Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin as empirical monotherapy for serious bacterial infections in the intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and tolerability of meropenem and imipenem/cilastatin as empirical monotherapy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with serious bacterial infections. METHODS A multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial was conducted in Belgium, evaluating empirical monotherapy with meropenem or imipenem/cilastatin (both 1 g/8 h intravenously) in ICU patients with one or more of the following infections caused by sensitive pathogens: lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in ventilated patients, intra-abdominal infection or sepsis. RESULTS The overall satisfactory clinical response rate at the end of randomized treatment was 77.0% (67/87) with meropenem and 68.1% (62/91) with imipenem/cilastatin (difference 8.9%; 95% confidence interval -4.2% to 21.9%; P = 0.185). The two drugs produced similar satisfactory clinical response rates against LRTIs: 68.3% (41/60) with meropenem versus 68.6% (35/51) with imipenem/cilastatin. Meropenem appeared to be slightly more effective against intra-abdominal infections: 95.5% (21/22) versus 76.7% (23/30), respectively. All five meropenem recipients with sepsis had a satisfactory clinical response, compared to 40.0% (4/10) of those who received imipenem/cilastatin. The overall satisfactory bacteriologic response rate was 67.1% (49/73) with meropenem and 60.3% (44/73) with imipenem/cilastatin (difference 6.9%; 95% confidence interval -8.7% to 22.4%; P = 0.389). The predominant pathogens were Escherichia coli, Enterobacter spp. and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. No incidences of drug-related nausea and vomiting were reported, but one probable drug-related seizure occurred in the imipenem/cilastatin group. CONCLUSIONS Meropenem is at least as efficacious (clinically and bacteriologically) as imipenem/cilastatin for the empirical monotherapy of serious bacterial infections in ICU patients, and it can therefore be considered a useful option in this setting. Moreover, meropenem is well tolerated and offers several potential advantages, including greater in vitro activity against Gram-negative pathogens and the option of bolus administration.

[1]  G Sherman,et al.  Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. , 1999, Chest.

[2]  S. Norrby,et al.  Safety profile of meropenem: a review of nearly 5,000 patients treated with meropenem. , 1999, Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases.

[3]  B. Sieger,et al.  Empiric treatment of hospital-acquired lower respiratory tract infections with meropenem or ceftazidime with tobramycin: a randomized study. Meropenem Lower Respiratory Infection Group. , 1997, Critical care medicine.

[4]  M. Niederman,et al.  Impact of BAL data on the therapy and outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia. , 1997, Chest.

[5]  D. Livermore,et al.  Antibiotic resistance and production of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases amongst Klebsiella spp. from intensive care units in Europe. , 1996, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[6]  K. Faulkner,et al.  Intravenous meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of serious bacterial infections in hospitalized patients. Meropenem Serious Infection Study Group. , 1996, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[7]  M. Kollef,et al.  The effect of late-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia in determining patient mortality. , 1995, Chest.

[8]  S. Wilson,et al.  Meropenem versus tobramycin plus clindamycin for treatment of intraabdominal infections: results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. , 1995, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[9]  J. Vincent,et al.  The prevalence of nosocomial infection in intensive care units in Europe. Results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study. EPIC International Advisory Committee. , 1995, JAMA.

[10]  D. Sirot.  Extended-spectrum plasmid-mediated β-lactamases , 1995 .

[11]  J. R. Edwards.  Meropenem: a microbiological overview. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[12]  A. Wilson.  Antibiotic prophylaxis and infection control measures in minimally invasive surgery. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[13]  H. Sjursen,et al.  Safety and efficacy of meropenem in patients with septicaemia: a randomised comparison with ceftazidime, alone or combined with amikacin. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[14]  J. Flaherty,et al.  Roxithromycin disposition in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[15]  D. Pezet,et al.  Antibiotic monotherapy with meropenem in the surgical management of intra-abdominal infections. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[16]  B. Pfausler,et al.  A randomised comparison of meropenem with cefotaxime or ceftriaxone for the treatment of bacterial meningitis in adults. Meropenem Meningitis Study Group. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[17]  R. Dagan,et al.  Randomized comparison of meropenem with cefotaxime for treatment of bacterial meningitis. Meropenem Meningitis Study Group , 1995, Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy.

