Advertisement

European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

, Volume 34, Issue 2, pp 173–178 | Cite as

Influence of age on the pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime in acutely ill, adult patients

  • B. Ljungberg
  • I. Nilsson-Ehle
Originals

Summary

The single and multiple i.v. dose pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime were investigated in 37 acutely ill patients with normal age-related glomerular function.

Distribution was rapid with similar t1/2a at all ages. Compared to the younger patients, elderly subjects had lower total and renal clearances and reduced urinary recovery. Ceftazidime clearance was closely correlated with glomerular function. The t1/2β was approximately 2 h in young and middle-aged patients, 2.73 h in patients aged 60–79 years, and 3.54 h in those above 80 years. The AUC was more than doubled in the oldest patients compared to individuals younger than 40 years. Vss did not change with advancing age, but was larger than previously reported in healthy volunteers. Elimination variables were not altered during multiple dosing, but a small but significant increase in AUC was detected in the elderly. Dose reduction by 50% in patients more than 70 years old is suggested.

Key words

ceftazidime pharmacokinetics age dependency elderly patients acute infection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Harding SM (1982) Clinical pharmacology of ceftazidime. In: Periti F, Grassi GG (eds) Current chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Chemotherapy, Florence, Italy, July 1981. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, pp 495–498Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ljungberg B, Nilsson-Ehle I (1988) Comparative pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime in young, healthy and elderly, acutely ill males. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 34: 179–186Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Granerus G, Aurell M (1981) Reference values for51Cr-EDTA clearance as a measure of glomerular filtration rate. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 41: 611–616Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ayrton J (1981) Assay of ceftazidime in biological fluids using high-pressure liquid chromatography. J Antimicrob Chemother 8 [Suppl B]: 227–231Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gibaldi M, Perrier D (1982) Pharmacokinetics, 2nd edn. Marcel Dekker, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gillenwater JY, Frohilich ED, Keller AD (1964) Differential effects of heat on splenic and renal vascular beds. Am J Physiol 207: 133–136Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 16: 31–41Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Siersbaek-Nielsen K, Moelholm Hansen J, Kampmann J, Kristensen M (1971) Rapid evaluation of creatinine clearance. Lancet 1: 1133–1134Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harding SM, Monro AJ, Thornton JE, Ayrton J, Hogg MIJ (1981) The comparative pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime and cefotaxime in healthy volunteers. J Antimicrob Chemother 8 [Suppl B]: 263–272Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    LeBel M, Barbeau G, Vallée F, Bergeron MG (1985) Pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime in elderly volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 28: 713–715Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alestig K, Trollfors B, Andersson R, Olaison L, Suurküla M, Norrby SR (1984) Ceftazidime and renal function. J Antimicrob Chemother 13: 177–181Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ljungberg B, Nilsson Ehle I (1987) Pharmacokinetics of anti-microbial agents in the elderly. Rev Infect Dis 9: 250–264Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Ljungberg
    • 1
  • I. Nilsson-Ehle
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Infectious DiseasesUniversity of LundLundSweden

Personalised recommendations