Elimination of Cardiac Glycosides Through Hemofiltration

Krämer, P.; Matthias, Christoph; Matthaei, D.; Scheler, F.

doi:10.3109/08860227709037664

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…18 Data from 1977 showed that hemofiltration was able to account for >50% of normal digoxin clearance and that continuous hemofiltration could be utilized for digitalis overdosage. 19 In neither of these reports was a digoxin C uf value obtained or an Sc value calculated. To our knowledge, ours is the first report of using an Sc value calculated from digoxin concentration values to individualize dosage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Management of digoxin therapy using pharmacokinetics in a patient undergoing continuous venovenous hemofiltration

Benken

Lizza

Yamout

et al. 2013

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Management of digoxin therapy using pharmacokinetics in a patient undergoing continuous venovenous hemofiltration

Benken

Lizza

Yamout

et al. 2013

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The elimination mechanism in hemofiltration differs from that in conventional dialysis treatment; diffusion processes, which play a role in peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis, do not take place during hemofiltration, in which the filtration process is the only mechanism of elimination (23). The effect of intermittent hemofiltration on drug disposition has been evaluated for only a few compounds (1,7,8,10,15,16,23,26). The present study demonstrated that hemofiltration can significantly remove ceftazidime and amikacin from the circulation of patients with severe renal disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of amikacin and ceftazidime in critically ill patients with septic multiple-organ failure during intermittent hemofiltration

Kinowski

Coussaye

Bressolle

et al. 1993

Antimicrob Agents Chemother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pharmacokinetic parameters of amikacin and ceftazidime were assessed in four patients undergoing hemofiltration for septic shock. The parameters were assessed during hemofiltration and in the interim period. The concentration-time profiles of these two drugs in plasma, urine, and ultrafiltrate were investigated after intravenous perfusion (30 min). In all cases a 1-g dose of ceftazidime was administered; for amikacin, the dosage regimen was adjusted according to the patient's amikacin levels (250 to 750 mg). Concentrations of drug in all samples were assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography with UV detection for ceftazidime and by enzyme multiplied immunoassay for amikacin. The elimination half-life (tl2) and the total clearance of amikacin ranged from 31.1 to 138.2 h and from 5.4 to 8.9 ml/min, respectively, during the interhemofiltration period in anuric patients. Hemofiltration substantially decreased the tl12 (3.5 0.49 h) and increased the total clearance (89.5 + 11.8 ml/min). The hemofiltration clearance of amikacin represented 71% of the total clearance, and the hemofiltration process removed, on average, 60% of the dose. During hemofiltration, the elimination t112 of ceftazidime (2.8 + 0.69 h) was greatly reduced and the total clearance increased (74.2 11.2 ml/min) compared with those in the interhemofiltration period (9 to 43.7 h and 7.4 to 16.8 ml/min, respectively). About 55% of the administered dose was recovered in the filtrate, and the hemofiltration clearance of ceftazidime was 46 + 14.3 ml/min. A redistribution phenomenon (rebound) in the amikacin and ceftazidime concentrations in plasma (35 and 28%, respectively) was reported after hemofiltration in two patients. The MICs for 90%o of the most important pathogens were exceeded by the concentrations of the two drugs in plasma during the whole treatment of these patients.

show abstract

“…16 Its potential in poisoning management was soon recognized. 17 Although peritoneal dialysis is not, per se, an ECTR (because poison removal does not occur outside the body), it too became a popular treatment for poisoning. Ganter pioneered its use in 1923, 18 but survival by a patient with acute kidney failure was only reported by Frank and colleagues in 1946.…”

Section: Historical Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%