[18]  G. De Sarro,et al.  Relationship between structure and convulsant properties of some beta-lactam antibiotics following intracerebroventricular microinjection in rats , 1995, Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy.

[19]  S. Steinberg,et al.  Monotherapy for fever and neutropenia in cancer patients: a randomized comparison of ceftazidime versus imipenem. , 1995, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  Jerome J. Schentag,et al.  Treatment of severe pneumonia in hospitalized patients: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial comparing intravenous ciprofloxacin with imipenem-cilastatin. The Severe Pneumonia Study Group , 1994, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[21]  L. Mandell,et al.  A prospective randomized trial of imipenem-cilastatin versus clindamycin/tobramycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal and pelvic infections. , 1993, The Canadian journal of infectious diseases = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses.

[22]  R. A. Castillo-Lara,et al.  Definitions for sepsis and organ failure. , 1993, JAMA.

[23]  P. Montravers,et al.  Nosocomial pneumonia in ventilated patients: a cohort study evaluating attributable mortality and hospital stay. , 1993, The American journal of medicine.

[24]  Christine C. Sanders,et al.  β-Lactam Resistance in Gram-Negative Bacteria: Global Trends and Clinical Impact , 1992 .

[25]  C. Sprung,et al.  Definitions for sepsis and organ failure. , 1992, Critical care medicine.

[26]  D. Bruckner,et al.  Beta-lactam antibiotic therapy in febrile granulocytopenic patients. A randomized trial comparing cefoperazone plus piperacillin, ceftazidime plus piperacillin, and imipenem alone. , 1991, Annals of internal medicine.

[27]  J. Rello,et al.  Incidence, etiology, and outcome of nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients. , 1991, Chest.

[28]  R. Rodríguez-Roisín,et al.  Incidence, risk, and prognosis factors of nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients. , 1990, The American review of respiratory disease.

[29]  M. Niederman,et al.  Pneumonia in the Critically III Hospitalized Patient , 1990 .

[30]  M. Niederman,et al.  Pneumonia in the critically ill hospitalized patient. , 1990, Chest.

[31]  J. Chastre,et al.  Nosocomial pneumonia in patients receiving continuous mechanical ventilation. Prospective analysis of 52 episodes with use of a protected specimen brush and quantitative culture techniques. , 1989, The American review of respiratory disease.

[32]  R. Giles,et al.  Meropenem: evidence of lack of proconvulsive tendency in mice. , 1989, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[33]  James H. Carrigan,et al.  Factors predisposing to seizures in seriously ill infected patients receiving antibiotics: experience with imipenem/cilastatin. , 1988, The American journal of medicine.

[34]  R. Rodríguez-Roisín,et al.  Nosocomial pneumonia. A multivariate analysis of risk and prognosis. , 1988, Chest.

[35]  T. Louie,et al.  Imipenem/cilastatin versus amikacin plus piperacillin in the treatment of infections in neutropenic patients: a prospective, randomized multi-clinic study. , 1987, Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases. Supplementum.

[36]  A. Schreiner.  Imipenem/cilastatin as monotherapy in severe infections: comparison with cefotaxime in combination with metronidazole and cloxacillin. Report from a Norwegian Study Group. , 1987, Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases.

[37]  W. Knaus,et al.  APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. , 1985 .

[38]  G. Calandra,et al.  Efficacy and safety of imipenem/cilastatin: a review of worldwide clinical experience. , 1985, Reviews of infectious diseases.

[39]  M. D. de Broe,et al.  The pharmacokinetics of imipenem (thienamycin-formamidine) and the renal dehydropeptidase inhibitor cilastatin sodium in normal subjects and patients with renal failure. , 1984, British journal of clinical pharmacology.