Comparative Impact of an Optimized PK/PD Target Attainment of Piperacillin-Tazobactam vs. Meropenem on the Trend over Time of SOFA Score and Inflammatory Biomarkers in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Infusion Monotherapy for Treating Documented Gram-Negative BSIs and/or VAP

Milo Gatti,Matteo Rinaldi,Tommaso Tonetti,Antonio Siniscalchi,Pierluigi Viale,Federico Pea
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13040296
2024-03-26
Antibiotics
Abstract:(1) Background: The advantage of using carbapenems over beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations in critically ill septic patients still remains a debated issue. We aimed to assess the comparative impact of an optimized pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment of piperacillin-tazobactam vs. meropenem on the trend over time of both Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and inflammatory biomarkers in critically ill patients receiving continuous infusion (CI) monotherapy with piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem for treating documented Gram-negative bloodstream infections (BSI) and/or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). (2) Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study comparing critically ill patients receiving targeted treatment with CI meropenem monotherapy for documented Gram-negative BSIs or VAP with a historical cohort of critical patients receiving CI piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy. Patients included in the two groups were admitted to the general and post-transplant intensive care unit in the period July 2021–September 2023 and fulfilled the same inclusion criteria. The delta values of the SOFA score between the baseline of meropenem or piperacillin-tazobactam treatment and those at 48-h (delta 48-h SOFA score) or at 7-days (delta 7-days SOFA) were selected as primary outcomes. Delta 48-h and 7-days C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT), microbiological eradication, resistance occurrence, clinical cure, multi-drug resistant colonization at 90-day, ICU, and 30-day mortality rate were selected as secondary outcomes. Univariate analysis comparing primary and secondary outcomes between critically ill patients receiving CI monotherapy with piperacillin-tazobactam vs. meropenem was carried out. (3) Results: Overall, 32 critically ill patients receiving CI meropenem monotherapy were compared with a historical cohort of 43 cases receiving CI piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy. No significant differences in terms of demographics and clinical features emerged at baseline between the two groups. Optimal PK/PD target was attained in 83.7% and 100.0% of patients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem, respectively. No significant differences were observed between groups in terms of median values of delta 48-h SOFA (0 points vs. 1 point; p = 0.89) and median delta 7-days SOFA (2 points vs. 1 point; p = 0.43). Similarly, no significant differences were found between patients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam vs. meropenem for any of the secondary outcomes. (4) Conclusion: Our findings may support the contention that in critically ill patients with documented Gram-negative BSIs and/or VAP, the decreases in the SOFA score and in the inflammatory biomarkers serum levels achievable with CI piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy at 48-h and at 7-days may be of similar extent and as effective as to those achievable with CI meropenem monotherapy provided that optimization on real-time by means of a TDM-based expert clinical pharmacological advice program is granted.
pharmacology & pharmacy,infectious diseases
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper aims to explore the comparative impact of achieving optimized pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) targets for piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem in the treatment of confirmed Gram-negative bloodstream infections (BSI) and/or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients. Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the impact of two antibiotics—piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem, both administered as continuous infusion (CI) monotherapy—on achieving optimized PK/PD targets for the following two primary indicators: 1. **SOFA score** (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score) trend over time; 2. **Inflammatory biomarkers** (such as C-reactive protein CRP and procalcitonin PCT) levels trend over time. Additionally, the study also focuses on several secondary outcome indicators, including changes in inflammatory biomarkers within 48 hours and 7 days, microbiological clearance rate, incidence of resistance, clinical cure rate, colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms, ICU and 30-day mortality rates, among others. Through a retrospective observational study, the authors compared these indicators in critically ill patients receiving meropenem CI monotherapy with those in a historical control group receiving piperacillin-tazobactam CI monotherapy. The results indicated that, after achieving optimized PK/PD targets, there were no significant differences between the two groups in both primary and secondary outcomes. This may support the similar efficacy and safety of piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem in treating critically ill patients with confirmed Gram-negative BSI and/or VAP. These findings are of significant importance for guiding antibiotic selection in clinical practice.