2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0272-6386(03)00656-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single-dose pharmacokinetics of ofloxacin during continuous venovenous hemofiltration in critical care patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…During CVVH, Fuhrmann et al found a mean serum ofloxacin concentration peak of 5.5 ± 0.7 mg/L and a t1/2, hemofiltration clearance, and total removal of 2.8 ± 0.5 h, 89.9 ± 4.5 mL/min, and 76.9% ± 7.1%, respectively. [40] In our study, mean ofloxacin SC, CL CVVH and t1/2 ranged from 59.50 to 66.00%; 18.74 to 52.19 mL/min and 6.58 to 8.72 h, respectively. However, due to the high volume of distribution, serum concentration is comparable between the standard and high volume group, implying that no dose adaptation is required at increasing CVVH dose.…”
Section: Ofloxacinsupporting
confidence: 43%
“…During CVVH, Fuhrmann et al found a mean serum ofloxacin concentration peak of 5.5 ± 0.7 mg/L and a t1/2, hemofiltration clearance, and total removal of 2.8 ± 0.5 h, 89.9 ± 4.5 mL/min, and 76.9% ± 7.1%, respectively. [40] In our study, mean ofloxacin SC, CL CVVH and t1/2 ranged from 59.50 to 66.00%; 18.74 to 52.19 mL/min and 6.58 to 8.72 h, respectively. However, due to the high volume of distribution, serum concentration is comparable between the standard and high volume group, implying that no dose adaptation is required at increasing CVVH dose.…”
Section: Ofloxacinsupporting
confidence: 43%
“…This small discrepancy might be explained by the fact that the bovine blood used in this ex vivo study has low albumin concentrations (mean concentration of 3.0-3.3 g/dL) [12] or perhaps these agents do not bind as avidly to bovine albumin as they do to human albumin. Previous in vitro and in vivo studies have reported similar discrepancies between observed and predicted pharmacokinetic parameters for antibiotics [16, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34]. The discrepancy in SA/SC likely has little clinical significance, as nearly 40% of critically ill patients are hypoalbuminemic (<2.5 g/dL) [35,] which results in decreased protein binding and increased free drug concentrations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Discordance between Sc/Sa and protein free fraction has also been reported for other antibiotics [15,26,27] . Lau et al [37] showed that for drugs that are highly protein bound, protein binding was the primary factor limiting drug sieving, but for other drugs the presence of plasma proteins had only a modest effect on the sieving coeffi cient.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…Different alternatives have been suggested to explain increased sieving coeffi cient: the requirement for the electroneutrality across the hemofi ltration membrane [26,39] , weak bindings to plasma proteins [40] or alterations of the fraction of drug available for transport across the fi lter membrane because of the passage through the extracorporeal circuit [26] . The issue of lower Scs has been much less discussed in the literature [41] ; adsorption to hemofi lter or the Gibbs-Donnan effect has been suggested [15] . Some authors defend that different affi nities of drugs on whole blood binding sites could be the reason of the deviation of drug sieving coeffi cients from predicted values [42] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%