Gentamicin pharmacokinetics in old age and frailty
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Gentamicin pharmacokinetics show wide inter‐individual variability across all age groups and impaired gentamicin clearance is associated with impaired creatinine clearance in older people. • Changes in body composition and renal function with old age and frailty are likely to affect the pharmacokinetics of gentamicin. • There is current debate on whether the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation estimate of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) should replace the Cockcroft Gault equation estimate of creatinine clearance for calculation of doses of renally excreted drugs. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • The volume of distribution of gentamicin is not significantly lower in frail than in non frail older people. • The correlation between volume of distribution of gentamicin and actual bodyweight is poor in frail and moderate in non frail older people. • Gentamicin clearance is significantly lower in frail than in non frail older people. • The Cockcroft Gault calculation of creatinine clearance, calculated using ideal bodyweight, gave the best estimate of gentamicin clearance in this population of frail and non frail older people. • The MDRD estimate of GFR and Cockcroft Gault estimate of creatinine clearance, calculated using actual bodyweight, overestimate gentamicin clearance in frail and non frail older people. AIMS Frailty, a syndrome of decreased physiological reserve that is prevalent in old age, impacts on clinical pharmacology. The aims of the study were to (1) determine whether frailty affects the pharmacokinetics of gentamicin and (2) assess the accuracy of different estimates of body size and renal clearance as estimates of gentamicin pharmacokinetics in older inpatients. METHODS This was an observational study of gentamicin pharmacokinetics in a cohort of Australian hospital inpatients aged ≥65 years, who were administered prophylactic intravenous gentamicin. RESULTS Of the 31 participants, 14 were frail and 17 non frail on the Reported Edmonton Frail Scale. The mean volume of distribution of gentamicin was 14.8 ± 1.4 l in frail participants and 15.3 ± 2.2 l in non frail (NS). Volume of distribution correlated best with lean bodyweight. Gentamicin clearance was significantly lower in frail participants (46.6 ± 10.7 ml min −1 ) than in non frail (58.2 ± 12.4 ml min −1 , P = 0.01). The Cockcroft Gault estimate of creatinine clearance calculated using ideal bodyweight gave the best estimate of gentamicin clearance (mean error – 0.15 ml min −1 , 95% CI −2.67, 2.39). The Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance calculated using actual bodyweight and the estimated glomerular filtration rate from the modified diet in renal disease equation overestimated gentamicin clearance, with mean errors of −10.15 ml min −1 (95%CI −13.60, −6.71) and −18.86 ml min −1 (95% CI −22.45, −15.27), respectively. The Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance calculated using lean bodyweight underestimated gentamicin clearance (mean error 6.54 ml min −1 , 95% CI 4.18, 8.90). CONCLUSIONS Frail older people have significantly lower gentamicin clearance than non frail. The best estimate of gentamicin clearance is obtained from the Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance calculated using ideal bodyweight.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».