burns 37 (2011) 1626

available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/burns

Review

Antibiotics and the burn patient

Francois Ravat a,*, Ronan Le-Floch b, Christophe Vinsonneau c, Pierre Ainaud d,
Marc Bertin-Maghit e, Herve Carsin f, Gerard Perro g
the Societe Francaise dEtude et de Traitement des Brulures (SFETB)
a

Centre des brules, Centre hospitalier St Joseph et St Luc, 20 quai Claude Bernard, 69007 Lyon, France
Centre des brules, Centre hospitalo-universitaire, Nantes, France
c
Centre des brules, Groupe hospitalier Cochin, Paris, France
d
Centre des brules, Hopital de la Conception, Marseille, France
e
Centre des brules, Hopital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France
f
Centre des brules, Hopital dInstruction des Armees Percy, Clamart, France
g
Centre des brules, Hopital Pellegrin-Tripode, Bordeaux, France
b

article info

abstract

Article history:

Infection is a major problem in burn care and especially when it is due to bacteria with

Accepted 13 October 2009

hospital-acquired multi-resistance to antibiotics. Moreover, when these bacteria are Gramnegative organisms, the most effective molecules are 20 years old and there is little hope of

Keywords:

any new product available even in the distant future. Therefore, it is obvious that currently

Antibiotics

available antibiotics should not be misused. With this aim in mind, the following review was

Antibiotic therapy

conducted by a group of experts from the French Society for Burn Injuries (SFETB). It

Burn

examined key points addressing the management of antibiotics for burn patients: when

Burn patient

to use or not, time of onset, bactericidia, combination, adaptation, de-escalation, treatment

Bacterial resistance

duration and regimen based on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of

Pharmacokinetics

these compounds. The authors also considered antibioprophylaxis and some other key

Pharmacodynamics

points such as: infection diagnosis criteria, bacterial inoculae and local treatment. French

Dosage

guidelines for the use of antibiotics in burn patients have been designed up from this work.
# 2009 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

Contents
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.

General considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2. Infection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3. Dealing with local infection . . . . . . . . .
1.4. Role of bacterial population (inoculum)
Time for onset of antibiotic therapy . . . . . . . .
Bactericidal or bacteriostatic molecules? . . . .
Association or monotherapy? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adaptation of antibiotherapy . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 478 61 89 25; fax: +33 478 61 88 77.
E-mail address: fravat@ch-stjoseph-stluc-lyon.fr (F. Ravat).
0305-4179/$36.00 # 2009 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.burns.2009.10.006

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

17
17
17
17
17
18
18
18
18

17

burns 37 (2011) 1626

6.
7.

8.
9.
10.

Duration of antibiotherapy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administration methods (dosage and rhythm of injection) . .
7.1. Notions of pharmacokinetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2. Notions of pharmacodynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.3. Regimen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Monitoring antibiotic concentrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Guidelines from the French Society for Burn Injuries (SFETB)
10.1. Guidelines for antibiotic therapy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.2. Guidelines for antibiotics prophylaxis. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.3. Practical use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A study conducted in the French burns centres during the

summer 2006 pointed out that 19% of inpatients developed
an infection. Although these facts are comparable to those
observed in intensive care units, infection is a major problem
in burn care and especially when it is due to bacteria
with hospital-acquired multi-resistance to antibiotics,
which has been proved to be directly related to the
consumption of antibiotics. Moreover, when these bacteria
are Gram-negative organisms, the most effective molecules
are 20 years old and there is no hope to see any new molecule
available even in the far future. Therefore, it is obvious that
current antibiotics still active should not be overused or
misused.
Thus, the French Society for Burn Injuries (SFETB) has
published guidelines for the use of antibiotics in the burn
patient. These guidelines were drawn up by a group of
experts from the SFETB. Analysis of the literature, synthesis
of the relevant items and drafting the guidelines were led by
three members of the group. The changes, definitive draft
and validation were approved collectively by all the experts,
according to the levels of evidence-based medicine [1,2]. The
following text is the review of literature conducted by
the French group of experts prior to the elaboration of
guidelines.

1.

General considerations

1.1.

Introduction

 Antibiotics should be used by keeping mind that they target

not the patient but the bacteria: the clinician should select
the molecule or molecules with the greatest antibacterial
efficacy and attempt to supply a concentration at the
infection site high enough to kill targeted pathogens
(bactericidia).
 Antibiotics should not allow bacterial resistance to arise by
lowering the selection pressure and thereby limiting the
consequences of antibiotics use in terms of bacterial
ecology. Controlling the prescription of antibiotics, especially by avoiding useless antibiotic therapy, is an excellent
means to decrease emergence of bacterial resistance [35].
 Antibiotics are only one of the means to fight infection.
Antibiotic therapy is part of global hospital strategy as well
as hygiene, and others.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1.2.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
21
24

Infection criteria

Diagnosis of infection in burn patient is not easy because

clinical (hyperthermia) and biological (hyperleukocytosis,
increased CRP levels, etc.) infection criteria are poorly
relevant, especially in heavier-burn patients. Actually, a
serious burn triggers a systemic inflammatory response
syndrome (SIRS), which mimics usual clinical and biological
signs of infection [69]. Therefore, deciding an antibiotic
therapy based on such usual infection criteria may lead to the
prescription of useless antibiotics. This has led experts to
define the criteria of infection in burn patient. The retained
criteria are based on those validated for intensive care patients
with two particular characteristics, namely the general criteria
of infection and criteria for burn wound infection. Differentiation between skin infection and colonisation should be
pointed out, as the presence of germs on the wound does not
necessarily mean that it is infected (see Appendix 1).

1.3.

Dealing with local infection

Antibiotic therapy prescribed to prevent infection of burned

skin does not actually prevent it and even facilitates the
emergence of multi-resistant bacteria [10]. Diffusion of
antibiotic in the burned skin is questionable and cannot
achieve bactericidal concentrations so that bacteria can grow
and develop resistances. However, local topical agents are
known to be efficient in preventing and treating burned skin
infections [7]. For these two reasons, local infection that is,
without general symptoms of sepsis should require only
local treatment.

