antibiotics

Article
Empirical Antibiotic Therapy for Gram-Negative Bacilli
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Observational Study and
Pharmacodynamic Assessment
Olivier Pajot 1, *, Karim Lakhal 2 , Jérome Lambert 3 , Antoine Gros 4 , Cédric Bruel 5 , Thierry Boulain 6 ,
Denis Garot 7 , Vincent Das 8 , Jean François Timsit 9 , Charles Cerf 10 , Bertrand Souweine 11 ,
Cendrine Chaffaut 3 , Hervé Mentec 1 , Jean Ralph Zahar 12 , Jean Paul Mira 13 and Vincent Jullien 14

1 Victor Dupouy Hospital, Intensive Care Unit, F-95100 Argenteuil, France

2 Service d’Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital Laënnec, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, F-44093 Nantes, France
3 Department of Biostatistics and Medical Information, APHP, Saint-Louis Hospital, F-75010 Paris, France
4 Medical-Surgical Intensive Care Unit, André Mignot Hospital, F-78150 Le Chesnay, France
5 Medical and Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Paris Saint-Joseph Hospital Network, F-75014 Paris, France
6 Intensive Care Unit, Orleans Regional Hospital, 14 Avenue de L’Hôpital CS 86709, CEDEX 02,
F-45067 Orléans, France
7 Service de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Hôpital Bretonneau, CHU Tours, F-37000 Tours, France
8 Service de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal André Grégoire,
F-93100 Montreuil, France
9 AP-HP, Bichat Hospital, Medical and Infectious Diseases Intensive Care Unit (MI2), F-75018 Paris, France
10 Intensive Care Unit, Foch Hospital, F-92150 Suresnes, France
11 CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Service de Réanimation Médicale, F-63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
12 AP-HP, Hôpital Avicenne, Prévention du Risque Infectieux, GH Paris Seine Saint-Denis,
Citation: Pajot, O.; Lakhal, K.; F-93000 Bobigny, France
13 Department of Medical Intensive Care, Cochin University Hospital, F-75014 Paris, France
Lambert, J.; Gros, A.; Bruel, C.; 14 Pharmacology Unit, University Sorbonne Paris Nord, Groupe Hospitalier Paris Seine-Saint-Denis,
Boulain, T.; Garot, D.; Das, V.; Timsit,
Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Jean Verdier, F-93140 Bondy, France
J.F.; Cerf, C.; et al. Empirical
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +33-134232455
Antibiotic Therapy for
Gram-Negative Bacilli
Abstract: Background: Strong evidence suggests a correlation between pharmacodynamics (PD)
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia:
index and antibiotic efficacy while dose adjustment should be considered in critically ill patients due
Observational Study and
Pharmacodynamic Assessment.
to modified pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters and/or higher minimum inhibitory concentrations
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664. https:// (MICs). This study aimed to assess pharmacodynamic (PD) target attainment considering both
doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11111664 antibiotics serum concentrations and measured MICs in these patients. Method: A multicentric
prospective open-label trial conducted in 11 French ICUs involved patients with Gram-negative
Academic Editor: Masafumi Seki
bacilli (GNB) ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) confirmed by quantitative cultures. Results: We
Received: 13 October 2022 included 117 patients. Causative GNBs were P. aeruginosa (40%), Enterobacter spp. (23%), E. coli (20%),
Accepted: 17 November 2022 and Klebsiella spp. (16%). Hence, 117 (100%) patients received β-lactams, 65 (58%) aminoglycosides,
Published: 19 November 2022 and two (1.5%) fluoroquinolones. For β-lactams, 83% of the patients achieved a Cmin /MIC > 1 and
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral 70% had a Cmin /MIC > 4. In the case of high creatinine clearance (CrCL > 100 mL/min/1.73 m2 ),
with regard to jurisdictional claims in 70.4% of the patients achieved a Cmin /MIC ratio > 1 versus 91% otherwise (p = 0.041), and 52%
published maps and institutional affil- achieved a Cmin /MIC ratio > 4 versus 81% (p = 0.018). For aminoglycosides, 94% of the patients had
iations. a Cmax /MIC ratio > 8. Neither β-lactams nor aminoglycosides PK/PD parameters were associated
clinical outcomes, but our data suggest a correlation between β-lactams Cmin /MIC and microbiologi-
cal success. Conclusion: In our ICU patients treated for GNB VAP, using recommended antibiotic
dosage led in most cases to PK/PD targets attainment for aminoglycosides and β-lactams. High
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
creatinine clearance should encourage clinicians to focus on PK/PD issues.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
Keywords: VAP; pharmacokinetics; pharmacodynamics; intensive care unit
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).

Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11111664 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/antibiotics

Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 2 of 15

1. Introduction
Ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) remains a major cause of morbidity and
mortality in critically ill patients despite advances in antimicrobial therapy and supportive
care [1]. Convincing rationale suggests that for β-lactams, the duration of time that the
antibiotic concentration remains above the MIC (T > MIC) during a dosing interval is
the most relevant pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) parameter predicting
outcome, with classical values in intensive care unit (ICU) patients comprised between
T > MIC = 100% and T > 6xMIC = 100% [2,3]. There are also strong data suggesting that
aminoglycosides activity is optimal when maximum concentrations (Cmax ) in serum reaches
8-10 fold above the MIC [4,5]. Concerning fluoroquinolones, both Cmax /MIC and area
under the curve (AUC)/MIC ratios are related to the efficacy, with optimal values around
8–12 and 125–250 respectively [3,6]. Nevertheless, antibiotic therapy of VAP in ICU patients
is challenging because of the wide pharmacokinetic variability combined to potentially
high antibiotics MICs for Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) [7,8]. Previously published data
pointed out that these PK/PD targets were not reached for ICU patients, highlighting the
risk of “PD failure” [9–11]. However, to our knowledge, most studies defined the target
concentrations of antibiotics, as well as the probability to attain the PK/PD targets, using
the clinical breakpoints instead of measuring the actual MIC. Such an approach may lead
to underestimating the probability of PK/PD target attainment. To our knowledge, few
studies have reported the antibacterial effect of antibiotics based on PK/PD ratio using
measured MICs instead of susceptibility breakpoints [12–16].
The objective of the present study was to assess the PK/PD targets attainment of
antibiotics at their commonly prescribed doses, considering the measured MICs, in critically
ill patients empirically treated for documented GNB VAP and to investigate the relationship
between PK/PD endpoints attainment and outcome.

2. Results
2.1. Patient Characteristics
One hundred and sixty-six patients with suspected VAP were enrolled; 49 were
secondarily excluded and 117 were finally included (Figure 1). Patients’ characteristics are
presented in Table 1. Median {IQR} age was 62 years {53–72}, and most patients were male
(n = 87, 74%). At inclusion, median {IQR} SAPS2 and SOFA scores were 47 {38–61} and 8
{6–10}, respectively. Eighty-six patients (73%) had received antibiotics within the month
preceding inclusion.

