European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

, Volume 75, Issue 1, pp 119–126 | Cite as

Association between increased mortality rate and antibiotic dose adjustment in intensive care unit patients with renal impairment

  • Marianne Silveira CamargoEmail author
  • Sóstenes Mistro
  • Márcio Galvão Oliveira
  • Luiz Carlos Santana Passos
Pharmacoepidemiology and Prescription



Adjusting the antibiotic dose based on an estimation of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) may result in subdosing, which may actually be significantly more problematic for intensive care unit (ICU) patients than not adjusting the dose. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of antibiotic dose adjustment in ICU patients with renal impairment.


A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients admitted to an ICU of a Brazilian hospital from January 2014 to December 2015. The eGFR was determined using Cockcroft–Gault and Modified Diet in Renal Disease equations for each day of hospitalization. Treatment failure was defined based on the clinical, laboratory, and radiological criteria.


A total of 126 patients were assessed to meet the inclusion criteria and subsequently enrolled in the study (19.9% of patients admitted to the ICU during the study period). Of the 168 opportunities for dose adjustment, 99 (58.9%) adjustments were made. The mean eGFR in the group with dose adjustment was lower than that in the group without dose adjustment (38.5 vs. 40.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively). The treatment failure rate among patients with dose adjustment and those treated with the usual dose was 59.3 and 38.9%, respectively (p = 0.023), and the mortality rates in the respective groups were 74.1 and 55.5% (p = 0.033). An association between dose adjustment and treatment failure/mortality rates was also observed in the multivariate analysis including the prognostic score.


In ICU patients with renal impairment, adjustments in antibiotic dose based on eGFR, significantly increased the risk of treatment failure and death.


Anti-infective agents Renal insufficiency Intensive care units Mortality 


Author contributions

MS Camargo was responsible for the study design, data analysis, and manuscript writing. S Mistro and MG Oliveira were responsible for the manuscript writing and data analysis. LC Passos supervised the study and was responsible for writing the manuscript.


No funding was received.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at Multidisciplinary Institute of Health, Federal University of Bahia, Vitória da Conquista, Brazil, with number (CAAE): 52721616.6.0000.5556.