1.4.

Role of bacterial population (inoculum)

The probability of antibiotic-resistant mutant strains appearing within a bacterial population is not void. For example, with
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the probability of a fluoroquinoloneresistant strain appearing is estimated at 10 6. The risk of
appearance of resistant strains is therefore directly related to
the size of the bacterial population (inoculum). With P.
aeruginosa, if the size of the bacterial population exceeds
106, the probability of a fluoroquinolone-resistant strain
appearing becomes higher. One of the means of limiting this
probability is to reduce the inoculum [11]. For some infectious
diseases, the reduction of inoculum alone ensures recovery

18

burns 37 (2011) 1626

without antibiotic therapy or becomes the main treatment

(this is especially the case of skin and soft-tissue infections
[12]). In burn patients, very significant inocula may be
observed during pneumonias and/or infection of burned skin.
In these cases, reducing the inoculum has tremendous impact,
by clearing for pneumonia and debridement (or removal) of
infected burned tissues, respectively.
During bacterial colonisation of tissue, the shift from
colonisation to infection depends on three parameters,
namely the level of the bacterial inoculum, host defences
and bacterial virulence [1315]. Reducing the inoculum may
therefore contribute to preventing infections.

2.

Time for onset of antibiotic therapy

In case of serious infection (i.e., poorly tolerated and/or life

threatening), antibiotic therapy should be started within 6 h
following the diagnosis of infection [16,17] as delayed
antibiotic therapy increases mortality [1719]. When the
infection is not very serious (i.e., well-tolerated and without
organ failure), initiation of antibiotic therapy can be delayed
until microbiological documentation. In serious undocumented infection, bacteriological sampling should be performed
before starting antibiotic therapy [20], but without delaying it.
As long as the infection is not documented, antibiotic
therapy is empiric. Therefore, broad-spectrum molecules
should be chosen for maximum efficacy. Nevertheless, the
choice for empiric treatment depends on patient ecology,
ward ecology, length of stay, previous antibiotic therapy,
patient condition, and so on.

3.

Bactericidal or bacteriostatic molecules?

Burn patients exhibit immune deficiency, which is still

incompletely understood, and mainly affects cell-mediated
immunity (lymphocytes, macrophages and neutrophils) [21].
In these conditions, antibiotic therapy will, by itself, probably
need to be effective, that is, without the help of host defences
[22]. Moreover, the infections observed are often with heavy
inoculae (lung, wound). Bactericidal antibiotics will there help
to reduce inoculum. Lastly, in case of serious infection,
antibiotic therapy will need to be effective quickly. For all
these reasons, bactericidal molecules should be preferred.

4.

Association or monotherapy?

The literature does not provide powerful enough data to

recommend combination therapy rather than monotherapy
[23,24] except in particular cases. Nevertheless, combination
therapy has a number of theoretical advantages, namely
broader spectrum (useful in situations of empiric antibiotic
therapy), enhanced bactericidia (more important and with the
quickest bactericidal activity) and prevention of emergence of
resistant strains (especially when inoculum is heavy). The
probability of bacterial resistance to a combination of two
molecules is the product of probability for each molecule (if
each molecule presents with a probability of 10 6, the

probability of the combination is 10 12, which exceeds the

usual inoculae sizes).
Some antibiotics should not be used in monotherapy due
to their high selection risk (fosfomycin, fusidic acid, rifampicin and fluoroquinolones) [11]. Combination therapy is also
recommended against multi-resistant hospital bacteria to
avoid acquisition of new resistances, thereby maintaining
their sensitivity profile [11]. One should remember that the
burn patient is immunocompromised and expresses a
number of factors altering the pharmacokinetics of antibiotics [25]; this means that the regimen of antibiotics should
be altered when compared with that recommended in the
healthy volunteer [26]. Antibiotic therapy should be started
immediately and should be effective from the beginning
[11,12,16,17,19].
All these arguments are in favour of the use of antibiotic
combinations for the management of serious bacterial
infections in burn patients.

5.

Adaptation of antibiotherapy

Adaptation is a two-stage strategy [19,27,28]:

 Initial clinical approach: start of empirical treatment when
infection is suspected.
 Subsequent bacteriological approach: assessment of initial
treatment based on bacteriological documentation.
Antibiotic therapy should be started immediately [16,17].
Consequently, it is often started though bacteriological
documentation is lacking (empiric antibiotic therapy). This
empiric antibiotic therapy may be inappropriate, and is known
to increase mortality [17,29]. The antibiotic usually chosen has
a broad-spectrum activity (with multi-drug resistant strains
selection risk) although bacteria involved are sensitive to
narrower-spectrum antibiotics [30,31]. In these conditions,
any antibiotic therapy should be assessed after 4872 h
[12,16,20], as soon as bacteriological results are available.
Antibiotic therapy will have to be adapted to the germ(s)
actually responsible for the infection.
Shifting from broad-spectrum empiric antibiotic therapy to
a narrow-spectrum adapted strategy (guided by the antibiogram) is called de-escalation. It should be performed whenever possible [16,20,27,28,32]. De-escalation has two aims,
namely individual benefit (recovery of a patient) and collective
benefit (reducing selective pressure and source of bacterial
resistance).
Three conditions are mandatory for de-escalation.
 Bacteriological documentation available.
 Antibiogram available (bacterial sensitivity to antibiotics
established).
 Improvement of clinical status after 72 h.
There are understandable limits:
 Reliability of bacteriological data (e.g., in the case of
ventilator-associated pneumonia, what type of sample
should be chosen to confirm diagnosis?).

burns 37 (2011) 1626

 How to assess the clinical evolution (e.g., which elements

should be used in pneumonia: hyperthermia? arterial blood
gases? imaging?)?
Discontinuation of antibiotic therapy considered useless
may be likened to de-escalation [33].

19

increase further (maximum bactericidal activity). With

these antibiotics, the determining factor is how long does
the concentration surpass the MIC.

