↓ Skip to main content

Impact of a high loading dose of amikacin in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Impact of a high loading dose of amikacin in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13613-016-0211-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolas Allou, Astrid Bouteau, Jérôme Allyn, Aurélie Snauwaert, Dorothée Valance, Julien Jabot, Bruno Bouchet, Richard Galliot, Laure Corradi, Philippe Montravers, Pascal Augustin

Abstract

The therapeutic effect of aminoglycosides is highest and optimal when the peak plasma concentration (C max)/minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio is between 8 and 10. The French guidelines recommend to use high doses of aminoglycosides for empiric antibiotic therapy in patients suffering from severe sepsis or septic shock. In clinical practice, the recommended target is an amikacin C max between 60 and 80 mg/L, which corresponds to approximately 8 times the MIC breakpoint, as defined by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and impact on mortality of an amikacin concentration between 60 and 80 mg/L in patients suffering from severe sepsis or septic shock. This was a prospective observational cohort study conducted in two intensive care units (ICU). Patients receiving amikacin at a loading dose of 30 mg/kg for severe sepsis or septic shock were enrolled in the cohort. The target C max for amikacin was between 60 and 80 mg/L, as recommended by French guidelines (i.e. C max/MIC breakpoint = 8-10). Over the study period, the amikacin C max was <60 mg/L, between 60 and 80 mg/L, and >80 mg/L in 20 (18.2%), 46 (41.8%) and 44 (40%) of the 110 selected patients, respectively. Mortality rate was 40, 28.3 and 56.8% in the groups of patients with C max < 60 mg/L, 60 mg/L < C max < 80 mg/L and C max > 80 mg/L, respectively. Following multivariate analysis, mortality rate was significantly lower in the group of patients with amikacin C max between 60 and 80 mg/L than in the group of patients with amikacin C max > 80 mg/L (P = 0.004). The multivariate analysis also revealed that the factors independently associated with a higher in-ICU mortality rate were age (P = 0.02) and norepinephrine dose (P = 0.0001). With a loading dose of 30 mg/kg of amikacin, concentration was potentially suboptimal (C max < 60 mg/L) in only 18.2% of patients. The pharmacodynamic target (60 mg/L < C max < 80 mg/L) recommended by French guidelines was reached in 41.8% of patients and was associated with reduced in-ICU mortality. But amikacin overexposure (i.e. C max > 80 mg/L) was frequent and potentially associated with increased mortality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 17%
Other 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 12 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 38%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 17 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 10 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2017.
All research outputs
#13,996,981
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#740
of 1,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,319
of 311,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#10
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.