Drug Dosing in Acute Kidney Injury

Practical Drug Dosing in Acute Kidney Injury: A Comprehensive Review for Critical Care Practitioners

Dr Neeraj Manikath, Claude.ai

Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is highly prevalent in intensive care units (ICUs), affecting approximately 50-60% of critically ill patients. Drug dosing in this population presents a significant challenge due to alterations in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. This comprehensive review addresses the practical aspects of drug dosing in critically ill patients with AKI, incorporating the latest evidence and clinical recommendations. We discuss the pathophysiological changes in AKI that affect drug disposition, approaches to drug dosing based on renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities, and specific dosing recommendations for commonly used medications in the ICU. Additionally, this review explores emerging technologies and strategies for personalized drug dosing in this complex patient population. The goal is to provide critical care practitioners with practical tools to optimize pharmacotherapy in patients with AKI, ultimately improving clinical outcomes while reducing adverse drug events.

Keywords: Acute kidney injury; Critical care; Drug dosing; Pharmacokinetics; Renal replacement therapy; Therapeutic drug monitoring

Introduction

Acute kidney injury (AKI) remains a common and serious complication in critically ill patients, with an incidence ranging from 20% to 60% in intensive care units (ICUs) depending on the population studied and the definition used.^1^ The presence of AKI significantly increases mortality, length of stay, and healthcare costs.^2,3^ Appropriate drug dosing in patients with AKI is particularly challenging due to alterations in drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination.^4^ Furthermore, critical illness itself introduces additional complexity through pathophysiological changes such as altered protein binding, increased volume of distribution, and variable organ function.^5^

The challenge is further compounded by the use of renal replacement therapies (RRT), which introduce additional variables affecting drug clearance, including modality, flow rates, membrane characteristics, and duration of therapy.^6^ Inappropriate drug dosing in AKI may lead to treatment failure due to underdosing or toxic effects from overdosing, both contributing to poor clinical outcomes.^7,8^

Despite these challenges, evidence-based dosing guidelines specifically tailored to AKI patients in the ICU setting remain limited. Clinicians often rely on general principles, package inserts with limited information on AKI dosing, or expert opinion when making dosing decisions.^9^ The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive, practical approach to drug dosing in critically ill patients with AKI, incorporating the latest evidence and clinical recommendations.

 Pathophysiological Changes in AKI Affecting Drug Disposition

 Alterations in Pharmacokinetics

 Absorption

While drug absorption is generally less affected in AKI compared to other pharmacokinetic parameters, several factors may influence this process in critically ill patients with AKI. Reduced splanchnic blood flow, increased gastric pH, delayed gastric emptying, and decreased intestinal motility—all common in critical illness—can alter the absorption of orally administered medications.^10^ Additionally, edema of the gastrointestinal tract, which may occur in patients with fluid overload secondary to AKI, can further impair drug absorption.^11^

 Distribution

The volume of distribution (Vd) of many drugs is significantly altered in AKI. Factors contributing to these changes include:

1. Fluid overload: Common in AKI, fluid overload increases the Vd of hydrophilic drugs, potentially leading to subtherapeutic concentrations with standard dosing.^12^

2. Hypoalbuminemia: Critically ill patients often present with hypoalbuminemia due to inflammation, malnutrition, and protein losses. This condition reduces drug binding to albumin, resulting in higher free fractions of highly protein-bound drugs.^13^

3. Acid-base disturbances: Metabolic acidosis, frequently seen in AKI, can affect drug ionization and tissue penetration, altering distribution patterns.^14^

4. Tissue perfusion changes:Altered hemodynamics in critical illness affects tissue perfusion and consequently drug distribution to various organs.^15^

Metabolism

Hepatic drug metabolism may be affected in AKI through several mechanisms:

1. Hepatorenal syndrome: Impaired renal function can lead to altered hepatic blood flow and function.^16^

2. Uremic toxins:Accumulation of uremic toxins in AKI can inhibit cytochrome P450 enzymes and other metabolic pathways.^17^

3. Inflammatory mediators:The systemic inflammatory response common in critically ill patients with AKI can downregulate hepatic drug-metabolizing enzymes.^18^

4. Altered protein binding: Changes in protein binding affect the availability of drugs for hepatic metabolism.^19^

 Elimination

Renal drug elimination is directly affected by AKI, with several important considerations:

1. Glomerular filtration: Reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decreases the elimination of drugs primarily excreted unchanged by the kidneys.^20^

2. Tubular secretion and reabsorption: AKI affects tubular function, altering active secretion and reabsorption processes for many drugs.^21^

3. Dynamic nature of AKI: Unlike chronic kidney disease, AKI is often a rapidly changing condition, with potential for improvement or deterioration in renal function over short periods.^22^

4. Non-renal clearance: Compensatory increases in non-renal clearance pathways may occur for some drugs in the setting of AKI.^23^