7.3.

Regimen

The regimen depends on the pharmacodynamic characteristics of the molecules [47,49]:

6.

Duration of antibiotherapy

Excepted in few particular situations related to the microorganism and/or severe immune failure, a well-conducted
antibiotic therapy enables a quick inoculum decrease [34].
Prolonged administration of antibiotics is often unjustified
and leads to an increase in selective pressure. Following
several prospective randomised studies conducted in ventilator-associated pneumonia [32,35,36], antibiotic therapy lasting
78 days is recommended unless treatment provided initially
was adequate. However, in P. aeruginosa-related infections, a
longer duration is probably necessary [35]. In that case, it is
recommended not to exceed 15 days of antibiotic therapy [37]
or discontinue it after 4872 h of apyrexia (or disappearance of
signs that led to diagnosis of infection).

7.
Administration methods (dosage and
rhythm of injection)
7.1.

Notions of pharmacokinetics

In intensive care and burn patients, all pharmacokinetics

parameters (absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion) of many classes of drugs, including antimicrobials, are
altered, with significant intra-individual variations, and have
been documented over the past 30 years [26,3844]. The main
clinical consequence is a drop in tissue concentrations. It has
also been demonstrated that low serum concentrations of
antibiotics may lead to both therapeutic failures and emergence
of resistant strains [45]. In addition, the resistance mechanisms
developed by bacteria lead to reduced efficacy of usual dosages
of antibiotic (increase in minimum inhibitory concentration),
and the combination of these factors brings about therapeutic
failures [46]. Consequently, the usually recommended regimen,
suitable for a healthy volunteer, is not recommended and both
daily dosage and regimen should be altered in burn patients.

7.2.

Notions of pharmacodynamics

Bactericidal antibiotics may be divided into two groups,

depending on their bactericidal activity profile [47,48]:
 Concentration-related antibiotics. Bactericidal activity is
proportional to the concentration obtained, that is, to the
administered dose: the higher the dose, the stronger the
bactericidal activity. The targeted pharmacokinetic objective is therefore the highest possible concentration, the only
limit being side effects.
 Time-related antibiotics. Bactericidal activity increases with
the dose but reaches a plateau over which it does not

 Concentration-related antibiotics (aminoglycosides, fluoroquinolones and fosfomycin) [34,5054]. The parameter to

consider is the inhibitory quotient (IQ), defined as the ratio
between the maximum concentration (Cmax) and the MIC.
Administration is intermittent; the interval between two
administrations depends on the elimination half-life of the
molecule; it should not exceed 3 times this half-life [55].
Consequently, regimen of aminoglycosides is a single daily
dose (SDD) while, with fluoroquinolones, it consists of
several daily injections (ciprofloxacin 34 daily, ofloxacin 3
daily, pefloxacin 2 daily and levofloxacin 23 daily).
 Time-related antibiotics (beta-lactams, glycopeptides) [45,56
58]. Bactericidal activity is slow and poorly related to
concentration. The predictive parameter of therapeutic
success is the time during which the antibiotic serum
concentrations are above the MIC. The aim is therefore to
reach serum concentrations exceeding the MIC 100% of the
time. There are several methods to achieve this, namely
using molecules with a long half-life, shortening the time
period between the two injections or using continuous
intravenous infusion. Continuous infusion regimen seems
to be the optimal choice because it appears to provide more
stable serum levels in burn patients [5961]. Continuous
infusion needs the injection of a loading dose to achieve
levels above MIC within a reasonable time period. The
loading dose depends on the molecules used [12,16].

8.

Monitoring antibiotic concentrations

Historically, antibiotic monitoring was suggested to prevent

toxicity. Nowadays, there is no doubt on its relevance in
guaranteeing, as soon as possible, the efficacy of the molecules
used [38,56,6264]. A new concept has been defined, based on
the interactions between the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the drug, in which the key factors are serum
levels. The following two situations occur, depending on the
bactericidal activity of the antibiotic considered:
 Concentration-related activity: Achieving an IQ above 10 in
most cases [34,50] and above 20 for P. aeruginosa (or similar
germ)-related infection is recommended. To determine the
IQ, both Cmax and MIC values are requested. MIC of targeted
bacteria can be found by the bacteriology laboratory (E-test
or other technique [65]). When MIC is unknown, the highest
MIC in sensitive bacteria (low critical concentration (LCC))
can be found by local scientific societies or CDC and should
be the value used to calculate IQ.
To measure the maximum concentration (Cmax), sampling should proceed 30 min after the end of the injection,

20

burns 37 (2011) 1626

with the exception of ciprofloxacin, where a sample must be

taken as soon as infusion is completed, due to the fast
diffusion of the molecule. With aminoglycosides, concentration measurement just before the second injection
(through concentration) is recommended. It will help assess
the risk of toxicity.
 Time-related antibiotics: When the continuous infusion regimen is chosen, monitoring blood concentrations by steady
state (Css) is mandatory. The experts recommend a Css
between 4 and 5 times the MIC [59]. In some particular cases,
such as Pseudomonas infections, targeted Css could be 10
times the MIC [57]. The half-life of most (except for
ceftriaxone, ertapene`me, doripenem, cefepime and teicoplanin) is short. Provided that the steady state is reached
after 5 T1/2b, samples for Css monitoring can be obtained by
the day following onset of the compound [59]. The steady
state is more quickly achieved after the administration of a
loading dose. Furthermore, with time-related antimicrobials, initiating continuous infusion without loading dose
will probably lead to initial low concentrations, when
inoculum and thereby risk of resistance selection is higher.
In the continuous infusion regimen, the sample can be
obtained for monitoring at any moment when the steady
state is thought to be achieved.

9.

Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis

In burn patients, antibiotic prophylaxis is only relevant during

the perioperative period as discussed above [10]. It aims to
fulfil three objectives [66,67]:
 Reduce local inoculum and enhance grafts intake.
 Decrease wound-borne bacteraemia.
 Do not increase selection pressure.
Antibiotic prophylaxis rules had been defined and spread
worldwide by several consensus conferences driven by other
scientific societies [68]. These are:
 Antibiotic prophylaxis should be started early enough before
surgery (approximately 1 h 30 min, usually just before
anaesthesia induction).
 Half of the initial dose should be re-injected every 2 halflives of the molecule (for oxacillin, the re-injection should be
practised every 4 h).
 Antibiotic prophylaxis lasts at least 24 h and should never
exceed 48 h.
 If repeated injections are likely, continuous infusion after
loading dose is possible, provided pharmacodynamics of the
molecule is suitable (time-related bactericidal molecules).

10.
Guidelines from the French Society for
Burn Injuries (SFETB)
The following guidelines have been established according to
the levels of evidence-based medicine [1,2]. They have been
validated by Societe Francaise dEtude et de Traitement des

Brulures in June 2008. They are available at www.sfetb.org or

www.brulure.org.

10.1.

Guidelines for antibiotic therapy

 No antibiotics without proven infections (level 1)

 A local infection requires a local treatment (level 1)
However, when the local infection is associated with
general signs of infection, experts consider that the
infectious process is no longer purely local and that use
of an antibiotic may be indicated.
 Attempt to reduce the bacterial inoculum (level 5)
 Antibiotics in serious infections is an emergency (level 1)
 Use bactericidal antibiotics (level 5)
 Know how to combine antibiotics (level 5)
Experts recommend the use of antibiotic combinations
for the management of serious bacterial infections
during, at least, the first 72 h of the infection.
 Adapt antibiotic therapy (level 1)
Any antibiotic therapy should be assessed within 48
72 h, as soon as bacteriology is available. Antibiotic
therapy should be adapted to the germ(s) responsible of
the infection.
 Practise de-escalation (level 5)
Anytime possible, shift broad-spectrum antibiotic for
narrow-spectrum one guided by the antibiogram.
 When to stop antibiotics therapy (level 5)
Antibiotic therapy lasting 78 days is recommended,
provided initial treatment was accurate.
In P. aeruginosa infections antibiotherapy should not
exceed 15 days.
 Respect the regimen (level 1)
With concentration-related antibiotics, administration is
intermittent and the interval between two injections
should not exceed 3 times its half-life.
With time-related antibiotics, continuous infusion after
the loading dose should be used.
In any burn patient, but those with kidney and/or liver
failure, higher dosage than usually recommended is
needed.
 Antibiotic monitoring is mandatory (level 2)
With concentration-related antibiotics, IQ over 10 should
be achieved (20 in P. aeuginosa infections).
With time-related antibiotics, experts recommend to
achieve a concentration at steady state between 4 and 5
times the MIC.

10.2.

Guidelines for antibiotics prophylaxis

In burn patients, antibiotic prophylaxis could be used in

patients needing invasive surgery (excisions, flaps, etc.) but
not in dressing changes. The experts recommend [68] (level 5):
 No identified local infection and undefined bacterial target.
Target methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus, that is, oxacillin or cloxacillin (30 mg kg 1) or first-generation cephalosporin (30 mg kg 1). In case of allergy, clindamycin
should be used (10 mg kg 1).
 No identified local infection but isolation of a pathogen on
skin samples.

21

burns 37 (2011) 1626

Target this one.

 Documented or non-documented local infection.
This is no longer prophylaxis, as the infection is ongoing.
Administration should follow the usual rules about
curative treatment and consider the identified or
presumed pathogen.
 Application of inert skin substitute such as artificial dermis.
In the absence of guidelines in the literature, the experts
suggest if bacteria are isolated from skin samples, target
them. Otherwise, target Staphylococcus.

10.3.

Practical use

For examples of regimen for some antibiotics in burn patients,

see Appendix 2.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no financial interests to declare.

Appendix A
General definitions
No predictive value of infection
 In adults, presence of SIRS: two or more criteria of the four
below:
T (8C)>38.5 8C or <36 8C,
Heart rate >90 bpm,
RR >20 per minute or capnia <25 mmHg,
Leucocytes >12 G or <4 G or >10% of immature forms.
 Any burn patient >20% BSA and/or with smoke inhalation
injury is likely to present with SIRS criteria in any infectious
process.

Predictive values of infection

 Appearance of SIRS criteria in an adult whose lesions are
<15% or 20% BSA and without any smoke inhalation injury.
 Two or more of the four criteria below in an adult with a burn
>BSA and/or with smoke inhalation injury:
- T (8C) >39.5 8C or <35.5 8C,
50% basal HR,
50% basal RR,
or
100% of number of leucocytes,
- Haemodynamic failure with onset or enhancement of
catecholamine treatment.

 To the burns
- Presence of pus
- Rapid cleansing and detachment
- Appearance of blackish marks (necrosis or haemorrhage)
- Unexplained conversion of a lesion from superficial to
deep (>48th hour)
 To the donor graft sites
- Presence of pus
- Unexplained delayed healing
- Scab
 To the recipient grafts
- Presence of pus
- Lysis of grafts
- Necrosis of fat located under the graft
 To the healed areas
- Impetigo
- Lysis of healed areas
(2) Bacteriological skin samples:
They are used to find out the germ(s) involved.
More often, a simple swab is enough.
The biopsy is never systematic. It might be performed in
difficult cases, followed by
 Microbiology examination
- Direct microscope examination with staining and
semi-quantitative measurement of germs
- Quantification of germs present per gram of tissue
after homogenate status: threshold of 105 CFU g 1 is
retained as significant of the risk of haematogenous
dissemination
 An extemporaneous pathology examination after
freezing enabling one to appreciate the level of
invasivity
- Colonisation: germs in the non-vascularised tissue
- Infection: germs in the living tissue and in contact with
vessels
(3) Summary:
Skin infection with general signs is considered as a
systemic infection originated from skin.

General signs
Local signs
Skin culture
Skin infection

+
+
+
+

+
+
+

+
+
S

+
+
+

+
+
?