2.2. Microbiological Findings

Microbiological assessment was performed with broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) for
17 patients (14.5%), plugged telescopic catheter (PTC) for 41 (35%), and tracheal aspi-
rate (TA) for 59 (50.5%). Overall, 167 GNB were isolated from respiratory samples col-
lected before treatment, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 48, 40%), Enterobacter spp.
(n = 29, 23%) and Escherichia coli (n = 24, 20%) (Table 2). VAP was polymicrobial in 43 pa-
tients (37%). Median MICs of each antibiotic for all GNB species identified above cut-off
values for respiratory samples and treated with the antibiotic of concern are presented in
Table 3.
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 3 of 15
Antibiotics 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16

Figure 1. Flowchart.
Figure 1. Flowchart.
Table 1. Demographics and clinical characteristics of the 117 patients at baseline and day 1.
Table 1. Demographics and clinical characteristics of the 117 patients at baseline and day 1.
Value
Age (years) Value
62 {53–72}
Female
Age (years) 30 (26)
62 {53–72}
Female (kg)
Weight 75 {61–90}
30 (26)
Body
WeightMass
(kg) Index (kg/m2) 25.6 {22–29.5}
75 {61–90}
Body Mass
SAPS2 Index (kg/m2 )
at admission 25.6{43–64}
54 {22–29.5}
Admission category
SAPS2 at admission 54 {43–64}
Medical 90 (77)
Admission category
Surgical
Medical 27 (23)
90 (77)
McCabe
Surgical classification 27 (23)
1 89 (81.5)
McCabe classification
2 17 (15.5)
1 89 (81.5)
32 417(3)
(15.5)
Reason
3 for admission 4 (3)
Respiratory failure 42 (36)
Reason for admission
Hemodynamic failure 26 (22)
Respiratory failure 42 (36)
Sepsis
Hemodynamic failure
10 (8.5)
26 (22)
Abdominal
Sepsis disease/Hepatic failure 310(3)
(8.5)
Acute renal failure/Metabolic
Abdominal disease/Hepatic failure disease 23 (2.5)
(3)
Neurologic failure
Acute renal failure/Metabolic disease 31 (26.5)
2 (2.5)
Other failure
Neurologic 231(2)
(26.5)
Other
Clinical presentation at VAP diagnosis or D1 2 (2)

Reason for mechanical ventilation

Cardiac arrest 18 (15)
Surgery 12 (10)
Septic shock 4 (3)
Hemorrhagic shock 1 (1)
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 4 of 15

Table 1. Cont.

Value
Clinical presentation at VAP diagnosis or D1
Reason for mechanical ventilation
Cardiac arrest 18 (15)
Surgery 12 (10)
Septic shock 4 (3)
Hemorrhagic shock 1 (1)
Cardiogenic shock 4 (3.5)
Acute respiratory failure 43 (37)
Toxic or metabolic coma 4 (3.5)
Neurologic failure 24 (20)
Other 7 (6)
Time intubation—VAP (days) 9 {6–11}
Temperature (◦ C) 38.5 {37.8–39.1}
mCPIS 6 {5–7}
SAPS2 47 {38–61}
SOFA 8 {6–10}
Vasopressor 45 (38.5)
PaO2 /FiO2 ratio (mmHg) 167 {108–240}
Leukocytes (G/L) 15 {11–19}
Serum creatinine at D1 (µmol/L) 68.5 {48–114}
Creatinine clearance at D1 (mL/min/1.73 m2 ) 94 {54–112}
Serum albumin at D1 (g/L) 19 {15–24}
Weight (kg) 78.5 {65–92}
RRT (D-2 to D0) 1 (1)
Fluid intake during D1 (mL) 2477 {1485–3450}
VAP, ventilator-associated pneumonia; SAPS2, simplified acute physiology score; SOFA, sepsis-related organ
failure assessment; mCPIS, modified clinical pulmonary index score. Data are presented as median {IQR} or
n (%).

Table 2. Microbiological findings in the first respiratory sample obtained (before treatment).

Value
Respiratory sample
Broncho Alveolar Lavage 17 (14.5)
Plugged Telescopic Catheter 41 (35)
Tracheal Aspirate 59 (50.5)
Positive blood culture 9 (8)
Polymicrobial VAP 43 (37)
All GNB identified (n = 167)
P. aeruginosa 48 (40)
Enterobacter spp. 29 (23)
E. coli 24 (20)
Klebsiella spp. 19 (16)
Haemophilus influenzae 10 (8)
Stenotrophomonas maltophila 6 (5)
Citrobacter spp. 5 (4)
Morganella spp. 5 (4)
Acinetobacter spp. 4 (4)
Serratia spp. 4 (3)
Proteus spp. 4 (3)
Others 9 (8)
MIC, minimal inhibitory concentration; GNB, Gram-negative bacilli; VAP, ventilator-associated pneumonia. Data
are presented as n (%).
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 5 of 15

Table 3. Median MICs of each antibiotic for all GNB species identified above cut-off values for
respiratory samples and treated with the antibiotic of concern.

Value
n MIC
β-lactams
Piperacillin/tazobactam 41 2 {0.85–4} (0.2;256)
Cefepime 22 0.1 {0.0395–1} (0.023;4)
Ceftazidime 9 1.5 {0.8–13} (0.1;256)
Imipenem 9 0.35 {0.2–2.62} (0.1;32)
Meropenem 8 0.2 {0.043–1.05} (0.023;32)
Piperacillin NA
Cefotaxime NA
Aminoglycosides
Amikacin 52 2 {1.5–3} (0.4;256)
Tobramycin 1 0.9
Quinolones
Ciprofloxacin 2 0.094 (0.032;6.4)
MIC, minimal inhibitory concentration. Data are presented as median {IQR} (min;max) or n (%).

2.3. Antibiotic Therapy

When considering in vitro susceptibility, empirical antibiotic therapy was appropriate
in 108 patients (96%).
A β-lactam was used in 117 patients (100%), as monotherapy in 45 patients (38.5%), or
in combination with an aminoglycoside in 68 patients (58%) or a quinolone in two patients
(1.5%). Among β-lactams, piperacillin/tazobactam and cefepime were the most used drugs
(45.5% and 24% of the patients, respectively) and continuous infusion was used for seven
patients. Antibiotics’ dosing regimens for the 24 first hours of treatment are specified in
Table 4. Total antibiotic treatment duration for VAP was eight days {6–9.5}. Antibiotic
concentrations in plasma are presented in Supplementary Table S1.

Table 4. Empirical antibiotic therapy and dose regimens.

Value
n (%) Daily Dose Regimen
Number of antibiotics per patient
1 45 (38.5)
2 70 (60)
3 2 (1.5)
Antibiotics and dose regimen
β-lactams 117 (100) (dose in g/day) CI *
16/2 {12/1.5–16/2}
Piperacillin/tazobactam 53 (45.5)
(8/1;20/2.5)
Cefepime 28 (24) 6 {6–6} (4;8)
Ceftazidime 12 (10) 6 {6–6} (6;6) 6 {6-6} (4;8)
Imipenem 13 (11) 3 {3–3} (2;4)
Meropenem 8 (7) 5 {3–6} (1;6) 3
Piperacillin 2 (2) 16 (16;16)
Cefotaxime 1 (0.5) 8
Aminoglycosides 68 (58) (dose in mg/kg/day)
Amikacin 67 (57) 26 {23–29} (16;35.5)
Tobramycin 1 (0.5) 9.5
Quinolones 2 (1.5) (dose in mg/day)
Ciprofloxacin 2 (1.5) 1200 (1200;1200)
*: continuous infusion. Data are presented as median {IQR} (min;max) or n (%).
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 6 of 15

2.4. Pharmacological Parameters

Finally, Cmin of β-lactams were available in 102 patients among those definitely in-
cluded (measured MICs were concomitantly available for 77 of them) and Cmax of amino-
glycosides or quinolones in 58 patients (measured MICs were concomitantly available for
48 of them). The PK/PD parameters of antibiotics are reported in Table 5.