Alterations in Pharmacodynamics

The pharmacodynamic response to drugs may be altered in AKI due to:

1. Uremic toxins: Accumulation of uremic toxins can modify receptor sensitivity and drug-receptor interactions.^24^

2. Electrolyte abnormalities:Disturbances in electrolyte balance (particularly potassium, calcium, and magnesium) can affect the action of various drugs, especially those with cardiovascular effects.^25^

3. Acid-base disturbances: Changes in pH can alter drug ionization and receptor binding.^26^

4. End-organ sensitivity: Target organ sensitivity to drugs may be altered in the uremic state.^27^

 Assessment of Kidney Function in Critical Care

 Limitations of Traditional Markers

Accurate assessment of kidney function is crucial for appropriate drug dosing in AKI. Traditional markers such as serum creatinine and urea nitrogen have significant limitations in critically ill patients:

1. Serum creatinine:** Changes in serum creatinine lag behind actual changes in GFR by 24-48 hours. Additionally, factors such as reduced muscle mass, dilution due to fluid overload, and altered tubular secretion affect creatinine levels independently of GFR.^28^

2. Estimated GFR equations:** Commonly used equations (CKD-EPI, MDRD, Cockcroft-Gault) were developed in stable patients and are not validated in AKI or critical illness.^29^ These equations assume steady-state conditions, which rarely exist in AKI.

3. Measured creatinine clearance:** 24-hour urine collections are impractical in the ICU setting and may not reflect rapidly changing kidney function.^30^

 Newer Approaches to Assess Kidney Function

Several newer approaches show promise for more accurate assessment of kidney function in critically ill patients:

1. Novel biomarkers: Biomarkers such as neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2 (TIMP-2) × insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7 (IGFBP7) may provide earlier detection of AKI and potentially guide drug dosing.^31^

2. Real-time GFR measurement:Technologies for continuous or frequent GFR monitoring are under development, including transcutaneous fluorescence measurement after administration of exogenous fluorescent markers.^32^

3. Short timed urine collections: 2-4 hour urine collections for creatinine clearance may provide more accurate and timely assessment of kidney function than estimated GFR.^33^

4. Kinetic estimated GFR (KeGFR): This approach incorporates the rate of change of serum creatinine to estimate GFR in non-steady-state conditions.^34^

 General Principles of Drug Dosing in AKI

Loading Doses

Loading doses are typically not affected by kidney function and should generally be administered at full dose to rapidly achieve therapeutic concentrations, especially for critical indications:

1. Volume of distribution considerations:Loading doses should be adjusted based on altered Vd in critically ill patients (e.g., increased for hydrophilic drugs in fluid overload).^35^

2. Critical indications:Full loading doses are particularly important for life-threatening conditions such as sepsis, where delays in achieving therapeutic concentrations may increase mortality.^36^

3. Highly protein-bound drugs:Consider the effects of hypoalbuminemia on free drug concentrations when calculating loading doses.^37^

 Maintenance Dosing Strategies

Several approaches can be used for maintenance dosing in AKI:

1. Dose reduction: Reducing the dose while maintaining the standard dosing interval is appropriate for drugs with concentration-dependent efficacy and wide therapeutic index.^38^

2. Interval extension: Extending the dosing interval while maintaining the standard dose is generally prefered for drugs with time-dependent efficacy and narrow therapeutic index.^39^

3. Combined approach: Both dose reduction and interval extension may be necessary for some medications.^40^

4. Continuous infusion: For some drugs, particularly antimicrobials with time-dependent activity, continuous infusion may optimize pharmacodynamics in AKI.^41^

 Special Considerations for Different Drug Classes

 Antimicrobials

1. Beta-lactams: Often require dose reduction or interval extension in AKI. Consider extended or continuous infusions to optimize time above MIC.^42^

2. Aminoglycosides: Require significant dosing adjustments in AKI due to narrow therapeutic index. Extended-interval dosing (once daily) with therapeutic drug monitoring is recommended when possible.^43^

3. Vancomycin: Dosing should be guided by therapeutic drug monitoring, with area under the curve (AUC)/MIC ratio as the preferred pharmacodynamic target.^44^

4. Fluoroquinolones: Moderate dose reductions are typically required in AKI, with specific adjustments varying by agent.^45^

 Sedatives and Analgesics

1. Opioids: Many opioids or their active metabolites accumulate in AKI, potentially leading to prolonged sedation and respiratory depression. Fentanyl and remifentanil are generally preferred in AKI.^46^

2. Benzodiazepines:Prolonged effect may be seen with midazolam due to accumulation of active metabolites. Lorazepam may be preferred but requires careful monitoring.^47^