Fungal skin infection

The diagnosis may be confirmed with a biopsy.

Herpes skin infection

Definitions of infection criteria for burned skin
The diagnosis of a skin infection is clinical.

The diagnosis is clinical and may be confirmed with the

onset of a serology conversion and the presence of the virus in
local samples.

Bacterial infection
(1) Positive local signs:
 Presence of a local or loco-regional inflammatory
reaction
 Unfavourable and unexpected local evolution

Definitions of infection criteria for the other sites

Definitions per site (below) originate from those maintained by the CCLIN (French Central Comity for Struggle

22

burns 37 (2011) 1626

Against Nosocomial Infections), the survey of the REAREACAT/RAISIN 2006 monitoring network. These definitions
are taken up in the Guide de definition des infections
nosocomiales of the CCLIN Paris-Nord (1995), itself adapted
from 1988 CDC definitions (CDC definitions for nosocomial
infections, Gardner JS, Jarvis WR, Emori TG, et al., Am J Infect
Contl 1988;16:12840.) and the 1992 CSHPF (100 recommandations pour la surveillance et la prevention des infections, BEH
June 1992) (100 guidelines for the monitoring and prevention of
infections).

 In case of central venous catheter (CVC)-associated bacteraemia, the following will be necessary:
- Positive blood culture in presence of a CVC (or withdrawn
within 48 h) in the absence of any other infection to the
same germ
- AND one of the following criteria:
- 103 CFU ml 1 of the same germ in quantitative culture of
the catheter
- Differential blood cultures with CVC/periph 5 or positivity time period CVC/periph 2 h to the same germ.

Lung infection
Pneumonia

Infection of central catheter

General signs + specific organ signs  microbiological criteria:

Local or general infection signs with all the following

criteria:

 At least two chest X-rays, with new image of pneumonia or a

change of a previous image
 At least one of the following signs (two in the absence of
microbiological criteria):
- Appearance of purulent secretions or change in their
characteristics
(colour,
smell,
consistency
and
quantity)
- Dyspnoea, tachypnoea or cough (if not ventilated)
- Recent onset or worsened hypoxemia
 Microbiological diagnosis (one of the following criteria):
- BAL with a threshold of 104 CFU ml 1 or 5% of cells with
direct bacterial inclusion
- Wimberley brush technique with a threshold of
103 CFU ml 1
- PDP with threshold of 103 CFU ml 1
- Quantitative bronchial aspiration with a threshold of
106 CFU ml 1
- Blood culture or positive sample of bronchial tissue
(histology) or pleural fluid in the absence of any other
source of infection
- Specific examinations for viral pneumonia or pneumonia
due to particular microorganisms (Ag or Ac in bronchial
secretions, direct examinations or positive cultures of
bronchial secretions, urinary antigens or serology conversions)

 No blood culture to the same germ

 CVC culture 103 CFU ml 1
 Regression of the infectious syndrome within 48 h following
catheter withdrawal

Bronchitis
General signs, cough, recent change in expectorations or
bronchial aspirations, bronchial crepitations + isolation of
germ(s) in bronchial aspirations + no radiological sign of
infection.

Bacteraemia
General signs + positive blood culture(s):
 At least one blood culture (sample taken during a temperature peak) positive to a germ known to be a pathogen
 Two blood cultures in a maximum interval of 48 h
(sample taken during a temperature peak) positive to one
of the following germs: coagulase-negative Staphylococcus,
Bacillus sp., Corynebacterium sp., Propionibacterium sp., Micrococcus sp. and Acinetobacter sp.
 If bacteraemia is the consequence of another infection or is
responsible for secondary localisations, local signs of
infection will be associated.

Urinary tract infection

 Positive urine cytology (104 leucocytes ml 1)
 Asymptomatic (without general signs):
- Bladder catheter within past 7 days: urine culture
105 CFU ml 1 if the patient has had urinary catheter
insertion within the previous 7 days.
- In the absence of urinary catheterisation, no bladder
catheter: two consecutive urine cultures 105 CFU ml 1 to
the same germ(s) without the presence of more than two
species (no more than two different species)
 Symptomatic (general signs):
- Urine culture 105 CFU ml 1 (at maximum of two species)
or
- or 103 CFU ml 1 with 104 leukocytes ml 1 and general
signs

Appendix B
Methods of administration of some antibiotics in burn
patients.

Beta-lactams
Beta-lactams are time-related bactericidal antibiotics.
They should be administered by continuous infusion
whenever possible [55,6973].
Continuous perfusion is immediately preceded by a
loading dose, depending on the molecule [12,16], and is
usually equal to a single dose in repeated administration
regimen.
Continuous administration is sometimes rendered difficult
by poor stability of the molecule along time (clavulanic acid
and imipenem), physical and chemical incompatibility of
molecules and differences in the pharmacokinetics of a
molecule and its co-factor (amoxicillinclavulanic acid/imipenemcilastatin).

burns 37 (2011) 1626

Penicillins
Cloxacillin and oxacillin
Continuous infusion
150200 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 50 mg 1 kg 1
Targeted steady-state concentration is at 810 mg l
the MIC.

or 45 times

Amoxicillin, amoxicillin + clavulanate

Continuous infusion
150200 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 50 mg 1 kg 1
Targeted steady-state concentration is at 6480 mg l 1 or 45 times
the MIC.
Amoxicillin: stable 6 h at 25 8C in NaCl solvent. In case of electric
syringe administration, replace the syringe every 6 h.
Amoxicillinclavulanate: clavulanate tends to accumulate because
its half-life is longer than amoxicillins. In continuous infusion
regimen, mix 50% amoxicillin and 50% as amoxicillinclavulanate
and change syringe every 6 h. In repeated injections regimen, the
recommended targeted concentration (1620 mg l 1) is a trough
concentration.
Carboxy- and Ureidopenicillins
Ticarcillin, ticarcillin + clavulanic acid
Continuous infusion
150200 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 50 mg 1 kg 1
Targeted steady-state concentration 6480 mg l 1 or 45 times the
MIC
Ticarcillin: stable for 24 h at 25 8C
Ticarcillinclavulanic acid: stable for 6 h at 25 8C. Clavulanate tends to
accumulate because its half-life is longer than ticarcillins. In
continuous infusion regimen, mix 50% ticarcillin and 50% ticarcillinclavulanate and change syringe every 6 h. In repeated injections
regimen, the recommended target concentration (1620 mg l 1) is a
trough concentration
Piperacillin, piperacillin + tazobactam
Continuous infusion
At least 200 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 50 mg kg 1
There are no stability or accumulation problems. Targeted steadystate concentration is reached at 6480 mg l 1 or 45 times the MIC
Cephalosporins
Cefotaxime
Continuous infusion
100150 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 25 mg kg 1
Stability: 3 h 30 min at 25 8C
Targeted steady-state concentration is at 1620 mg l
MIC