Table 5. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of the patients and comparison accord-
ing to clinical outcome.
Antibiotics 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 16
Overall Population Alive at D8 Death at D8 p
β-lactams n = 77 n = 68 n=9
Amikacin 12.6 {2.5–47.2} 67 (57) 26{1.9–60}
11.6 {23–29} (16;35.5)
20.8 {7.5–46}
Cmin /MIC 0.21
Tobramycin (0.001;637) 1 (0.5) (0.001;637)
9.5 (3.2;116.5)
Cmin /MIC > 1
Quinolones 64 (83%) 2 (1.5) 55 (dose
(81) in mg/day) 9 (100) 0.34
Cmin /MIC > 4 54 (70%) 46 (68) 8 (89) 0.27
Ciprofloxacin 2 (1.5) 1200 (1200;1200)
*:Aminoglycosides n =Data
continuous infusion. 47 are presented as median
n = 40{IQR} (min;max)
n =or
7 n (%).
32.5 {19.3–45.5} 32.4 {18.2–44.5} 33.4 {21.4–44}
Cmax /MIC 0.63
2.4. Pharmacological(0.17;165)
Parameters (0.17;165) (0.26;126.9)
Cmax /MIC > 8 44 (94) 38 (95) 6 (86) 0.39
Finally, Cmin of
Cmax /MIC > 10
β-lactams were available
41 (87)
in 102 patients6 among
35 (87.5) (86)
those definitely
1.00
in-
cluded (measured MICs were concomitantly available for 77 of them) and Cmax of amino-
Data are presented as median {IQR} (min;max) or n (%).
glycosides or quinolones in 58 patients (measured MICs were concomitantly available for
48 of them). The PK/PD parameters of antibiotics are reported in Table 5.
For β-lactams, the median Cmin /MIC ratio at D1 was 12.6 {2.5–47.2}. Further, 64 pa-
For β-lactams, the median Cmin/MIC ratio at D1 was 12.6 {2.5–47.2}. Further, 64 pa-
tients (83%) achieved a Cmin /MIC ratio > 1 and 54 (70%) a Cmin /MIC ratio > 4 at D1.
tients
Cmin /MIC(83%)ratio
achieved a Cmin/MIC lower
was significantly ratio >in
1 and 54 (70%)
patient a CminCrCL
with high /MIC(>100
ratio mL/min/1.73
> 4 at D1. Cmin/MICm2 ):
ratio was significantly lower in patient with high CrCL (>100 mL/min/1.73 m
4.8 {0.9–23.1} versus 14.8 {6–103.8}, p = 0.012. Among these patients, 19 (70.4%) achieved a
2): 4.8 {0.9–

C23.1}/MIC
versusratio
14.8>{6–103.8},
1 versus p43= 0.012. Among
patients (91%)these patients,
without 19 (70.4%)
high CrCL achieved
(p = 0.041), aC
and /MIC
14min(52%)
min
achieved a Cmin /MIC ratio > 4 versus 38 patients (81%) without high CrCL (p = 0.018)a
ratio > 1 versus 43 patients (91%) without high CrCL (p = 0.041), and 14 (52%) achieved
Cmin/MIC
(Figure 2). ratio > 4 versus 38 patients (81%) without high CrCL (p = 0.018) (Figure 2).

Figure2.2.Proportion
Figure Proportionofofpatients
patientsachieving
achievingPK/PD
PK/PDtargets
targetsfor β-lactams,i.e.,
forβ-lactams, i.e.,CCmin/MIC
min /MIC > 1 (A)
(A) or
or
min/MIC
CCmin /MIC>>44(B),
(B),according
accordingtotoCrCL.
CrCL.

For
For carbapenems,
carbapenems, the themedian
medianCCmin min/MIC ratio at
/MIC ratio at D1 was 5.45.4 {0.2–25}.
{0.2–25}. Eight
Eight patients
patients
(61.5%)
(61.5%) achieved
achieved a Cmin /MICratio
min/MIC ratio> >1 1and
and7 7 (54%)
(54%) aC a min
Cmin /MIC
/MIC ratioratio
>4> at 4D1.
at D1. For
For non-
non-carbapenems β-lactams, the median
carbapenems β-lactams, the median Cmin/MIC C /MIC ratio at D1 was 14 {3.2–75.6}.
min ratio at D1 was 14 {3.2–75.6}. Further, 56 Further,
56 patients
patients (87.5%)
(87.5%) achieved
achieved a Camin
C/MIC
min /MIC
ratioratio > 1 and
> 1 and 47 (73%)
47 (73%) a Cmina /MIC
Cmin /MIC
ratio >ratio
4 at >D1.
4
at D1. There was no statistically significant difference between carbapenems
There was no statistically significant difference between carbapenems and non-car- and non-
carbapenems β-lactams.
bapenems β-lactams.
There was no difference in PK/PD target attainment between patients with monomi-
crobial VAP and those with polymicrobial VAP (data not shown).
The Cmax/MIC ratio for aminoglycosides, calculated for each infectious episode on D1,
was above 8 in 44 VAP episodes (94%) and above 10 in 41 (87%) (Table 2). The median
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 7 of 15

There was no difference in PK/PD target attainment between patients with monomi-
crobial VAP and those with polymicrobial VAP (data not shown).
The Cmax /MIC ratio for aminoglycosides, calculated for each infectious episode on
D1, was above 8 in 44 VAP episodes (94%) and above 10 in 41 (87%) (Table 2). The median
Cmax /MIC ratio was 32.5 {19.3–45.5}.

2.5. β-Lactams Cmin Covariables

Age, SAPS2, CrCL, and presence of a high CrCL (>100 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) were signifi-
cantly associated with the Cmin in univariate analysis (Supplementary Table S2).

2.6. Microbiological Outcome

Microbiological success on day 3 occurred in 48 patients (62%). Table 6 presents the
distribution of main PK/PD parameters according to the microbiological outcome. For
β-lactams, 26 patients (93%) had a Cmin /MIC ratio > 1 in the microbiological success group
compared to 19 (73%) in the microbiological failure group (p = 0.11). Cmin /MIC ratio was
higher in the microbiological success group, 25.7 {6.9–119} versus 6.2 {1.1–46} (p = 0.041)
(Table 6).

Table 6. Comparison of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters according to microbiological

outcome on day 3.

Microbiological Failure Microbiological Success p

β-lactams n = 26 n = 28
Cmin /MIC 6.2 {1.1–46} (0.001;513) 25.7 {6.9–119} (0.4;637) 0.041
Cmin /MIC > 1 19 (73) 26 (93) 0.11
Cmin /MIC > 4 17 (65) 23 (82) 0.27
Aminoglycosides n = 17 n = 20
Cmax /MIC 24.4 {19.6–37} (0.26;61.8) 35 {21–51} (0.18;165) 0.91
Cmax /MIC > 8 16 (94) 18 (90) 1.00
Cmax /MIC > 10 16 (94) 16 (80) 0.44
Data are presented as median {IQR} (min;max) or n (%).

2.7. Clinical Outcome

After VAP episode, 35 patients (32%) needed a new antibiotic treatment until day 28,
among whom seven experienced VAP recurrence. The median length of stay in intensive
care unit and in hospital were 26 days {16–36} and 47 days {31–68}, respectively. Median
mechanical ventilation duration was 18 days {12–24}. Overall mortality was 14.5% at D8
and 35% at D28.
At day 8, median SOFA and mCPIS scores were 5 {3–7} and 4 {3–5}, respectively.
Clinical cure of VAP was obtained in 76% of the 70 patients with pharmacodynamic
targets achieved for all antibiotics administered, 83% of the seven patients with only one
pharmacodynamic parameter achieved (in case of combination therapy), and 71.4% of the
eight patients with none of the pharmacodynamic parameters achieved (p = 0.88).
Patients alive at day 8 were significantly younger (61 {51.7–67} versus 68 {59–80},
p = 0.043), had a lower SOFA score at D1 (7 {5–9} versus 11 {9–13}, p < 0.001), and had
higher CrCL (97 mL/min/1.73 m2 {65–115} versus 38 mL/min/1.73 m2 {33.5–88}, p < 0.001)
than patients who had died. PK/PD parameters of β-lactams or aminoglycosides were not
different between patients alive or dead at D8 (Table 5).
None of the other secondary outcomes (cure of VAP, poor clinical outcome or 28-day
mortality) was significantly associated with the PK/PD of β-lactams or aminoglycosides
(Supplementary Tables S3–S5), neither with the composite variable of PD target attainment
taking into account combination therapy (data not shown).
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 8 of 15