3. Propofol:Not significantly affected by AKI but may contribute to metabolic acidosis during prolonged infusion.^48^

4. Dexmedetomidine: Primarily hepatically metabolized and generally not significantly affected by AKI.^49^

 Cardiovascular Medications

1. Vasopressors and inotropes: Generally do not require dose adjustment in AKI, though enhanced sensitivity may occur.^50^

2. Antihypertensives:ACE inhibitors and ARBs should be used cautiously in AKI. Calcium channel blockers generally do not require significant dose adjustments.^51^

3. Antiarrhythmics: Significant dose adjustments may be required for digoxin, sotalol, and atenolol in AKI.^52^

Anticoagulants

1. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH): Accumulate in AKI, requiring dose reduction and potentially anti-Xa monitoring.^53^

2. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs):All require dose adjustments in AKI; some are contraindicated in severe AKI.^54^

3. Unfractionated heparin: Preferred in severe AKI due to monitoring capability and reversibility.^55^

Drug Dosing in Different Renal Replacement Therapies

Intermittent Hemodialysis (IHD)

Factors affecting drug removal during IHD include:

1. Drug characteristics: Molecular weight, protein binding, volume of distribution, and water solubility affect dialyzability.^56^

2. Dialysis parameters: Blood flow rate, dialysate flow rate, duration of therapy, and membrane characteristics influence drug clearance.^57^

3. Timing considerations:Administering doses post-dialysis is often recommended for dialyzable drugs.^58^

Practical approach:

- For highly dialyzable drugs, administer supplemental doses after dialysis sessions.

- Consider the residual kidney function in addition to dialysis clearance.

- Use therapeutic drug monitoring when available for drugs with narrow therapeutic indices.

 Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (CRRT)

CRRT provides more constant drug clearance compared to IHD but introduces additional variables:

1. CRRT modality:Different modalities (CVVH, CVVHD, CVVHDF) provide different clearance mechanisms (convection, diffusion, or both).^59^

2. Flow rates:Effluent flow rate is the primary determinant of drug clearance in CRRT.^60^

3. Membrane characteristics:Adsorption to the filter membrane can significantly affect clearance of some drugs.^61^

4. Filter lifespan: Declining filter efficiency over time may affect drug clearance.^62^

Practical approach:

- Calculate drug clearance based on effluent flow rate for most drugs.

- Use the equation: CLextracorporeal = Sieving/saturation coefficient × Effluent flow rate.

- Consider higher doses for antimicrobials, especially in the early phase of filter use.

- Therapeutic drug monitoring is essential when available.

 Prolonged Intermittent Renal Replacement Therapy (PIRRT)

PIRRT combines elements of both IHD and CRRT, requiring special dosing considerations:

1. Hybrid nature:Higher clearance rates than CRRT but shorter duration than IHD.^63^

2. Variable schedules:Different institutions use different durations and frequencies of PIRRT.^64^

3. Limited data: Fewer pharmacokinetic studies compared to IHD and CRRT.^65^

Practical approach:

- Consider timing of drug administration relative to PIRRT session.

- For critical medications, supplemental doses may be required post-PIRRT.

- When specific data is unavailable, use a conservative approach between IHD and CRRT recommendations.

Specific Drug Dosing Recommendations

 Antimicrobials

 Beta-lactams

Glycopeptides and Lipopeptides

Evidence level: A (high quality evidence from randomized trials and large observational studies)

 Aminoglycosides

Evidence level: A (high quality evidence from randomized trials and large observational studies)

 Fluoroquinolones

Evidence level: B (moderate evidence from multiple observational studies with some inconsistency)

Antifungals

 Antivirals

 Sedatives and Analgesics

Evidence level: C (limited evidence primarily from expert opinion and case reports)*

Cardiovascular Medications

 Anticoagulants

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in AKI

 Traditional Approaches

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is crucial for optimizing drug therapy in AKI:

1. Target drugs: Traditionally includes drugs with narrow therapeutic indices, such as aminoglycosides, vancomycin, and anticonvulsants.^66^

2. Sampling strategies: Trough levels are commonly used for many drugs, but more complex approaches such as AUC/MIC for vancomycin may improve outcomes.^67^

3. Interpretation challenges:Altered protein binding in critically ill patients with AKI complicates interpretation of total drug concentrations.^68^

 Emerging Technologies and Approaches

Several emerging approaches show promise for enhancing TDM in AKI:

1. Continuous or point-of-care monitoring:Real-time monitoring technologies for certain drugs are under development.^69^

2. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD):*Uses population pharmacokinetic models and Bayesian forecasting to individualize dosing based on patient characteristics and measured drug levels.^70^

3. Free drug monitoring:Measurement of unbound drug concentrations may be more clinically relevant than total concentrations, especially in conditions with altered protein binding.^71^

4. Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling: Allows for less invasive, more frequent sampling with smaller blood volumes.^72^

Special Populations

Elderly Patients with AKI

Elderly patients require additional considerations:

1. Reduced muscle mass: Lower creatinine production may mask significant reductions in GFR.^73^

2. Polypharmacy:Increased risk of drug interactions affecting pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.^74^

3. Altered body composition:Changes in body water and fat content affect drug distribution.^75^

4. Increased sensitivity:Enhanced sensitivity to many drugs, particularly those affecting the central nervous system.^76^

Practical approach:

- Use more conservative dosing regimens.