or 45 times

Ceftazidime
Continuous infusion
100150 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 25 mg kg 1
Administration in soft bags with volumetric pump is preferred due
to the risk of gas release, but continuous administration with electric
syringe is possible
Targeted steady-state concentration is at 1620 mg l 1 or 45 times
MIC. For germs at risk (specifically ticarcillin-R P. aeruginosa), the
targeted steady-state concentration is 3240 mg l 1 or 810 times MIC

23

Iimipenem
Continuous infusion
50100 mg kg 1 daily
Loading dose 10 mg kg 1
Stability: 3 h 30 min at 25 8C
Targeted steady-state concentration is at 1620 mg l 1 or 45 times
MIC. For germs at risk (specifically Acinetobacter baumanii) it is 32
40 mg l 1 or 810 times MIC

Fluoroquinolones
Concentration-related bactericidal antibiotics active on
Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria [74]. These products should be administered repeatedly. The frequency of
injections is determined by the half-life of the molecules [74].
Only few data about pharmacokinetics of fluoroquinolones
such as ciprofloxacin being available, the experts can only
provide guidelines for ciprofloxacin.
Ciprofloxacin [26,75]
Repeated administration
34 injections daily
1020 mg kg 1 per injection (total dose 3080 mg kg 1 daily)
Infuse for 30 min. Sample for Cmax immediately at the end of the
injection (due to the very quick diffusion time of the molecule)
Target (Cmax): >30 mg l 1 (optimal = 40 mg l 1) or >10 times the
MIC
Beware of occult water administration (0.5 ml per mg ciprofloxacin)

Aminoglycosides
Concentration-related bactericidal antibiotics.
Single daily dose (SDD).
The dosage should be increased in burn patients [42].
Amikacin
30 mg kg 1 once a day
Infuse for 60 min
Sample for peak concentration 30 min after the end of infusion
Targeted peak value: >80 mg l 1 or >10 times the MIC
Sample for trough concentration immediately before the second
infusion
Trough concentration < 5 mg l 1
Gentamicin, tobramycin and netilmicin
10 mg kg 1 once a day
Infuse for 60 min
Sample for peak concentration 30 min after the end of infusion
Targeted peak value: >20 mg l 1 or >10 times the MIC
Sample for trough concentration immediately before the second
infusion
Trough concentration < 2 mg l 1

Glycopeptides

Vancomycin
Continuous infusion
30 mg kg 1 per day
Loading dose = 5 mg kg 1
Concentration at steady state: 2030 mg l 1. Sample can be taken
any time, more than 12 h after infusion onset

24

burns 37 (2011) 1626

Oxazolidinones
[17]
a

Linezolide
Spectrum limited to Gram-positive cocci. Bactericidal activity
limited to streptococci [76].
Continuous infusion (time-related bactericidal activity)
1200 mg daily in adults
Loading dose = 5 mg kg 1
Target concentration is 10 mg l 1 or 5 times the MIC
a

Few data available by this day [7779].

[18]

[19]

references
[20]
[1] Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W,
Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and
teach EBM, second ed., London: Churchill Livingstone;
2000.
[2] Delvenne C, Pasleau F. Comment resoudre en pratique un
proble`me diagnostique ou therapeutique en suivant une
demarche EBM? Rev Med Liege 2000;55:22632.
[3] Kollef MH. Is there a role for antibiotic cycling in the
intensive care unit? Crit Care Med 2001;28(Suppl. 4):
N13542.
[4] Goldmann DA, Weinstein RA, Wenzel RP, Tablan OC,
Dumas RJ, Gaynes RP, et al. Strategies to prevent and
control the emergence and spread of antimicrobial
resistant microorganisms in hospitals: a challenge to
hospital leadership. JAMA 1996;275:23440.
[5] Haute Autorite de Sante. Recommandations
professionnelles: strategies dantibiotherapie et prevention
des resistances bacteriennes en etablissement de sante;
Avril 2008. www.has.fr.
[6] Latarjet J, Echinard C. Les brulures. Paris: Masson; 1993.
[7] Heggers JP, Hawkins H, Edgar P, Villareal C, Herndon D.
Treatment of infection in burns. In: Herndon DH, et al.,
editors. Total burn care. second ed., London: WB Saunders;
2002. p. 12069.
[8] Sherwood ER, Traber DL. The systemic inflammatory
response syndrome. In: Herndon DH, editor. Total burn
care. 3rd ed, Saunders-Elsevier; 2007. p. 293309.
[9] Jeschke MG, Mlcak RP, Finnerty CC, Norbury WB, Gauglitz
GG, Kulp GA, et al. Burn size determines the inflammatory
and hypermetabolic response. Crit Care Med
2007;35(Suppl.):S51923.
[10] Ugburo AO, Atoyebi OA, Oyeneyin JO, Sowemimo GOA. An
evaluation of the role of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in
the control of burn wound infection at the Lagos University
Teaching Hospital. Burns 2004;30:438.
[11] Conference dexperts de la SFAR (Societe Francaise
dAnesthesie et de Reanimation). Associations
dantibiotiques ou monotherapie en reanimation
chirurgicale et en chirurgie; 1999. www.sfar.org.
[12] Antibiotherapie probabiliste des etats septiques, graves.
Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2004;23:10206.
[13] Lepape A. Epidemiologie et ecologie bacterienne des
infections nosocomiales en reanimation. In: Martin C, Gouin
F, editors. Infections et antibiotherapie en reanimation aux
urgences et en chirurgie. Paris: Arnette; 2000. p. 42739.
[14] Greene JN. The microbiology of colonization, including
techniques for assessing and measuring colonization.
Infect Contl Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:1148.
[15] Bonten MJ, Weinstein RA. The role of colonization in the
pathogenesis of nosocomial infections. Infect Contl Hosp
Epidemiol 1996;17:193200.
[16] Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H, Gerlach H, Calandra T,
Cohen J, et al. Surviving. Sepsis Campaign guidelines for