3. Discussion
In this prospective study performed in critically ill patients with documented GNB
VAP and receiving at least a β-lactam as empirical therapy, the overall PK/PD target
attainment for β-lactams (Cmin /MIC ratio > 1 or >4) was 83% and 70% respectively at day
1, measuring both drug exposure and MICs for the causative pathogens. Furthermore, by
excluding carbapenems that may allow less restrictive PK/PD targets due to the significant
post-antibiotic effect on GNB [17], β-lactams PK/PD target attainment (Cmin /MIC ratio > 1
or >4) was 87.5% and 73%, respectively.
These data are not in accordance with previous studies that showed a higher risk of
pharmacodynamic failure. Roberts et al. reported that Cmin /MIC ratio > 1 was achieved
in only 60.4% of 361 critically ill patients treated various β-lactams [10]. Similarly, Car-
lier et al. concluded that a 3-h extended infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam (4 g/0.5 g)
q.i.d was insufficient in critically ill patients to achieve the same pharmacodynamic target
(Cmin /MIC > 1) throughout the entire treatment course and therefore could endanger
treatment efficacy [18]. Taccone et al. found an adequate PD (i.e., Cmin /MIC > 4) for
ceftazidime, cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam in 28%, 16%, and 44% of their patients,
respectively [11]. Patients’ characteristics in our study and those reported above seem simi-
lar especially in terms of severity (estimated by the SOFA score) and creatinine clearance,
but those studies were only based on PD ratio calculated with clinical breakpoints.
In contrast, two recent studies using measured MICs instead of clinical breakpoints
showed results very close to ours: Al-Shaer et al. showed in a retrospective monocentric
study including 206 patients receiving β-lactams that Cmin /MIC ratio was above 1 in
89% of cases and above 4 in 72% [19]. Moreover, the TARGET trial [20] randomized
254 ICU patients receiving piperacillin/tazobactam in either a daily TDM-guided dose
adjustment group or in a fixed dose group and found that, overall, approximately 27%
of the patients failed to reach the PK/PD target at day 1, before adjustment. However,
GNB were categorized in three groups according to MICs, and the highest MIC of each
group was considered for target calculation (i.e., Cmin /MIC > 4). This may have led to
an overestimation of PD failure. In our study, PD calculations took into account some
resistant strains with high MICs (in respect of inclusion criteria) which may also have
lowered the target attainment value. In particular, we observed lower Cmin /MIC and
percentage of targets attainment in the carbapenems subgroup, likely due to resistant
strains (MICs = 32 mg/L, Table 3) kept in this analysis in the case of polymicrobial VAP.
β-lactams pharmacodynamic failure, even when setting high targets (Cmin /MIC > 4),
may thus be less common than reported in the literature. This points out the need for a
better identification of patients with a high risk of pharmacodynamic failure.
Recent studies found a relatively high incidence, approximately 20%, of augmented
renal clearance (ARC, commonly defined as a CrCL ≥ 130 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) in critically ill
patients [21,22], which makes it a major concern. While different thresholds for ARC have
been used in the literature, i.e., 120, 130, or 150 mL/min [23–25], Carrié et al. demonstrated
in 79 septic critically ill patients that the best cut-off to predict underdosing (Cmin < 4xMIC)
was 170 mL/min [26]. It therefore appears difficult to set a single threshold, as there is
a strong correlation, sometimes linear, between CrCL and clearance of primarily renally
eliminated antibiotics, such as most β-lactams [27–29]: increasing the CrCL reduces the
Cmin and reduces subsequently the probability of target attainment (f T > MIC), particularly
with more resistant organisms. Thus, some studies have demonstrated the need for dose
escalation of ceftazidime [30], cefepime [31], meropenem [32], or piperacillin [29,33] as
CrCL exceeded 90 or 100 mL/min, suggesting attention be paid to that lower range of CrCL.
Nevertheless, authors did not only use measured MICs for PK/PD targets calculations,
but also clinical breakpoints. In our study, CrCL was a covariate of β-lactams’ Cmin , as
expected, and patients with high CrCL (>100 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) had significantly lower
Cmin /MIC ratio. In addition, the proportion of patient achieving PK/PD targets, either
Cmin /MIC > 1 or Cmin /MIC > 4, was significantly lower in case of high CrCL, as shown
in Figure 2. Our study confirms previous results when using observed MICs, supposed
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 9 of 15

to be lower than breakpoints, and should encourage clinicians to focus on this issue for
lower-than-expected CrCL.
Our study suggests the importance of β-lactams PK/PD on the microbiological out-
come. A significant higher mean Cmin /MIC ratio and a trend toward a higher target
(Cmin /MIC > 1) attainment rate were indeed found in the microbiological success group.
Conversely, no association was found between Cmin /MIC ratio and clinical outcome on D8
or D28. Montravers et al. showed that the microbiological outcome in VAP was predictive
of the clinical outcome [34], but clinical outcomes in critically ill patients are linked to
many factors, not only the appropriateness and adequacy of antimicrobial therapy, whereas
microbiological outcomes are more closely dependent on the activity of the antimicrobial
agent. Our negative result concerning clinical outcome has therefore to be seen in the
light of the various confounding variables that may explain mortality in the ICU. For
example, higher β-lactams Cmin /MIC ratios were found in our patients who died at D8
(non-significant difference, Table 5) but this could be related to lower CrCL, acute kidney
injury being itself an independent risk factor for mortality [35], which was here also closely
linked to much higher SOFA scores at D1. Similarly, since old preclinical studies [36–38],
many recent trials assessing continuous infusion of β-lactams in ICU patients have failed to
confirm the potential impact of antibiotics’ pharmacodynamics on clinical outcome [39–41].
Furthermore, optimal pharmacodynamic index ensuring clinical effectiveness is still de-
bated as scientific evidence is variable, from Cmin /MIC > 1 to Cmin /MIC > 4–5 [10,42,43].
These studies, as our own, focused on β-lactams plasma concentrations whereas authors
have suggested that standard dosing regimens could be insufficient to achieve optimal
antibiotic concentrations in epithelial lining fluid [44], and this tissue diffusion concern
could explain heterogeneous results. The combination with another antibiotic, most often
an aminoglycoside in our trial, could also explain the lack of association, mainly because
94% of our patients reached a Cmax /MIC > 8, which is considered as an optimal target
for aminoglycosides. Last, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of β-lactams could be
performed for each patient according to physician’s advice, so that individual PK/PD value
at D1 may not reflect the Cmin /MIC obtained after dose adjustment.
The present study has several limitations. First, these analyses were performed us-
ing the total plasma concentration of β-lactams, without correction for protein binding.
However, such a correction would have been of limited impact as the unbound fractions of
the β-lactams used in the present study are usually >80% in healthy volunteers, and are
likely higher in ICU patients due to hypoalbuminemia: 102.5% for ceftazidime, 98.4% for
meropenem and 95.7% for piperacillin with interpatient variability of <6% [45]. Second, we
did not measure antibiotic concentrations in the epithelial lining fluid. Nevertheless, for
bedside TDM, measuring drug concentration at the site of infection could be less practical
in critically ill patients. Third, the small sample size did not allow us to draw definite
conclusions about how β-lactams pharmacodynamics impact either microbiological or
clinical outcomes. Moreover, we had to deal with missing data, leading to a small cohort of
patients with both MIC and Cmin available, which decreased the statistical power. However,
our results are quite similar to recent studies assessing PD targets achievement [19,20],
and suggest that when a high β-lactams Cmin /MIC ratio is reached, optimal bacterial
activity is achieved. Fourth, respiratory samples were not obtained with same method in
all patients. Although European guidelines suggest obtaining distal quantitative samples
(PTC or BAL in our study) for microbiological diagnosis of VAP in order to reduce antibi-
otic exposure [46], all methods are currently accepted [1,47]. Sampling techniques have
similar accuracy in the diagnosis of VAP [47] and do not affect any clinical outcome [48].
Fifth, as our trial started and stopped before new drugs’ approval in France [49] and
although there was no restriction in the antibiotic choice, our study focused mainly on
piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, and carbapenems and therefore does not allow us to
draw any formal conclusions on these new antibiotics. Nevertheless, PK/PD principles of
β-lactams remain the same, especially in case of elevated CrCL [50,51]. Finally, we could
not assess the impact of continuous infusion of β-lactams, since most patients received
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 10 of 15