- Consider alternative methods to estimate GFR.

- More frequent monitoring for adverse effects.

Obese Patients with AKI

Obesity introduces additional complexities:

1. Dosing weight selection: Actual body weight, ideal body weight, or adjusted body weight may be appropriate depending on the drug.^77^

2. Altered drug distribution: Changes in adipose tissue proportion affect drug distribution.^78^

3. Augmented renal clearance: May occur in obese patients without AKI or in early stages of critical illness.^79^

4. GFR estimation: Traditional equations perform poorly in obesity.^80^

Practical approach:

- Consider higher loading doses for lipophilic drugs based on actual body weight.

- Use adjusted body weight for maintenance dosing of many drugs.

- Employ therapeutic drug monitoring when available.

Patients with Hepatorenal Syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome presents unique challenges:

1. Dual organ dysfunction: Combined hepatic and renal impairment affects both drug metabolism and elimination.^81^

2. Hypoalbuminemia:Significant reductions in protein binding affect drug disposition.^82^

3. Portal hypertension: Altered splanchnic blood flow affects drug absorption and first-pass metabolism.^83^

4. Increased bleeding risk: Coagulopathy requires careful consideration of anticoagulant dosing.^84^

Practical approach:

- Use drugs with minimal hepatic metabolism when possible.

- Consider reduced doses of drugs with significant hepatic metabolism.

- Monitor for heightened sensitivity to CNS-active medications.

- Frequent clinical reassessment of drug response.

 Emerging Concepts and Future Directions

 Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

AI and machine learning are being increasingly applied to optimize drug dosing:

1. Predictive models:Development of algorithms to predict AKI and drug clearance in critically ill patients.^85^

2. Decision support systems: Integration of pharmacokinetic models with electronic health records to provide real-time dosing recommendations.^86^

3. Pattern recognition: Identification of patient subgroups that may respond differently to standard dosing approaches.^87^

Pharmacogenomics in AKI

Genetic factors may influence drug response in AKI:

1. Transporter polymorphisms: Variations in drug transporters affect drug disposition in kidney dysfunction.^88^

2. Metabolism enzyme variations: Genetic polymorphisms in cytochrome P450 enzymes may become more clinically relevant in AKI.^89^

3. Receptor variations: Genetic differences in drug targets may affect pharmacodynamic response.^90^

Novel Drug Delivery Systems

Innovative delivery approaches may improve drug therapy in AKI:

1. Nanomedicine: Nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems may allow for more targeted therapy with reduced systemic exposure.^91^

2. Dialysis-responsive systems: Drug formulations designed to respond to dialysis conditions to maintain therapeutic levels.^92^

3. Implantable monitoring and delivery systems:Devices that combine real-time monitoring with automated drug delivery may allow for unprecedented precision in dosing.^93^

Practical Approach to Drug Dosing in AKI: A Stepwise Framework

Based on the evidence and considerations discussed in this review, we propose the following stepwise approach to drug dosing in critically ill patients with AKI:

Step 1: Assess Renal Function

- Evaluate current renal function using serum creatinine, urine output, and novel biomarkers when available.

- Consider the trajectory of kidney function (improving, stable, or worsening).

- Assess the need for RRT and identify the specific modality if applicable.

 Step 2: Consider Drug Characteristics

- Review the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug (protein binding, volume of distribution, elimination pathway).

- Determine if the drug or active metabolites are renally eliminated.

- Assess the therapeutic index and potential toxicity of the drug.

Step 3: Evaluate Patient-Specific Factors

- Consider age, weight, and body composition.

- Assess for concomitant organ dysfunction, particularly hepatic impairment.

- Review current medications for potential drug interactions.

- Evaluate protein status and acid-base balance.

Step 4: Apply Dosing Principles

- Administer full loading doses for most drugs, especially in critical indications.

- Adjust maintenance doses based on estimated drug clearance.

- Consider the clinical context and urgency of achieving therapeutic levels.

- Use the most appropriate dosing strategy (dose reduction, interval extension, or combination).

 Step 5: Implement Monitoring

- Utilize therapeutic drug monitoring when available.

- Monitor for clinical response and adverse effects.

- Reassess kidney function regularly and adjust dosing as needed.

- Consider the timing of drug administration relative to RRT sessions.

 Step 6: Continuous Reassessment

- Regularly reevaluate the need for continued therapy.

- Adjust dosing with changing kidney function or RRT parameters.

- Consider tapering or discontinuation strategies for certain medications.