The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


  1. 1.
    Barrasa-Villar JI, Aibar-Remon C, Prieto-Andres P, Mareca-Donate R, Moliner-Lahoz J (2017) Impact on morbidity, mortality, and length of stay of hospital-acquired infections by resistant microorganisms. Clin Infect Dis 65(4):644–652. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garcia-Lamberechts EJ, Gonzalez-Del Castillo J, Hormigo-Sanchez AI, Nunez-Orantos MJ, Candel FJ, Martin-Sanchez FJ (2017) Factors predicting failure in empirical antibiotic treatment. An Sist Sanit Navar 40(1):119–130. Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Denny KJ, Cotta MO, Parker SL, Roberts JA, Lipman J (2016) The use and risks of antibiotics in critically ill patients. Expert Opin Drug Saf 15(5):667–678. Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jager NG, van Hest RM, Lipman J, Taccone FS, Roberts JA (2016) Therapeutic drug monitoring of anti-infective agents in critically ill patients. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 9 (7):961-979.
  5. 5.
    Tasa T, Metsvaht T, Kalamees R, Vilo J, Lutsar I (2017) DosOpt: a tool for personalized Bayesian dose adjustment of vancomycin in neonates. Ther Drug Monit 39(6):604–613. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mouton JW, Muller AE, Canton R, Giske CG, Kahlmeter G, Turnidge J (2018) MIC-based dose adjustment: facts and fables. J Antimicrob Chemother 73(3):564–568.
  7. 7.
    van Hasselt JG, Schellens JH, Beijnen JH, Huitema AD (2014) Design of informative renal impairment studies: evaluation of the impact of design stratification on bias, precision and dose adjustment error. Investig New Drugs 32(5):913–927.
  8. 8.
    Sharif-Askari FS, Syed Sulaiman SA, Saheb Sharif-Askari N, Al Sayed Hussain A (2014) Development of an adverse drug reaction risk assessment score among hospitalized patients with chronic kidney disease. PLoS One 9(4):e95991. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elinder CG, Barany P, Heimburger O (2014) The use of estimated glomerular filtration rate for dose adjustment of medications in the elderly. Drugs Aging 31(7):493–499. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Surana S, Kumar N, Vasudeva A, Shaikh G, Jhaveri KD, Shah H, Malieckal D, Fogel J, Sidhu G, Rubinstein S (2017) Awareness and knowledge among internal medicine house-staff for dose adjustment of commonly used medications in patients with CKD. BMC Nephrol 18(1):26. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Martin JH, Fay MF, Udy A, Roberts J, Kirkpatrick C, Ungerer J, Lipman J (2011) Pitfalls of using estimations of glomerular filtration rate in an intensive care population. Intern Med J 41(7):537–543. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bicalho MD, Soares DB, Botoni FA, Reis AM, Martins MA (2015) Drug-induced nephrotoxicity and dose adjustment recommendations: agreement among four drug information sources. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12(9):11227–11240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kumar BV, Mohan T (2017) Retrospective comparison of estimated GFR using 2006 MDRD, 2009 CKD-EPI and Cockcroft–Gault with 24 hour urine creatinine clearance. J Clin Diagn Res 11(5):BC09–BC12. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Delanaye P, Guerber F, Scheen A, Ellam T, Bouquegneau A, Guergour D, Mariat C, Pottel H (2017) Discrepancies between the Cockcroft-gault and chronic kidney disease epidemiology (CKD-EPI) equations: implications for refining drug dosage adjustment strategies. Clin Pharmacokinet 56(2):193–205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karsch-Volk M, Schmid E, Wagenpfeil S, Linde K, Heemann U, Schneider A (2013) Kidney function and clinical recommendations of drug dose adjustment in geriatric patients. BMC Geriatr 13:92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Khanal A, Peterson GM, Castelino RL, Jose MD (2014) Renal drug dosing recommendations: evaluation of product information for brands of the same drug. Intern Med J 44(6):591–596. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brown DL, Masselink AJ, Lalla CD (2013) Functional range of creatinine clearance for renal drug dosing: a practical solution to the controversy of which weight to use in the Cockcroft–Gault equation. Ann Pharmacother 47(7-8):1039–1044. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 16(1):31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Levey AS, Coresh J, Greene T, Stevens LA, Zhang YL, Hendriksen S, Kusek JW, Van Lente F, Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology C (2006) Using standardized serum creatinine values in the modification of diet in renal disease study equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 145(4):247–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Truven Health Analytics, Inc. (2016) Micromedex® 2.0. Truven Health Analytics, Inc. Greenwood Village
  21. 21.
    American Pharmacists Association (2015). Drug information handbook, 24th edn. Lexi-Comp, Ohio State University, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ismail B, Shafei MN, Harun A, Ali S, Omar M, Deris ZZ (2017) Predictors of polymyxin B treatment failure in Gram-negative healthcare-associated infections among critically ill patients. J Microbiol Immunol Infect.
  23. 23.
    Sanchez Garcia M (2009) Early antibiotic treatment failure. Int J Antimicrob Agents 34[Suppl 3]:S14–S19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Silva Junior JM, Malbouisson LM, Nuevo HL, Barbosa LG, Marubayashi LY, Teixeira IC, Nassar Junior AP, Carmona MJ, Silva IF, Auler Junior JO, Rezende E (2010) Applicability of the simplified acute physiology score (SAPS 3) in Brazilian hospitals. Rev Bras Anestesiol 60(1):20–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sunder S, Jayaraman R, Mahapatra HS, Sathi S, Ramanan V, Kanchi P, Gupta A, Daksh SK, Ram P (2014) Estimation of renal function in the intensive care unit: the covert concepts brought to light. J Intensive Care 2(1):31. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zander J, Dobbeler G, Nagel D, Maier B, Scharf C, Huseyn-Zada M, Jung J, Frey L, Vogeser M, Zoller M (2016) Piperacillin concentration in relation to therapeutic range in critically ill patients—a prospective observational study. Crit Care 20:79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Roberts JA, Lipman J (2009) Pharmacokinetic issues for antibiotics in the critically ill patient. Crit Care Med 37(3):840–851; quiz 859. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Eppenga WL, Kramers C, Derijks HJ, Wensing M, Wetzels JF, De Smet PA (2016) Drug therapy management in patients with renal impairment: how to use creatinine-based formulas in clinical practice. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 72(12):1433–1439.
  29. 29.
    Charmillon A, Novy E, Agrinier N, Leone M, Kimmoun A, Levy B, Demore B, Dellamonica J, Pulcini C (2016) The ANTIBIOPERF study: a nationwide cross-sectional survey about practices for beta-lactam administration and therapeutic drug monitoring among critically ill patients in France. Clin Microbiol Infect 22(7):625–631. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Post-Graduate Program in Medicine and HealthFederal University of BahiaSalvadorBrazil
  2. 2.Vitória da ConquistaBrazil
  3. 3.Post-Graduate Program in Public Health, Multidisciplinary Institute of HealthFederal University of BahiaVitória da ConquistaBrazil

Personalised recommendations