intermittent or extended infusions. However, although there is a theoretical benefit of con-

tinuous infusion to achieve higher plasma antibiotic concentrations [52], many recent trials
have failed to confirm a potential impact of continuous infusion on clinical outcome [39–41].

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Patients’ Selection
A multicentric prospective open-label trial was conducted in 11 French ICUs.
The ANSM (French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety)
registration number of the study was A120162-32/EudraCT 2012-000111-81. The protocol
was approved by the Saint Germain En Laye Hospital Ethics Committee. The study was
registered in CliniTrials.gov (NCT02127528). All patients or their relatives gave inform
consent before enrollment.
ICU patients older than 18 years who had received mechanical ventilation for at least
48 h were eligible if they met all the following criteria: (i) clinical suspicion of VAP defined
by a new or persistent infiltrate on chest radiography associated with at least 1 of the
following: purulent tracheal secretions, temperature of 38.3 ◦ C or higher, and leukocytes
count higher than 10,000/mL; (ii) risk factor for acquired GNB with high antibiotic MICs,
namely more than 5 days of mechanical ventilation, antibiotic treatment in the 15 days
preceding infection, or known upper respiratory tract GNB colonization; (iii) a broncho-
alveolar-lavage (BAL), a blinded plugged telescopic catheter (PTC), or tracheal aspirate (TA)
has been performed as soon as VAP was clinically suspected. The cut-off values for GNB
obtained from BAL, PTC and TA cultures were 104 cfu/mL, 103 cfu/mL and 106 cfu/mL,
respectively. Patients were secondarily excluded if no GNB reached these thresholds and
the diagnosis of VAP was not retained by the clinician in charge, or all the GNB above these
values were not susceptible to empirical antibiotic therapy, or renal replacement therapy
(RRT) was performed between the two assays.
Patients were non included if they: (i) were pregnant, (ii) had a life expectancy ≤ 72 h
following treatment initiation, or (iii) received first antibiotic administration > 24 h after
diagnosis.

4.2. Drug Administration

Patients were empirically treated with a β-lactam and an aminoglycoside and/or a
fluoroquinolone. Antibiotic choice, use of combination therapy, and dosing were left to the
investigator’s decision but based on available recommendations at the time the trial was
conducted. All doses were administered via an automatic high-precision infusion pump
and the choice of the administration mode (short, extended, or continuous infusion) was
left to the physician. Antimicrobial therapy was started within 24 h after microbiological
sampling. Day 1 was defined as the first day of antibiotic therapy.
Physicians were encouraged to keep the empirical treatment unchanged for the first
48 h, then to de-escalate therapy towards antibiotics with a narrower spectrum. Treatment
duration was left to the investigator’s choice, but 8-day therapy was suggested, with the
exception of VAP caused by non-fermenting GNB, for which optimal treatment duration
might be longer [53]. TDM of the prescribed ATB was allowed. Any adverse event related
to treatment or its administration was recorded.

4.3. Data Collected

For each patient, the usual clinical and demographic data were collected at baseline,
including age, gender, McCabe score [54], simplified acute physiology score (SAPS2)
(admission and baseline) [55], sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) [56], and
modified clinical pulmonary index score (mCPIS) [57]. At day 1, weight, fluid intake,
vasopressor support, mechanical ventilation parameters, use of renal replacement therapy
(RRT), and high flow oxygen or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were noted,
if applicable.
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 11 of 15

SOFA, vital status, and mechanical ventilation requirement were recorded at days 3,
5, and 8. Recurrence between end of treatment and day 28 were recorded. Duration of
mechanical ventilation during ICU stay and vital status at day 28 were also recorded.

4.4. Assessment of Renal Function

The CKD-EPI equation was used to estimate creatinine clearance (CrCL) at day 1 [58].
High creatinine clearance was defined by a CrCL >100 mL/min/1.73 m2 .

4.5. Blood Sampling and Analytical Method

Two blood samples were obtained for concentration measurement of each adminis-
tered antibiotic: 0.5 h after the end of one of the infusions received during the first 24 first
hours of treatment (Cmax ) and just before the following infusion (through concentration,
Cmin ). Blood samples were immediately centrifuged within 30 min of collection, and the
plasma was frozen at −80 ◦ C until analysis in a centralized laboratory. For carbapenems,
plasma was stabilized with the same volume of 1.0 M MOPS buffer, pH 7.0 (1:1) before
being frozen at −80 ◦ C. β-lactams concentrations in plasma were determined by a high-
performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry method. The limit of
quantitation was 0.5 mg/L for all molecules.
Aminoglycoside’s concentrations in plasma were measured by fluorescence polariza-
tion immunoassay on the TDX analyzer (Abbott GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany). The limit
of quantitation was 0.5 mg/L.

4.6. Microbiological Analysis

A respiratory sample was performed as soon as VAP was clinically suspected, and be-
fore initiation of antimicrobial therapy and enrollment. Direct examination and quantitative
culture on appropriate media were performed. Bacterial colonies were counted after 18–24 h
of incubation. A second respiratory sample was performed after 48 h of treatment, at day 3,
using the same methods. API systems (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’étoile, France) or MALDI-TOF
Mass Spectrometry were used for bacterial identification and the disk diffusion method was
used for antibiotic susceptibility testing. Antibiotics’ MICs were determined using Etest
strips (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’étoile, France), according to the manufacturer’s instructions,
for GNB isolated above defined thresholds (BAL ≥ 104 cfu/mL, PTC ≥ 103 cfu/mL or TA
≥ 106 cfu/mL) from first samples (before administration of antibiotics). Antibiotic MICs or
diameters were interpreted according to the recommendations of the European Committee
on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST).

4.7. Pharmacodynamic Analysis

Several pharmacodynamic parameters were determined for each patient and antimi-
crobial. For β-lactams, we analyzed the following parameters: Cmin /MIC, number of
patients achieving a T > MIC of 100% (Cmin /MIC ratio > 1) and number of patients achiev-
ing a T > 4xMIC of 100% (Cmin /MIC ratio > 4). For aminoglycosides and fluroquinolones
pharmacodynamic analysis, we studied the Cmax /MIC ratio, and the number of patients
achieving a Cmax /MIC > 8 or 10 for aminoglycosides and >10 for quinolones.
To take into account the role of combination therapy in the clinical course (β-lactam +
aminoglycoside or β-lactam + fluoroquinolone), a qualitative variable based on the simulta-
neous attainment of T > MIC = 100% for β-lactams and Cmax /MIC > 8 for aminoglycosides
or >10 for fluoroquinolones was created. Patients were included in 3 groups according to
the achievement of these targets (none, 1, or 2 of the pharmacodynamic targets achieved).
In the case of a polymicrobial infection, patient-specific pharmacodynamic parameters
were computed considering the highest MIC among GNB recovered at inclusion.
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 12 of 15

4.8. Outcome Assessment

The primary endpoint of the study was the proportion of patients achieving the phar-
macodynamic targets defined above, using both MICs and concentrations measurements at
the first day of treatment.
Several secondary endpoints were also assessed: microbiological success (defined as
none of the GNB species identified at D1 grown above cut-off values at D3), 8- and 28-day
mortality, cure of VAP defined as CPIS < 6 and alive at day 8, poor clinical outcome (defined
as a composite criterion: SOFA score > 3 or death at day 8), and total duration of mechanical
ventilation during ICU stay. We also evaluated the impact of PK/PD parameters on the
microbiological and clinical outcomes.