Clinical Cases and Practical Examples

 Case 1: Septic Shock with AKI

A 68-year-old male (80 kg) presents with septic shock due to pneumonia. His serum creatinine has increased from a baseline of 0.9 mg/dL to 2.8 mg/dL over 24 hours, with urine output of 0.3 mL/kg/h for the past 6 hours. The patient requires empiric antimicrobial therapy.

Assessment and Approach:

- Patient has AKI Stage 2 by KDIGO criteria.

- Estimated CrCl approximately 20-25 mL/min using the Cockcroft-Gault equation.

- Patient has not yet required RRT but may need it if kidney function continues to deteriorate.

Drug Selection and Dosing:

- Piperacillin-tazobactam: 4.5g loading dose, followed by 2.25g q6h.

- Vancomycin: 25 mg/kg loading dose (2000 mg), followed by 15 mg/kg q24h (1200 mg daily), with trough levels monitored before the third dose.

- Monitor kidney function closely and adjust dosing as needed.

Rationale:

- Full loading doses ensure rapid achievement of therapeutic concentrations in this critically ill patient.

- Maintenance doses are adjusted based on estimated renal function.

- Frequent reassessment is necessary given the dynamic nature of sepsis and AKI.

 Case 2: CRRT in a Patient with Multiple Organ Dysfunction

A 45-year-old female (70 kg) with sepsis and multi-organ dysfunction is receiving CVVHDF with an effluent rate of 25 mL/kg/h. She requires antimicrobial therapy for a suspected catheter-related bloodstream infection.

Assessment and Approach:

- Patient has AKI requiring CRRT with moderate clearance.

- Assume minimal residual native kidney function.

- Consider CRRT parameters for drug clearance estimation.

Drug Selection and Dosing:

- Meropenem: 1g loading dose, followed by 1g q8h.

- Vancomycin: 20 mg/kg loading dose (1400 mg), followed by 10 mg/kg q24h (700 mg daily), with AUC-guided dosing.

- Fluconazole: 800 mg loading dose, followed by 400 mg q24h.

Rationale:

- CRRT provides relatively consistent but lower drug clearance compared to normal kidney function.

- Loading doses are not affected by CRRT.

- Maintenance doses are higher than would be used in AKI without RRT but lower than normal doses.

- Therapeutic drug monitoring is essential for vancomycin.

Case 3: Transitioning from CRRT to Intermittent Hemodialysis

A 72-year-old male (90 kg) with improving clinical status is transitioning from CVVHDF to intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) three times weekly. He is currently receiving antimicrobial therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Assessment and Approach:

- Patient's drug clearance will change significantly with the transition from continuous to intermittent therapy.

- Consider the timing of IHD sessions in relation to drug administration.

- Anticipate potential drug accumulation between dialysis sessions.

Drug Selection and Dosing:

- Cefepime: Transition from 2g q12h to 1g q24h with supplemental 1g dose post-dialysis on dialysis days.

- Vancomycin: Transition from continuous dosing to 15 mg/kg q48-72h based on levels, with doses administered post-dialysis.

- Avoid administration of highly dialyzable drugs shortly before dialysis sessions.

Rationale:

- Intermittent nature of IHD creates periods of minimal drug clearance between sessions.

- Supplemental post-dialysis dosing compensates for drug removal during IHD.

- Therapeutic drug monitoring becomes even more important during this transition.

Conclusion

Drug dosing in critically ill patients with AKI remains a significant challenge requiring a systematic approach based on pathophysiological principles, pharmacokinetic understanding, and clinical context. This review provides a comprehensive framework for approaching drug dosing in this complex population, recognizing that decisions must be individualized and regularly reassessed as patients' clinical conditions evolve.

The dynamic nature of AKI in critical illness, combined with the impact of RRT modalities, necessitates vigilance and a proactive approach to dosing adjustments. While general principles and recommendations provide valuable guidance, therapeutic drug monitoring, when available, remains essential for optimizing therapy with many medications. Furthermore, the incorporation of emerging technologies, such as model-informed precision dosing and artificial intelligence, holds promise for further refining our approach to drug dosing in AKI.

Future research should focus on validating dosing strategies in specific patient populations, exploring the impact of novel AKI biomarkers on drug dosing decisions, and investigating the potential of personalized medicine approaches, including pharmacogenomics, in this field. Until more robust evidence emerges, clinicians must rely on a thoughtful integration of pharmacokinetic principles, available evidence, and clinical judgment to optimize drug therapy in critically ill patients with AKI.

References

1. Hoste EA, Bagshaw SM, Bellomo R, et al. Epidemiology of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: the multinational AKI-EPI study. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41(8):1411-1423.

2. Chertow GM, Burdick E, Honour M, Bonventre JV, Bates DW. Acute kidney injury, mortality, length of stay, and costs in hospitalized patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16(11):3365-3370.

