Search

Objectives: The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may alter blood levels of several drugs, including antibiotics, leading to under dosing of these drugs and thus to potential treatment failure. No data exist on pharmacokinetics of new antimicrobial, in particular ceftazidime/avibactam. We therefore perform this study to evaluate ceftazidime/avibactam blood levels in ECMO patients and find factors associated with underdosing., Methods: Retrospective observational study of patients on ECMO having received ceftazidime/avibactam and in whom trough blood levels of ceftazidime and avibactam were available. Main outcome measurement was the number of patients with ceftazidime and avibactam blood levels above predefined cut-off values, derived from the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) breakpoints for Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, namely 8 mg/L for ceftazidime and 4 mg/L for avibactam, and explored factors associated with underdosing., Results: Twenty-three ceftazidime/avibactam trough levels were available in 14 ECMO patients, all of them having received veno-venous ECMO for SARS-CoV-2-associated pneumonia. Although ceftazidime levels were above 8 mg/L in all except one patient, nine (39%) of the avibactam dosages were below 4 mg/L. Increased renal clearance (creatinine clearance > 130 mL/min) was the main factor associated with under dosing, since 7 out of the 10 dosages below the predefined cut-offs were measured in patients with this condition., Conclusions: In ECMO patients receiving ceftazidime/avibactam, ceftazidime and avibactam serum levels are above EUCAST breakpoints in most cases, justifying the use of normal dosing in ECMO patients. Increased renal clearance may lead to ceftazidime and avibactam under dosing., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with active cancer admitted for cardiogenic shock remain largely unknown. This study aimed to address this issue and identify the determinants of 30-day and 1-year mortality in a large cardiogenic shock cohort of all aetiologies., Methods and Results: FRENSHOCK is a prospective multicenter observational registry conducted in French critical care units between April and October 2016. 'Active cancer' was defined as a malignancy diagnosed within the previous weeks with planned or ongoing anticancer therapy. Among the 772 enrolled patients (mean age 65.7 ± 14.9 years; 71.5% male), 51 (6.6%) had active cancer. Among them, the main cancer types were solid cancers (60.8%), and hematological malignancies (27.5%). Solid cancers were mainly urogenital (21.6%), gastrointestinal (15.7%), and lung cancer (9.8%). Medical history, clinical presentation, and baseline echocardiography were almost the same between groups. In-hospital management significantly differed: patients with cancers received more catecholamines or inotropes (norepinephrine 72% vs. 52%, P = 0.005 and norepinephrine-dobutamine combination 64.7% vs. 44.5%, P = 0.005), but had less mechanical circulatory support (5.9% vs. 19.5%, P = 0.016). They presented a similar 30-day mortality rate (29% vs. 26%) but a significantly higher mortality at 1-year (70.6% vs. 45.2%, P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, active cancer was not associated with 30-day mortality but was significantly associated with 1-year mortality in 30-day survivors [HR 3.61 (1.29-10.11), P = 0.015]., Conclusion: Active cancer patients accounted for almost 7% of all cases of cardiogenic shock. Early mortality was the same regardless of active cancer or not, whereas long-term mortality was significantly increased in patients with active cancer., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: All of the authors declare to have no conflict of interest.