Effects of regional limb perfusion technique on concentrations of antibiotic achieved at the target site: A meta-analysis.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 06 01 2022
accepted: 10 03 2022
entrez: 1 4 2022
pubmed: 2 4 2022
medline: 15 4 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Intravenous regional limb perfusions (RLP) are widely used in equine medicine to treat distal limb infections, including synovial sepsis. RLPs are generally deemed successful if the peak antibiotic concentration (Cmax) in the sampled synovial structure is at least 8-10 times the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for the bacteria of interest. Despite extensive experimentation and widespread clinical use, the optimal technique for performing a successful perfusion remains unclear. The objective of this meta-analysis was to examine the effect of technique on synovial concentrations of antibiotic and to assess under which conditions Cmax:MIC ≥ 10. A literature search including the terms "horse", "equine", and "regional limb perfusion" between 1990 and 2021 was performed. Cmax (μg/ml) and measures of dispersion were extracted from studies and Cmax:MIC was calculated for sensitive and resistant bacteria. Variables included in the analysis included synovial structure sampled, antibiotic dose, tourniquet location, tourniquet duration, general anesthesia versus standing sedation, perfusate volume, tourniquet type, and the concurrent use of local analgesia. Mixed effects meta-regression was performed, and variables significantly associated with the outcome on univariable analysis were added to a multivariable meta-regression model in a step-wise manner. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of our findings. Thirty-six studies with 123 arms (permutations of dose, route, location and timing) were included. Cmax:MIC ranged from 1 to 348 for sensitive bacteria and 0.25 to 87 for resistant bacteria, with mean (SD) time to peak concentration (Tmax) of 29.0 (8.8) minutes. Meta-analyses generated summary values (θ) of 42.8 x MIC and 10.7 x MIC for susceptible and resistant bacteria, respectively, though because of high heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 98.8), these summary variables were not considered reliable. Meta-regression showed that the only variables for which there were statistically significant differences in outcome were the type of tourniquet and the concurrent use of local analgesia: perfusions performed with a wide rubber tourniquet and perfusions performed with the addition of local analgesia achieved significantly greater concentrations of antibiotic. The majority of arms achieved Cmax:MIC ≥ 10 for sensitive bacteria but not resistant bacteria. Our results suggest that wide rubber tourniquets and concurrent local analgesia should be strongly considered for use in RLP and that adequate therapeutic concentrations (Cmax:MIC ≥ 10) are often achieved across a variety of techniques for susceptible but not resistant pathogens.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35363825
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265971
pii: PONE-D-22-00403
pmc: PMC8974993
doi:

Substances chimiques

Anti-Bacterial Agents 0
Amikacin 84319SGC3C
Rubber 9006-04-6

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0265971

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Am J Vet Res. 2011 May;72(5):613-9
pubmed: 21529212
Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12
pubmed: 8721797
Am J Vet Res. 2002 Mar;63(3):374-80
pubmed: 11911572
Vet Surg. 2013 Aug;42(6):649-57
pubmed: 23889562
Vet Surg. 2016 Oct;45(7):851-858
pubmed: 27509840
Can Vet J. 2013 Apr;54(4):363-7
pubmed: 24082163
Vet Surg. 2019 Jul;48(5):685-693
pubmed: 30993777
Equine Vet J. 1992 Nov;24(6):436-42
pubmed: 1459056
Vet Surg. 2011 Oct;40(7):891-7
pubmed: 22380674
Vet J. 2016 Feb;208:50-4
pubmed: 26639821
Vet Surg. 1992 Jul-Aug;21(4):279-85
pubmed: 1455636
Vet Surg. 2005 Nov-Dec;34(6):610-7
pubmed: 16343149
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58
pubmed: 12111919
Am J Vet Res. 2008 Mar;69(3):334-42
pubmed: 18312131
Res Vet Sci. 2017 Oct;114:64-68
pubmed: 28319829
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Oct-Dec;32(4):424-430
pubmed: 28096570
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 Mar 1;228(5):706-12, 655
pubmed: 16506931
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Dec 19;14:135
pubmed: 25524443
Equine Vet J. 2014 May;46(3):375-9
pubmed: 23789781
Am J Vet Res. 2019 Dec;80(12):1099-1106
pubmed: 31763943
Can Vet J. 2019 Mar;60(3):294-299
pubmed: 30872853
Vet Surg. 2017 Nov;46(8):1120-1125
pubmed: 28952152
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol. 2020 Sep;33(5):327-332
pubmed: 32799312
J Vet Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Feb;38(1):35-40
pubmed: 25073920
Vet Surg. 1992 Sep-Oct;21(5):367-73
pubmed: 1413470
Am J Vet Res. 2021 Feb;82(2):99-104
pubmed: 33480277
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2012 Dec 15;241(12):1650-8
pubmed: 23216042
Vet Surg. 2010 Jul;39(5):588-93
pubmed: 20459481
Can Vet J. 2001 Aug;42(8):617-22
pubmed: 11519271
Vet Surg. 2014 Mar;43(3):282-8
pubmed: 24467593
Am J Vet Res. 2016 Jun;77(6):582-8
pubmed: 27227495
Vet Surg. 2018 Aug;47(6):852-860
pubmed: 30066453
J Vet Pharmacol Ther. 1999 Feb;22(1):68-71
pubmed: 10211721
Vet Surg. 2010 Dec;39(8):1021-4
pubmed: 20880139
Am J Vet Res. 2018 Mar;79(3):282-286
pubmed: 29466037
Vet Surg. 2016 Nov;45(8):1077-1082
pubmed: 27684571
Animals (Basel). 2021 Jul 13;11(7):
pubmed: 34359213
Vet Rec. 2016 Jun 4;178(23):585
pubmed: 27076528
J Infect Dis. 1987 Jan;155(1):93-9
pubmed: 3540140
Vet Surg. 2017 Jul;46(5):675-682
pubmed: 28460426
Vet Surg. 2016 Aug;45(6):798-803
pubmed: 27416788
Vet Surg. 2005 Nov-Dec;34(6):618-24
pubmed: 16343150
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol. 2021 Jul;34(4):287-293
pubmed: 33979876
J Vet Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Jun;36(3):236-40
pubmed: 22607056
Am J Vet Res. 2006 Oct;67(10):1687-95
pubmed: 17014317
Vet Surg. 2016 Jul;45(5):625-30
pubmed: 27273831
J Vet Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Oct;36(5):434-40
pubmed: 23240633
Equine Vet J. 2012 Sep;44(5):594-9
pubmed: 22212017

Auteurs

Laurel E Redding (LE)

Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania.

Elizabeth J Elzer (EJ)

Rood and Riddle Equine Hospital, Saratoga Springs, New York, United States of America.

Kyla F Ortved (KF)

Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania.

Articles similaires

Vancomycin-associated DRESS demonstrates delay in AST abnormalities.

Ahmed Hussein, Kateri L Schoettinger, Jourdan Hydol-Smith et al.
1.00
Humans Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome Vancomycin Female Male
Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice

Classifications MeSH