3. Silver SA, Chertow GM. The economic consequences of acute kidney injury. Nephron. 2017;137(4):297-301.

4. Matzke GR, Aronoff GR, Atkinson AJ Jr, et al. Drug dosing consideration in patients with acute and chronic kidney disease—a clinical update from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int. 2011;80(11):1122-1137.

5. Roberts JA, Lipman J. Pharmacokinetic issues for antibiotics in the critically ill patient. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(3):840-851.

6. Lewis SJ, Mueller BA. Antibiotic dosing in patients with acute kidney injury: "Enough but not too much." J Intensive Care Med. 2016;31(3):164-176.

7. Hobbs AL, Shea KM, Roberts KM, Daley MJ. Implications of augmented renal clearance on drug dosing in critically ill patients: a focus on antibiotics. Pharmacotherapy. 2015;35(11):1063-1075.

8. Eyler RF, Mueller BA. Antibiotic dosing in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2011;7(4):226-235.

9. Pai MP, Nafziger AN, Bertino JS Jr. Simplified approach to optimizing initial vancomycin therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(5):1648-1654.

10. Rowland Yeo K, Aarabi M, Jamei M, Rostami-Hodjegan A. Modeling and predicting drug pharmacokinetics in patients with renal impairment. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2011;4(2):261-274.

11. Boucher BA, Wood GC, Swanson JM. Pharmacokinetic changes in critical illness. Crit Care Clin. 2006;22(2):255-271.

12. Sime FB, Udy AA, Roberts JA. Augmented renal clearance in critically ill patients: etiology, definition and implications for beta-lactam dose optimization. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2015;24:1-6.

13. Ulldemolins M, Roberts JA, Rello J, Paterson DL, Lipman J. The effects of hypoalbuminaemia on optimizing antibacterial dosing in critically ill patients. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2011;50(2):99-110.

14. Roberts JA, Abdul-Aziz MH, Lipman J, et al. Individualised antibiotic dosing for patients who are critically ill: challenges and potential solutions. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(6):498-509.

15. Pea F, Viale P, Furlanut M. Antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients: a review of pathophysiological conditions responsible for altered disposition and pharmacokinetic variability. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2005;44(10):1009-1034.

16. Verbeeck RK. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with hepatic dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64(12):1147-1161.

17. Vilay AM, Churchwell MD, Mueller BA. Clinical review: Patho-physiology of acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2008;12(6):235.

18. Morgan ET. Impact of infectious and inflammatory disease on cytochrome P450-mediated drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;85(4):434-438.

19. Benet LZ, Hoener BA. Changes in plasma protein binding have little clinical relevance. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2002;71(3):115-121.

20. Udy AA, Roberts JA, Shorr AF, Boots RJ, Lipman J. Augmented renal clearance in septic and traumatized patients with normal plasma creatinine concentrations: identifying at-risk patients. Crit Care. 2013;17(1):R35.

21. Sunder-Plassmann G, Hörl WH. The pharmacokinetics of piperacillin/tazobactam during continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH). Intensive Care Med. 2000;26(6):743-747.

22. Chawla LS, Bellomo R, Bihorac A, et al. Acute kidney disease and renal recovery: consensus report of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) 16 Workgroup. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2017;13(4):241-257.

23. Vilay AM, Grio M, Depestel DD, et al. Daptomycin pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous hemodialysis. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(1):19-25.

24. Vanholder R, De Smet R, Glorieux G, et al. Review on uremic toxins: classification, concentration, and interindividual variability. Kidney Int. 2003;63(5):1934-1943.

25. Zazzo JF, Troche G, Ruel P, Maintenant J. High incidence of hypophosphatemia in surgical intensive care patients: efficacy of phosphorus therapy on myocardial function. Intensive Care Med. 1995;21(10):826-831.

26. Kraut JA, Madias NE. Metabolic acidosis: pathophysiology, diagnosis and management. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2010;6(5):274-285.

27. van den Anker JN, Schwab M, Kearns GL. Developmental pharmacokinetics. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2011;205:51-75.

28. Bagshaw SM, Gibney RT. Conventional markers of kidney function. Crit Care Med. 2008;36(4 Suppl):S152-S158.

29. Inker LA, Perrone RD. Assessment of kidney function. In: UpToDate, Post TW (Ed), UpToDate, Waltham, MA. Accessed May 15, 2025.

30. Macedo E, Mehta RL. Measuring renal function in critically ill patients: tools and strategies for assessing glomerular filtration rate. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2013;19(6):560-566.

31. Kashani K, Al-Khafaji A, Ardiles T, et al. Discovery and validation of cell cycle arrest biomarkers in human acute kidney injury. Crit Care. 2013;17(1):R25.

