Background: This clinical trial evaluated the pharmacokinetics and safety/tolerability of amikacin/fosfomycin solution using a vibrating plate nebulizer, in mechanically ventilated patients with ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Methods: Nine adult patients were consented to receive three escalating doses of a combination of 50 mg/mL amikacin and 20 mg/mL fosfomycin; doses were separated by 24 -2 hr. On day 3, patients received two blinded, randomized treatments (amikacin/fosfomycin and volume-matched placebo), separated by 2 hr. All treatments were administered with a single-patient, multitreatment nebulizer (Investigational eFlow Ò Inline Nebulizer System; PARI Pharma GmbH, positioned in the inspiratory limb tubing between the ventilator and the patient. The nebulizer remained in-line until all treatments had been delivered. Concentrations of amikacin and fosfomycin were measured in tracheal aspirate and plasma samples obtained during the 24 hr after each dose. Results: Fifteen minutes after dosing with the 300/120 mg amikacin/fosfomycin combination, tracheal aspirate amikacin concentrations -SD were 12,390 -3,986 lg/g, and fosfomycin concentrations were 6,174 -2,548 lg/g (n¼6). Airway clearance was rapid. Plasma concentrations were subtherapeutic; the highest observed amikacin plasma concentration was 1.4 lg/mL, and the highest observed fosfomycin plasma concentration was 0.8 lg/mL. Administration time was approximately 2 min/mL. No adverse effects on respiratory rate, peak airway pressures, or oxygenation were observed during or following drug or placebo administration. Conclusions: High tracheal aspirate concentrations of amikacin and fosfomycin were achieved in mechanically ventilated patients with VAT or VAP after aerosolized administration with an inline nebulizer system. Airway clearance was rapid. No adverse respiratory effects were noted during or following drug administration.

In quantifying aerosol delivery, the drug is often mixed with a radiolabel such as (99m)Tc-DTPA whose deposition is used as a proxy for the drug. (99m)Tc-DTPA deposited in the lung is cleared by a combination of absorption into the pulmonary circulation and mucociliary clearance. If administration is not instantaneous, the image will not include that clearance during administration, a problem raised if comparing devices with different administration times. However, if rates of clearance are measured, it will be possible to "correct" the initial image for the clearance that occurred during administration and before counting. Five adult males inhaled a 5-mL solution containing (99m)Tc-DTPA from a breath enhanced jet nebulizer (LC Plus)over the course of 10 min and a 1.25-mL solution from a vibrating membrane device (eFlow), which was delivered in 2.5 min. Quality assurance was the radioactivity count balance (RCB) defined as the difference in the total radioactivity pre-nebulization less post, divided by pre, and expressed as a percentage. Attenuation calculations used a (57)Co flood source (Macey and Marshall). The "correction" for the clearance of (99m)Tc-DTPA was 0.91 +/- 0.04 (mean +/- SD) for the LC Plus) and 0.96 +/- 0.02 for the eFlow). RCB was -0.6 +/- 3.5% for the LC Plus and -4.7 +/- 6.4% for the eFlow, implying acceptable accuracy. For the LC Plus, lung deposition was 15.9(13.4, 18.4)% (mean and 95% CI) of the charge dose, and for the eFlow it was 32.0(29.0, 35.0)%. This technique gave an acceptable level of accuracy for quantitative planar imaging and allowed the comparison of delivery from devices with very different rates of delivery.

No abstract

No abstract