Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Continuous versus Short-Term Infusion of Imipenem-Cilastatin in Critically Ill Patients in a Randomized, Controlled Trial

Open access
Sakka, Samir G., Glauner, Anna K., Bulitta, Jürgen B., Kinzig-Schippers, Martina, Pfister, Wolfgang, Drusano, George L., Sörgel, Fritz·2007·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

Beta-lactams are regularly administered in intermittent short-term infusions. The percentage of the dosing interval during which free drug concentrations exceed the MIC ( fT >MIC ) is the measure of drug exposure that best correlates with clinical outcome for beta-lactams. Therefore, administration by continuous infusion has gained increasing interest recently. We studied 20 critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia and investigated whether continuous infusion with a reduced total dose, compared to the standard regimen of intermittent short-term infusion, results in a superior probability of target attainment as assessed by the fT >MIC value of imipenem. In this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study, patients received either a loading dose of 1 g/1 g imipenem and cilastatin (as a short-term infusion) at time zero, followed by 2 g/2 g imipenem-cilastatin per 24 h as a continuous infusion for 3 days ( n = 10), or 1 g/1 g imipenem-cilastatin three times per day as a short-term infusion for 3 days (total daily dose, 3 g/3 g; n = 10). Imipenem concentrations in plasma were determined by using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. A two-compartment open model was employed for population pharmacokinetic modeling. We simulated 10,000 intensive-care-unit patients via Monte Carlo simulations for pharmacodynamic evaluation using the target 40% fT >MIC . The probability of target attainment by MIC for intermittent infusion was robust (>90%) up to MICs of 1 to 2 mg/liter. The corresponding value for continuous infusion was 2 to 4 mg/liter. Although all 20 patients had an fT >MIC of 100%, 3 patients died. Patient survival was best described by employing a sepsis-related organ failure assessment score as a covariate in a logistic regression analysis. Larger clinical trials are warranted for evaluation of continuous infusions at a reduced dose of imipenem for critically ill patients.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aac.01318-06

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 159

Metadata

Authors
Sakka, S. G., Glauner, A. K., Bulitta, J. B., Kinzig-Schippers, M., Pfister, W., Drusano, G. L., & Sörgel, F.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2007-09
Volume
51
Issue
9
Pages
3304-3310
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2085793991
Cited by
159
References
1
FWCI
5.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Continuous versus Short-Term Infusion of Imipenem-Cilastatin in Critically Ill Patients in a Randomized, Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.01318-06
The paper
Sakka, S. G., Glauner, A. K., Bulitta, J. B., Kinzig-Schippers, M., Pfister, W., Drusano, G. L., & Sörgel, F. (2007). Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Continuous versus Short-Term Infusion of Imipenem-Cilastatin in Critically Ill Patients in a Randomized, Controlled Trial. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.01318-06

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.