The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The pharmacokinetics of once-daily dosing of ceftriaxone in critically ill patients
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the pharmacokinetic profile of the normal recommended dose of ceftriaxone in critically ill patients and to establish whether the current daily dosing recommendation maintains plasma concentrations adequate for antibacterial efficacy. Ceftriaxone at a recommended dose of 2 g iv was administered od to 12 critically ill patients with severe sepsis and normal serum creatinine concentrations. Blood samples were taken at pre-determined intervals over the first 24 h and on day 3 for measurement of ceftriaxone concentrations. There was wide variability in drug disposition, explained by the presence of variable renal function and identified by the measurement of creatinine clearance. In nine patients with normal renal function, there was a high level of creatinine clearance (mean +/- S.D., 41 +/- 12 mL/min) and volume of distribution (20 +/- 3.3 L), which resulted in an elimination half-life of 6.4 +/- 1.1 h. In comparison with normal subjects, ceftriaxone clearance was increased 100%, volume of distribution increased 90% and the elimination half-life was similar. Three patients had substantially suboptimal plasma ceftriaxone concentrations. We confirm previous findings that ceftriaxone clearance in critically ill patients correlates with renal clearance by glomerular filtration. The elimination half-life is prolonged (21.4 +/- 9.8 h) in critically ill patients with renal failure when compared with previously published data in non-critically ill patients with renal failure. We conclude that in critically ill patients with normal renal function, inadequate plasma concentrations may result following od bolus dosing of ceftriaxone. Drug accumulation may occur in critically ill patients with renal failure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Roberts, J. A., Abdul-Aziz, M. H., Lipman, J., Mouton, J. W., Vinks, A. A., Felton, T. W., Hope, W. W., Farkas, A., Neely, M. N., Schentag, J. J., et al. (2014) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70036-2 · Cited by 1,046
The effects of hypoalbuminaemia on optimizing antibacterial dosing in critically ill patients.
Ulldemolins, M., Roberts, J. A., Rello, J., Paterson, D. L., & Lipman, J. (2011) · Clinical Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.2165/11539220-000000000-00000 · Cited by 469
Blot, S. I., Pea, F., & Lipman, J. (2014) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2014.07.006 · Cited by 444
Augmented Renal Clearance: Implications for Antibacterial Dosing in the Critically Ill
Udy, A. A., Roberts, J. A., Boots, R. J., Paterson, D. L., & Lipman, J. (2010) · Clinical Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.2165/11318140-000000000-00000 · Cited by 377
Therapeutic drug monitoring of β-lactams in critically ill patients: proof of concept
Roberts, J. A., Ulldemolins, M., Roberts, M. S., McWhinney, B., Ungerer, J., Paterson, D. L., & Lipman, J. (2010) · International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents · doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2010.06.008 · Cited by 334
Metadata
- Authors
- Joynt, G. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-04-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 421-429
- ISSN
- 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2091
- OpenAlex
- W2156273542
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The pharmacokinetics of once-daily dosing of ceftriaxone in critically ill patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/47.4.421
- The paper
- Joynt, G. M. (2001). The pharmacokinetics of once-daily dosing of ceftriaxone in critically ill patients. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/47.4.421
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.