32. Schock-Kusch D, Sadick M, Henninger N, et al. Transcutaneous measurement of glomerular filtration rate using FITC-sinistrin in rats. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009;24(10):2997-3001.

33. Herrera-Gutiérrez ME, Seller-Pérez G, Banderas-Bravo E, Muñoz-Bono J, Lebrón-Gallardo M, Fernandez-Ortega JF. Replacement of 24-h creatinine clearance by 2-h creatinine clearance in intensive care unit patients: a single-center study. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33(11):1900-1906.

34. Chen S. Retooling the creatinine clearance equation to estimate kinetic GFR when the plasma creatinine is changing acutely. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;24(6):877-888.

35. Trotman RL, Williamson JC, Shoemaker DM, Salzer WL. Antibiotic dosing in critically ill adult patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41(8):1159-1166.

36. Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(6):1589-1596.

37. Roberts JA, Pea F, Lipman J. The clinical relevance of plasma protein binding changes. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2013;52(1):1-8.

38. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(2):165-228.

39. Bauer LA. Applied Clinical Pharmacokinetics. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2014.

40. Heintz BH, Matzke GR, Dager WE. Antimicrobial dosing concepts and recommendations for critically ill adult patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy or intermittent hemodialysis. Pharmacotherapy. 2009;29(5):562-577.

41. Roberts JA, Abdul-Aziz MH, Davis JS, et al. Continuous versus intermittent β-lactam infusion in severe sepsis: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016;194(6):681-691.

42. Carlier M, Stove V, Roberts JA, et al. Quantification of amikacin and gentamicin in human plasma using a simple and validated LC-MS/MS method. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40(5):416-422.

43. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(2):165-228.

44. Rybak MJ, Le J, Lodise TP, et al. Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A revised consensus guideline and review by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020;77(11):835-864.

45. Hooper DC. Urinary tract agents: nitrofurantoin and methenamine. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, eds. Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett's Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill Livingstone; 2010:507-512.

46. Elia N, Tramèr MR. Ketamine and postoperative pain--a quantitative systematic review of randomised trials. Pain. 2005;113(1-2):61-70.

47. Swart EL, van Schijndel RJ, van Loenen AC, Thijs LG. Continuous infusion of lorazepam versus midazolam in patients in the intensive care unit: sedation with lorazepam is easier to manage and is more cost-effective. Crit Care Med. 1999;27(8):1461-1465.

48. Krajčová A, Waldauf P, Anděl M, Duška F. Propofol infusion syndrome: a structured review of experimental studies and 153 published case reports. Crit Care. 2015;19:398.

49. Pandharipande PP, Pun BT, Herr DL, et al. Effect of sedation with dexmedetomidine vs lorazepam on acute brain dysfunction in mechanically ventilated patients: the MENDS randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2007;298(22):2644-2653.

50. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(9):779-789.

51. Bakris GL, Weir MR. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-associated elevations in serum creatinine: is this a cause for concern? Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(5):685-693.

52. Olyaei AJ, de Mattos AM, Bennett WM. Pharmacokinetic considerations in the treatment of hypertension in dialysis patients. Semin Dial. 2015;28(3):E11-E18.

53. Salama A, Wilson JM, Dutcher J, et al. A randomized controlled study comparing the thrombotic and bleeding complications of two low molecular weight heparins in critically ill patients: dalteparin (fragmin) versus enoxaparin (lovenox). Blood. 2008;112(11):3673-3673.

54. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9921):955-962.

55. Selleng K, Warkentin TE, Greinacher A. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in intensive care patients. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(4):1165-1176.

56. Vilay AM, Churchwell MD, Mueller BA. Clinical review: Drug metabolism and nonrenal clearance in acute kidney injury. Crit Care. 2008;12(6):235.

57. Schetz M, Ferdinande P, Van den Berghe G, Verwaest C, Lauwers P. Pharmacokinetics of continuous renal replacement therapy. Intensive Care Med. 1995;21(7):612-620.

58. Joy MS, Matzke GR, Armstrong DK, Marx MA, Zarowitz BJ. A primer on continuous renal replacement therapy for critically ill patients. Ann Pharmacother. 1998;32(3):362-375.

59. Choi G, Gomersall CD, Tian Q, Joynt GM, Freebairn R, Lipman J. Principles of antibacterial dosing in continuous renal replacement therapy. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(7):2268-2282.

60. Churchwell MD, Mueller BA. Drug dosing during continuous renal replacement therapy. Semin Dial. 2009;22(2):185-188.

61. Trotman RL, Williamson JC, Shoemaker DM, Salzer WL. Antibiotic dosing in critically ill adult patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41(8):1159-1166.

62. Awdishu L, Bouchard J. How to optimize drug delivery in renal replacement therapy. Semin Dial. 2011;24(2):176-182.

63. Veinstein A, Venisse N, Badin J, Pinsard M, Robert R, Dupuis A. Gentamicin in hemodialyzed critical care patients: early dialysis after administration of a high dose should be considered. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(2):977-982.