4.9. Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis was performed on the cohort of included subjects who have
confirmed all inclusion and non-inclusion criteria (including secondary exclusion crite-
ria). Results are presented as median {interquartile range} (minimum; maximum) for
quantitative data and count (percentage) for categorical data.
The proportion of pharmacodynamic success was estimated with its 95% confidence
interval. Analysis of secondary objectives included estimation (pointwise with 95% confi-
dence interval) of the proportion of pharmacological success by detailing the 3 different
pharmacodynamic targets of the primary endpoint and search for an association.
For each outcome, a comparison of patient’s characteristics and of PK/PD parameters
was performed using student t-test for quantitative data and Chis-square test for qualitative
data. Of note, due to their skewed distribution, PK/PD parameters, such as Cmin , Cmax ,
Cmin /MIC, and Cmax /MIC, were log-transformed before being compared.
A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. All analysis were performed with R
(version 4.0.4 (15 February 2021)) and SAS (version 9.3) softwares.

5. Conclusions
In conclusion, in a setting of documented GNB VAP receiving at least a β-lactam as
empirical therapy, 83% of our patients achieved an appropriate pharmacodynamic target for
β-lactams, defined as Cmin /MIC > 1, and patients with high CrCL >100 mL/min/1.73 m2
had a significantly lower proportion of target attainment, which should encourage clinicians
to focus on this issue. No correlation was found between β-lactams Cmin /MIC ratio and
clinical outcome, but our data suggest a correlation between Cmin /MIC and microbiological
success.
These findings suggest that an exclusive focus on Cmin without MIC measurement is
probably not suitable to evaluate the pharmacodynamics efficacy of antibiotic therapy and
leads to overstating the risk of PD failure. The routine assessment of β-lactam pharmaco-
dynamic seems nevertheless interesting, as the overall probability of pharmacodynamic
failure was still 17%, and up to 30–50% (depending on the target) in case of high CrCL.

Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https:
//www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics11111664/s1, Table S1: Antibiotics’ plasma concen-
tration measurements. Data are presented as median [IQR] (min; max); Table S2: Covariables of
β-lactams’ log(Cmin ) Univariate analysis title; Table S3: Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic
parameters of the patients and comparison according to clinical outcome (cure of VAP); Table S4:
Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of the patients and comparison according to
clinical outcome; Table S5: Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of the patients and
comparison according to clinical outcome (28-day mortality).
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, O.P. and V.J.; data curation, J.L. and C.C. (Cendrine
Chaffaut); formal analysis, J.L. and C.C.; funding acquisition, O.P. and J.R.Z.; investigation, O.P., K.L.,
A.G., C.B., T.B., D.G., V.D., J.F.T., C.C. (Charles Cerf), B.S., H.M., J.P.M., and V.J.; methodology, O.P.,
J.L., J.F.T., and V.J.; software, C.C.; supervision, O.P., J.R.Z., and V.J.; writing—original draft, O.P.;
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 13 of 15

writing—review & editing, O.P., K.L., J.L., and V.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Na-
tional 2013 (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Département de la Recherche Clinique et du
Développement), grant number AOM11259, P110137.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Saint Germain En Laye Hospital on 20 october
2014 (protocol code 12009).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Data available on request.
Conflicts of Interest: Pajot reports personal fees from MSD unrelated to the submitted work. No
other disclosures were reported.

References
1. Papazian, L.; Klompas, M.; Luyt, C.-E. Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Adults: A Narrative Review. Intensive Care Med. 2020,
46, 888–906. [CrossRef]
2. Craig, W.A. Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Parameters: Rationale for Antibacterial Dosing of Mice and Men. Clin. Infect.
Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 1998, 26, 1–10; quiz 11–12. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Abdul-Aziz, M.H.; Brady, K.; Cotta, M.O.; Roberts, J.A. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Antibiotics: Defining the Therapeutic
Range. Ther. Drug Monit. 2022, 44, 19–31. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Moore, R.D.; Lietman, P.S.; Smith, C.R. Clinical Response to Aminoglycoside Therapy: Importance of the Ratio of Peak
Concentration to Minimal Inhibitory Concentration. J. Infect. Dis. 1987, 155, 93–99. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Kashuba, A.D.; Nafziger, A.N.; Drusano, G.L.; Bertino, J.S. Optimizing Aminoglycoside Therapy for Nosocomial Pneumonia
Caused by Gram-Negative Bacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1999, 43, 623–629. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Forrest, A.; Nix, D.E.; Ballow, C.H.; Goss, T.F.; Birmingham, M.C.; Schentag, J.J. Pharmacodynamics of Intravenous Ciprofloxacin
in Seriously Ill Patients. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1993, 37, 1073–1081. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Williams, P.; Cotta, M.O.; Roberts, J.A. Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics of β-Lactams and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring:
From Theory to Practical Issues in the Intensive Care Unit. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2019, 40, 476–487. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Sulaiman, H.; Abdul-Aziz, M.H.; Roberts, J.A. Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamics-Optimized Antimicrobial Therapy in
Patients with Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia/Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2017, 38, 271–286.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. de Montmollin, E.; Bouadma, L.; Gault, N.; Mourvillier, B.; Mariotte, E.; Chemam, S.; Massias, L.; Papy, E.; Tubach, F.; Wolff, M.;
et al. Predictors of Insufficient Amikacin Peak Concentration in Critically Ill Patients Receiving a 25 Mg/Kg Total Body Weight
Regimen. Intensive Care Med. 2014, 40, 998–1005. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
10. Roberts, J.A.; Paul, S.K.; Akova, M.; Bassetti, M.; De Waele, J.J.; Dimopoulos, G.; Kaukonen, K.-M.; Koulenti, D.; Martin, C.;
Montravers, P.; et al. DALI: Defining Antibiotic Levels in Intensive Care Unit Patients: Are Current β-Lactam Antibiotic Doses
Sufficient for Critically Ill Patients? Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 2014, 58, 1072–1083. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11. Taccone, F.S.; Laterre, P.-F.; Dugernier, T.; Spapen, H.; Delattre, I.; Wittebole, X.; De Backer, D.; Layeux, B.; Wallemacq, P.; Vincent,
J.-L.; et al. Insufficient β-Lactam Concentrations in the Early Phase of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. Crit. Care Lond. Engl. 2010,
14, R126. [CrossRef]
12. Gao, W.; Passarell, J.; Patel, Y.T.; Zhang, Z.; Lin, G.; Fiedler-Kelly, J.; Bruno, C.J.; Rhee, E.G.; De Anda, C.S.; Feng, H.-P.
Exposure-Efficacy Analyses Support Optimal Dosing Regimens of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Participants with Hospital-
Acquired/Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia in ASPECT-NP. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2022, 66, e01399-21. [Cross-
Ref] [PubMed]
13. Razzazzadeh, S.; Darazam, I.A.; Hajiesmaeili, M.; Salamzadeh, J.; Mahboubi, A.; Sadeghnezhad, E.; Sahraei, Z. Investigation of
Pharmacokinetic and Clinical Outcomes of Various Meropenem Regimens in Patients with Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia and
Augmented Renal Clearance. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2022, 78, 823–829. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Zhou, Y.; Zhang, J.; Chen, Y.; Wu, J.; Guo, B.; Wu, X.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, M.; Ya, R.; Huang, H. Combined PK/PD Index
May Be a More Appropriate PK/PD Index for Cefoperazone/Sulbactam against Acinetobacter Baumannii in Patients with
Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 703. [CrossRef]
15. Crandon, J.L.; Luyt, C.-E.; Aubry, A.; Chastre, J.; Nicolau, D.P. Pharmacodynamics of Carbapenems for the Treatment of
Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Associations with Clinical Outcome and Recurrence. J. Antimicrob.
Chemother. 2016, 71, 2534–2537. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Pajot, O.; Burdet, C.; Couffignal, C.; Massias, L.; Armand-Lefevre, L.; Foucrier, A.; Da Silva, D.; Lasocki, S.; Laouénan, C.; Mentec,
H.; et al. Impact of Imipenem and Amikacin Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Parameters on Microbiological Outcome of
Gram-Negative Bacilli Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2015, 70, 1487–1494. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 14 of 15