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]
[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Intensive

Care Med 2004;30:53655.
Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE, Sharma S,
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;34:158996.
Luna CM, Vujacich P, Niederman MS, Vay C, Gherardi C,
Matera J, et al. Impact of BAL data on the therapy and
outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest
1997;111:67685.
Iregui M, Ward S, Sherman G, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH. Clinical
importance of delays in the initiation of appropriate
treatment for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest
2002;122:2628.
Kollef MH, Micek ST. Strategies to prevent antimicrobial
resistance in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med
2005;33:184553.
Munster AM. The immunological response and strategies
for intervention. In: Herndon DH, et al., editors. Total burn
care. second ed., London: WB Saunders; 2002. p. 31630.
Zhao X, Drlica K. Restricting the selection of antibioticresistant mutants: a general strategy derived from
fluoroquinolones studies. Clin Infect Dis 2001;33(Suppl.
3):S14756.
Brun-Buisson C. Associations dantibiotiques ou
monotherapie?In: Actualites en Reanimation et Urgences.
Paris: Elsevier Masson; 2007. pp. 463473.
Safdar N, Handelsman J, Maki DG. Does combination
antimicrobial therapy reduce mortality in Gram-negative
bacteraemia? A meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis
2004;4:51927.
Blanchet B, Julien V, Vinsonneau C, Tod M. Influence of
burns on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of
drugs used in the care of burn patients. Clin Pharmacokinet
2008;47:63554.
Lesne-Hulin A, Bourget P, Ravat F, Goudin C, Latarjet J.
Clinical pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin in patients with
major burns. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1999;55:5159.
Rello J, Vidaur L, Sandiumenge A, Rodriguez A, Gualis B,
Boque C, et al. De-escalation therapy in ventilatorassociated pneumonia. Crit Care Med 2004;32:218390.
Hoffken G, Niederman MS. Nosocomial pneumonia: the
importance of a de-escalating strategy for antibiotic
treatment of pneumonia in the ICU. Chest 2002;122:
214832196.
Dupont H, Mentec H, Sollet JP, Bleichner G. Impact of
appropriateness of initial antibiotic therapy on the
outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Intensive
Care Med 2001;27:35562.
Kollef MH. Optimizing antibiotic therapy in the intensive
care unit setting. Crit Care 2001;5:18995.
Kollef MH. Gram negative bacterial resistance: evolving
patterns and treatment paradigms. Clin Inf Dis
2005;40(Suppl. 2):S8588.
Micek ST, Heuring TJ, Hollands JM, Shah RA, Kollef MH.
Optimizing antibiotic treatment for ventilator-associated
pneumonia. Pharmacotherapy 2006;26(2):20413.
Kollef MH, Kollef KE. Antibiotic utilization and outcomes
for patients with clinically suspected ventilator-associated
pneumonia and negative quantitative BAL culture results.
Chest 2005;128:270613.
Forrest A, Nix DE, Ballow CH, Goss TF, Birmingham MC,
Schentag JJ. Pharmacodynamics of intravenous
ciprofloxacin in seriously ill patients. Antimicrob Agents
Chemother 1993;37:107381.
Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY, Chevret S, Thomas F, Wermert
D, et al. Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for
ventilator associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized
trial. JAMA 2003;290:258898.