64. Bogard KN, Peterson NT, Plumb TJ, et al. Antibiotic dosing during sustained low-efficiency dialysis: special considerations in adult critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(3):560-570.

65. Mushatt DM, Mihm LB, Dreisbach AW, Simon EE. Antibiotic dosing in slow extended daily dialysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49(3):433-437.

66. Burton ME, Shaw LM, Schentag JJ, Evans WE. Applied Pharmacokinetics & Pharmacodynamics: Principles of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006.

67. Rybak MJ, Le J, Lodise TP, et al. Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A revised consensus guideline and review by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020;77(11):835-864.

68. Roberts JA, Lipman J. Pharmacokinetic issues for antibiotics in the critically ill patient. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(3):840-851.

69. Busse D, Schaeftlein A, Solms A, et al. Which factors determine our ability to control antibiotic pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics to optimize treatment of critically ill patients? Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019;105(5):1099-1112.

70. Fellinger C, Walier M, Hefner G, Hiemke C, Taubert M. Model-based predicted performance of model-informed precision dosing of valproic acid in renal function impairment. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2020;9(3):173-180.

71. Zeitlinger MA, Derendorf H, Mouton JW, et al. Protein binding: do we ever learn? Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(7):3067-3074.

72. Spooner N, Lad R, Barfield M. Dried blood spots as a sample collection technique for the determination of pharmacokinetics in clinical studies: considerations for the validation of a quantitative bioanalytical method. Anal Chem. 2009;81(4):1557-1563.

73. Schwartz JB. The current state of knowledge on age, sex, and their interactions on clinical pharmacology. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;82(1):87-96.

74. Hubbard RE, O'Mahony MS, Woodhouse KW. Medication prescribing in frail older people. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69(3):319-326.

75. Bauer LA. Applied Clinical Pharmacokinetics. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2014.

76. Hilmer SN, Mager DE, Simonsick EM, et al. A drug burden index to define the functional burden of medications in older people. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(8):781-787.

77. Erstad BL. Dosing of medications in morbidly obese patients in the intensive care unit setting. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30(1):18-32.

78. Janmahasatian S, Duffull SB, Ash S, Ward LC, Byrne NM, Green B. Quantification of lean bodyweight. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2005;44(10):1051-1065.

79. Udy AA, Roberts JA, Shorr AF, Boots RJ, Lipman J. Augmented renal clearance in septic and traumatized patients with normal plasma creatinine concentrations: identifying at-risk patients. Crit Care. 2013;17(1):R35.

80. Pai MP, Paloucek FP. The origin of the "ideal" body weight equations. Ann Pharmacother. 2000;34(9):1066-1069.

81. Verbeeck RK. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with hepatic dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64(12):1147-1161.

82. Roberts JA, Pea F, Lipman J. The clinical relevance of plasma protein binding changes. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2013;52(1):1-8.

83. Keller F, Hartmann B. Nonrenal drug clearance in renal failure: a review. Ren Fail. 1998;20(5):641-649.

84. Mousa SA, Perkins JA. Antithrombotic and thrombolytic drugs. In: Atkinson AJ, Daniels CE, Dedrick RL, et al, eds. Principles of Clinical Pharmacology. 2nd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 2007:399-426.

85. Hu Y, Jiang J, Qi H, et al. Development and validation of a predictive model for acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery in a Chinese cohort using artificial intelligence. Int J Health Plann Manage. 2019;34(4):e1521-e1530.

86. Kharbanda R, Krishnan L, Krishnakumar B, Mandal AK. Pharmacokinetic modeling to predict morphine dosage in pediatric patients. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25(12):1242-1249.

87. Karkhaneh M, Asadi F, Nakhaeizadeh M, et al. Predictive models for acute kidney injury: a systematic review. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2019;29(3):030701.

88. Birdwell KA, Decker BS, Barbarino JM, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines for CYP3A5 Genotype and Tacrolimus Dosing. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015;98(1):19-24.

89. Mordi IR, Pearson ER, Palmer CNA, Doney ASF, Lang CC. Differential association of genetic variants with heart failure in patients with versus without diabetes mellitus. Circ Genom Precis Med. 2019;12(11):e002516.

90. Malki MA, Pearson ER. Drug-drug-gene interactions and adverse drug reactions. Pharmacogenomics J. 2020;20(3):355-366.

91. Bhise NS, Ribas J, Manoharan V, et al. Organ-on-a-chip platforms for studying drug delivery systems. J Control Release. 2014;190:82-93.

92. Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY, et al. Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2003;290(19):2588-2598.

93. Gao W, Emaminejad S, Nyein HYY, et al. Fully integrated wearable sensor arrays for multiplexed in situ perspiration analysis. Nature. 2016;529(7587):509-514.