17. Mouton, J.W.; Touzw, D.J.; Horrevorts, A.M.; Vinks, A.A. Comparative Pharmacokinetics of the Carbapenems: Clinical Implica-
tions. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 2000, 39, 185–201. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Carlier, M.; Carrette, S.; Stove, V.; Verstraete, A.G.; De Waele, J.J. Does Consistent Piperacillin Dosing Result in Consistent
Therapeutic Concentrations in Critically Ill Patients? A Longitudinal Study over an Entire Antibiotic Course. Int. J. Antimicrob.
Agents 2014, 43, 470–473. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Al-Shaer, M.H.; Rubido, E.; Cherabuddi, K.; Venugopalan, V.; Klinker, K.; Peloquin, C. Early Therapeutic Monitoring of β-Lactams
and Associated Therapy Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2020, 75, 3644–3651. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Hagel, S.; Bach, F.; Brenner, T.; Bracht, H.; Brinkmann, A.; Annecke, T.; Hohn, A.; Weigand, M.; Michels, G.; Kluge, S.; et al. Effect
of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring-Based Dose Optimization of Piperacillin/Tazobactam on Sepsis-Related Organ Dysfunction in
Patients with Sepsis: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Intensive Care Med. 2022, 48, 311–321. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. Fuster-Lluch, O.; Gerónimo-Pardo, M.; Peyró-García, R.; Lizán-García, M. Glomerular Hyperfiltration and Albuminuria in
Critically Ill Patients. Anaesth. Intensive Care 2008, 36, 674–680. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Udy, A.A.; Dulhunty, J.M.; Roberts, J.A.; Davis, J.S.; Webb, S.A.R.; Bellomo, R.; Gomersall, C.; Shirwadkar, C.; Eastwood,
G.M.; Myburgh, J.; et al. Association between Augmented Renal Clearance and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving β-
Lactam Antibiotic Therapy by Continuous or Intermittent Infusion: A Nested Cohort Study of the BLING-II Randomised,
Placebo-Controlled, Clinical Trial. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2017, 49, 624–630. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Jacobs, A.; Taccone, F.S.; Roberts, J.A.; Jacobs, F.; Cotton, F.; Wolff, F.; Creteur, J.; Vincent, J.-L.; Hites, M. β-Lactam Dosage
Regimens in Septic Patients with Augmented Renal Clearance. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2018, 62, e02534-17. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
24. Udy, A.A.; Varghese, J.M.; Altukroni, M.; Briscoe, S.; McWhinney, B.C.; Ungerer, J.P.; Lipman, J.; Roberts, J.A. Subtherapeutic
Initial β-Lactam Concentrations in Select Critically Ill Patients: Association between Augmented Renal Clearance and Low
Trough Drug Concentrations. Chest 2012, 142, 30–39. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Besnard, T.; Carrié, C.; Petit, L.; Biais, M. Increased Dosing Regimens of Piperacillin-Tazobactam Are Needed to Avoid Subthera-
peutic Exposure in Critically Ill Patients with Augmented Renal Clearance. Crit. Care 2019, 23, 13. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Carrié, C.; Petit, L.; d’Houdain, N.; Sauvage, N.; Cottenceau, V.; Lafitte, M.; Foumenteze, C.; Hisz, Q.; Menu, D.; Legeron, R.; et al.
Association between Augmented Renal Clearance, Antibiotic Exposure and Clinical Outcome in Critically Ill Septic Patients
Receiving High Doses of β-Lactams Administered by Continuous Infusion: A Prospective Observational Study. Int. J. Antimicrob.
Agents 2018, 51, 443–449. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Casu, G.S.; Hites, M.; Jacobs, F.; Cotton, F.; Wolff, F.; Beumier, M.; De Backer, D.; Vincent, J.-L.; Taccone, F.S. Can Changes in Renal
Function Predict Variations in β-Lactam Concentrations in Septic Patients? Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2013, 42, 422–428. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
28. Lipman, J.; Wallis, S.C.; Boots, R.J. Cefepime Versus Cefpirome: The Importance of Creatinine Clearance. Anesth. Analg. 2003, 97,
1149–1154. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29. Udy, A.A.; Lipman, J.; Jarrett, P.; Klein, K.; Wallis, S.C.; Patel, K.; Kirkpatrick, C.M.; Kruger, P.S.; Paterson, D.L.; Roberts, M.S.; et al.
Are Standard Doses of Piperacillin Sufficient for Critically Ill Patients with Augmented Creatinine Clearance? Crit. Care 2015, 19,
28. [CrossRef]
30. Falcone, M.; Menichetti, F.; Cattaneo, D.; Tiseo, G.; Baldelli, S.; Galfo, V.; Leonildi, A.; Tagliaferri, E.; Di Paolo, A.; Pai, M.P.
Pragmatic Options for Dose Optimization of Ceftazidime/Avibactam with Aztreonam in Complex Patients. J. Antimicrob.
Chemother. 2021, 76, 1025–1031. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31. Tam, V.H.; McKinnon, P.S.; Akins, R.L.; Drusano, G.L.; Rybak, M.J. Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Cefepime in
Patients with Various Degrees of Renal Function. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003, 47, 1853–1861. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Burger, R.; Guidi, M.; Calpini, V.; Lamoth, F.; Decosterd, L.; Robatel, C.; Buclin, T.; Csajka, C.; Marchetti, O. Effect of Renal
Clearance and Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy on Appropriateness of Recommended Meropenem Dosing Regimens
in Critically Ill Patients with Susceptible Life-Threatening Infections. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2018, 73, 3413–3422. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
33. Dhaese, S.A.M.; Roberts, J.A.; Carlier, M.; Verstraete, A.G.; Stove, V.; De Waele, J.J. Population Pharmacokinetics of Continuous
Infusion of Piperacillin in Critically Ill Patients. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2018, 51, 594–600. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Montravers, P.; Fagon, J.Y.; Chastre, J.; Lecso, M.; Dombret, M.C.; Trouillet, J.L.; Gibert, C. Follow-up Protected Specimen Brushes
to Assess Treatment in Nosocomial Pneumonia. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1993, 147, 38–44. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Uchino, S.; Kellum, J.A.; Bellomo, R.; Doig, G.S.; Morimatsu, H.; Morgera, S.; Schetz, M.; Tan, I.; Bouman, C.; Macedo, E.; et al.
Acute Renal Failure in Critically Ill PatientsA Multinational, Multicenter Study. JAMA 2005, 294, 813–818. [CrossRef]
36. Craig, W.A.; Ebert, S.C. Killing and Regrowth of Bacteria in Vitro: A Review. Scand. J. Infect. Dis. Suppl. 1990, 74, 63–70.
37. Craig, W.A.; Andes, D. Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Antibiotics in Otitis Media. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 1996, 15,
255–259. [CrossRef]
38. Eagle, H.; Fleischman, R.; Levy, M. “Continuous” vs. “Discontinuous” Therapy with Penicillin; the Effect of the Interval between
Injections on Therapeutic Efficacy. N. Engl. J. Med. 1953, 248, 481–488. [CrossRef]
39. Tamma, P.D.; Putcha, N.; Suh, Y.D.; Van Arendonk, K.J.; Rinke, M.L. Does Prolonged β-Lactam Infusions Improve Clinical
Outcomes Compared to Intermittent Infusions? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized, Controlled Trials. BMC
Infect. Dis. 2011, 11, 181. [CrossRef]
Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1664 15 of 15

