumonia in critically ill trauma patients | 60 mg/kg/d CI (n = 17) vs. 3 x 2 g/d II (n = 15) | RCT | Length of stay Duration of leucocytosis Days to defervescence | NS NS NS | T > MIC > 90% in both II and CI groupLower antimicrobial dose in CI group |
| *Nicolau 2001 [38] | Ceftazidime (+tobramycin 7 mg/kg/d) | Nosocomial pneumonia in ICU patients | 3 g/d CI (n = 17) vs. 3 x 2 g/d II (n = 18) | RCT | Clinical cure Microbiological cure | NS NS | Lower antimicrobial dose in CI group |
| *Lorente 2007 [52] | Ceftazidime (+tobramycin 7 mg/kg) | VAP | 4 g/d CI (n = 56) vs. 2 x 2 g/d II (n = 65) | Retrospective, nonrandomized, historical chart review | Clinical cure | CI > II(p < 0.001) | |
| *Roberts 2007 [35] | Ceftriaxone | Sepsis | 2 g/d CI (n = 29) vs. 1 x 2 g/d II (n = 28) | RCT | Clinical cure- ITT analysisa priori | NS CI > II (p = 0.04) | Significant difference in clinical cure only in an ‘a priori’ defined subgroup of patients who received at least 4 days of ceftriaxone therapy (to exclude patients that were not ill enough or too ill) |
| Van Zanten 2007 [17] | Cefotaxime | COPD exacerbations | 2 g/d CI (n = 47) vs. 3 x 1 g/d II (n = 46) | RCT | Clinical cure | NS | Lower antimicrobial dose in CI group |
| *Georges 2005 [41] | Cefepime (+ amikacin 15 mg/kg/d) | Severe pneumonia or bacteremia | 4 g/d CI (n = 26) vs. 2 x 2 g/d II (n = 24) | RCT | Clinical cure | NS |