40. Dulhunty, J.M.; Roberts, J.A.; Davis, J.S.; Webb, S.A.R.; Bellomo, R.; Gomersall, C.; Shirwadkar, C.; Eastwood, G.M.; Myburgh, J.;
Paterson, D.L.; et al. A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Continuous versus Intermittent β-Lactam Infusion in Severe Sepsis. Am.
J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2015, 192, 1298–1305. [CrossRef]
41. Abdul-Aziz, M.H.; Sulaiman, H.; Mat-Nor, M.-B.; Rai, V.; Wong, K.K.; Hasan, M.S.; Abd Rahman, A.N.; Jamal, J.A.; Wallis,
S.C.; Lipman, J.; et al. Beta-Lactam Infusion in Severe Sepsis (BLISS): A Prospective, Two-Centre, Open-Labelled Randomised
Controlled Trial of Continuous versus Intermittent Beta-Lactam Infusion in Critically Ill Patients with Severe Sepsis. Intensive
Care Med. 2016, 42, 1535–1545. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Li, C.; Du, X.; Kuti, J.L.; Nicolau, D.P. Clinical Pharmacodynamics of Meropenem in Patients with Lower Respiratory Tract
Infections. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2007, 51, 1725–1730. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. McKinnon, P.S.; Paladino, J.A.; Schentag, J.J. Evaluation of Area under the Inhibitory Curve (AUIC) and Time above the Minimum
Inhibitory Concentration (T > MIC) as Predictors of Outcome for Cefepime and Ceftazidime in Serious Bacterial Infections. Int. J.
Antimicrob. Agents 2008, 31, 345–351. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Jamal, J.-A.; Abdul-Aziz, M.-H.; Lipman, J.; Roberts, J.A. Defining Antibiotic Dosing in Lung Infections. Clin. Pulm. Med. 2013, 20,
121–128. [CrossRef]
45. Schießer, S.; Hitzenbichler, F.; Kees, M.G.; Kratzer, A.; Lubnow, M.; Salzberger, B.; Kees, F.; Dorn, C. Measurement of Free Plasma
Concentrations of Beta-Lactam Antibiotics: An Applicability Study in Intensive Care Unit Patients. Ther. Drug Monit. 2021, 43,
264–270. [CrossRef]
46. Torres, A.; Niederman, M.S.; Chastre, J.; Ewig, S.; Fernandez-Vandellos, P.; Hanberger, H.; Kollef, M.; Li Bassi, G.; Luna, C.M.;
Martin-Loeches, I.; et al. International ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT Guidelines for the Management of Hospital-Acquired Pneu-
monia and Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Guidelines for the Management of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia (HAP)/Ventilator-
Associated Pneumonia (VAP) of the European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM),
European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and Asociación Latinoamericana Del Tórax (ALAT).
Eur. Respir. J. 2017, 50, 1700582. [CrossRef]
47. Kalil, A.C.; Metersky, M.L.; Klompas, M.; Muscedere, J.; Sweeney, D.A.; Palmer, L.B.; Napolitano, L.M.; O’Grady, N.P.; Bartlett,
J.G.; Carratalà, J.; et al. Management of Adults With Hospital-Acquired and Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: 2016 Clinical
Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society. Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ.
Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 2016, 63, e61–e111. [CrossRef]
48. Berton, D.C.; Kalil, A.C.; Teixeira, P.J.Z. Quantitative versus Qualitative Cultures of Respiratory Secretions for Clinical Outcomes
in Patients with Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2014, 10, CD006482. [CrossRef]
49. Bassetti, M.; Mularoni, A.; Giacobbe, D.R.; Castaldo, N.; Vena, A. New Antibiotics for Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia and
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2022, 43, 280–294. [CrossRef]
50. Katsube, T.; Wajima, T.; Ishibashi, T.; Arjona Ferreira, J.C.; Echols, R. Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling and
Simulation of Cefiderocol, a Parenteral Siderophore Cephalosporin, for Dose Adjustment Based on Renal Function. Antimicrob.
Agents Chemother. 2016, 61, e01381-16. [CrossRef]
51. Sime, F.B.; Lassig-Smith, M.; Starr, T.; Stuart, J.; Pandey, S.; Parker, S.L.; Wallis, S.C.; Lipman, J.; Roberts, J.A. Population
Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Ceftolozane and Tazobactam in Critically Ill Patients without Renal Dysfunction. Antimicrob.
Agents Chemother. 2019, 63, e01265-19. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
52. Dulhunty, J.M.; Roberts, J.A.; Davis, J.S.; Webb, S.A.R.; Bellomo, R.; Gomersall, C.; Shirwadkar, C.; Eastwood, G.M.; Myburgh, J.;
Paterson, D.L.; et al. Continuous Infusion of Beta-Lactam Antibiotics in Severe Sepsis: A Multicenter Double-Blind, Randomized
Controlled Trial. Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 2013, 56, 236–244. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53. Chastre, J.; Wolff, M.; Fagon, J.-Y.; Chevret, S.; Thomas, F.; Wermert, D.; Clementi, E.; Gonzalez, J.; Jusserand, D.; Asfar, P.; et al.
Comparison of 8 vs 15 Days of Antibiotic Therapy for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Adults: A Randomized Trial. JAMA
2003, 290, 2588–2598. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Craven, D.E.; Kunches, L.M.; Lichtenberg, D.A.; Kollisch, N.R.; Barry, M.A.; Heeren, T.C.; McCabe, W.R. Nosocomial Infection
and Fatality in Medical and Surgical Intensive Care Unit Patients. Arch. Intern. Med. 1988, 148, 1161–1168. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
55. Le Gall, J.R.; Lemeshow, S.; Saulnier, F. A New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) Based on a European/North American
Multicenter Study. JAMA 1993, 270, 2957–2963. [CrossRef]
56. Vincent, J.L.; Moreno, R.; Takala, J.; Willatts, S.; De Mendonça, A.; Bruining, H.; Reinhart, C.K.; Suter, P.M.; Thijs, L.G. The SOFA
(Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment) Score to Describe Organ Dysfunction/Failure. On Behalf of the Working Group on
Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 1996, 22, 707–710. [CrossRef]
57. Luna, C.M.; Blanzaco, D.; Niederman, M.S.; Matarucco, W.; Baredes, N.C.; Desmery, P.; Palizas, F.; Menga, G.; Rios, F.; Apezteguia,
C. Resolution of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Prospective Evaluation of the Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score as an Early
Clinical Predictor of Outcome. Crit. Care Med. 2003, 31, 676–682. [CrossRef]
58. Levey, A.S.; Stevens, L.A.; Schmid, C.H.; Zhang, Y.L.; Castro, A.F.; Feldman, H.I.; Kusek, J.W.; Eggers, P.; Van Lente, F.; Greene, T.;
et al. A New Equation to Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009, 150, 604–612. [CrossRef]