burns 37 (2011) 1626

[36] Christ-Crain M, Stolz D, Bingisser R, Muller C, Miedinger D,

Huber PR, et al. Procalcitonin guidance of antibiotic therapy
in community-acquired pneumonia: a randomized trial.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006;174(1):8493.
[37] Guidelines for the management of adults with hospitalacquired ventilator-associated and healthcare-associated,
pneumonia. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 2005;171:388416.
[38] Potel G, Caillon J, Jacqueline C, Navas D, Kergueris MF,
Batard E. Dosage des antibiotiques en reanimation: quand
et comment demander et interpreter les tests. Reanimation
2006;15:18792.
[39] Weinbren MJ. Pharmacokinetics of antibiotics in burn
patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999;44:31927.
[40] Zaske DE, Sawchuk RJ, Gerding DR, Strate RG. Increased
dosage requirements of gentamycin in burn patients. J
Trauma 1976;6:8248.
[41] Bourget P, Lesne-Hulin A, Le Reveille R, Le Bever H, Carsin
H. Clinical pharmacokinetics of piperacillintazobactam
combination in patients with major burns and signs
of infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996;40:
13945.
[42] Conil JM, Georges B, Breden A, Segonds C, Lavit M, Seguin T,
et al. Increased amikacin dosage requirements in burn
patients receiving a once-daily regimen. Int J Antimicrob
Agents 2006;28:22630.
[43] Kiser TH, Hoody DW, Obritsch MD, Wegzyn CO, Bauling PC,
Fish DN. Levofloxacin pharmacokinetics and
pharmacodynamics in patients with severe burn injury.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006;50:193745.
[44] Mohr 3rd JF, Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Wainright DJ, Parks DH,
Hollenbeck TC, Ericsson CD. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of
single-dose intravenous daptomycin in patients with
thermal burn injury. Antimicrob Agents Chemother
2008;52:18913.
[45] Craig W. Does the dose matter? Clin Infect Dis
2001;33(Suppl. 3):S2337.
[46] Roberts JA, Kruger P, Paterson DL, Lipman J. Antibiotic
resistancewhats dosing got to do with it? Crit Care Med
2008;36:243340.
[47] Petitjean O, Nicolas P, Tod M. Pharmacodynamie des
antibiotiques. In: Martin C, Gouin F, editors. Infections et
antibiotherapie en reanimation aux urgences et en
chirurgie. Paris: Arnette; 2000. p. 1382.
[48] Vogelman B, Craig WA. Kinetics of antimicrobial activity. J
Pediatr 1986;108:83540.
[49] Hyatt JM, Mckinnon PS, Zimmer GS, Schentag JJ. The
importance of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic
surrogate markers to outcome. Focus on antibacterial
agents. Clin Pharmacokinet 1995;28:14360.
[50] Moore RD, Lietman PS, Smith CR. Clinical response to
aminoglycoside therapy: importance of the ratio of peak
concentration to minimal inhibitory concentration. J infect
Dis 1987;155:939.
[51] Marik PE. Aminoglycoside volumer of distribution and
illness severity in clinically ill patients. Anesth intensive
Care 1993;21:1723.
[52] Barza M, Ioannidis JP, Cappelleri JC, Lau J. Single or multiple
daily doses of aminoglycosides: a meta-analysis. BMJ
1996;312:33845.
[53] Lipman J, Scribante J, Gous AG, Hon H, Tshukutsoane S, The
Baragwanath Ciprofloxacin Study Group. Pharmacokinetics
profiles of high dose intravenous ciprofloxacin in severe
sepsis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998;42:22359.
[54] Thomas JK, Forrest A, Bhavnani SM, Hyatt JM, Cheng A,
Ballow CH, et al. Pharmacodynamics evaluation of factor
associated with the development of bacterial resistance in
acutely ill patients during therapy. Antimicrob Agents
Chemother 1998;42:5217.

25

[55] Schentag J. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic

surrogate markers: studies with fluoroquinolones in
patients. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1999;56(Suppl. 3):S214.
[56] Craig WA. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics
parameters: rationale for antimicrobial dosing of men and
mice. Clin Infect Dis 1998;26:112.
[57] Manduru M, Mihm LB, White RL, Friedrich LW, Flume RA,
Bosso JA. In vitro pharmacodynamics of ceftazidime
against P. aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997;41:20536.
[58] Wysocki M, Delatour F, Faurisson F, Rauss A, Pean Y, Misset
B, et al. Continuous versus intermittent infusion of
vancomycin in severe Staphylococcal infections:
prospective multicenter randomised study. Antimicrob
Agents Chemother 2001;45:24607.
[59] Garaffo R. Bases pharmacodynamiques de ladministration
IV des beta lactamines par perfusion continue:
optimisation de lactivite antibacterienne sur les bacilles a`
gram negatif. Antibiotics 2002;4:227.
[60] Viaene E, Chanteux H, Servais H, Mingeot Leclerc MP,
Tulkens P. Comparative stability of antipseudomonal
agents administration through portable elastomeric pumps
(home therapy for cystic fibrosis patients) and motor
operated syringes (intensive care units). Antimicrob Agents
Chemother 2002;8:232732.
[61] Swanson D, De Angelis C, Smith I, Schentag J. Degradation
kinetics of imipenem in normal saline and in human
serum. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1986;5:9367.
[62] Scaglione F. Can PK/PD be used in everyday clinical
practice. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2002;19:34953.
[63] Frimodt-Moller N. How predictive is PK/PD for antibacterial
agents? Int J Antimicrob Agents 2002;19:3339.
[64] Carlet J, Tabah A. Antibiotherapie des etats infectieux
graves. Med Mal Infect 2006;36:299303.
[65] Bolmstrom A. Determination of minimum bactericidal
concentrations, kill curves, and postantibiotic effects with
the E-test technology. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis
1994;19:18795.
[66] Griswold JA, Grube BJ, Engrav LH, Marvin JA, Heimbach DM.
Determinants of donor sites infections in small burn grafts.
J Burn Care Rehabil 1989;10:5315.
[67] Piel P, Scarnati S, Goldfarb W, Slater H. Antibiotics
prophylaxis in patients undergoing burn wound excision. J
Burn Care Rehabil 1985;6:4224.
[68] Recommandations pour la pratique de lantibioprophylaxie
en chirurgie. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1999;18:7585.
[69] Eagle H, Fleishman R, Levy M. Continuous vs
discontinuous therapy with penicillin: the effect of the
interval between injections on therapeutic efficacy. N Engl J
Med 1953;12:4818.
[70] Craig W, Ebert S. Continuous infusion of beta-lactam
antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992;36:257783.
[71] Mouton J, Vinks A. Is continuous infusion of beta lactam
antibiotics worthwhile? Efficacy and pharmacokinectic
considerations. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996;38:515.
[72] Leder K, Turnidge J, Korman T, Grayson L. The clinical
efficacy of continuous infusion flucloxacillin in serious
staphylococcal sepsis. J Antimicrob Chemother
1999;43:1138.
[73] Roberts JA, Paratz J, Paratz E, Krueger WA, Lipman J.
Continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics in severe
infections: a review of its role. Int J Antimicrob Agents
2007;30:118.
[74] Lode H, Borner K, Koeppe P. Pharmacodynamics of
fluoroquinolones. CID 1998;27:339.
[75] Garrelts JC, Jost G, Kowalsky SF, Krol GJ, Lettieri JT.
Ciprofloxacin pharmacokinetics in burn patients.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996;40:11536.

26

burns 37 (2011) 1626

[76] Johnson AP, Warren M, Livermore DM. Activity of linezolid

against multi resistant Gram-positive bacteria from diverse
hospitals in the UK. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000;45:
22530.
[77] Whitehouse T, Cepeda JA, Shulman R, Aarons L, NaldaMolina R, Tobin C, et al. Pharmacokinetic studies of
linezolid and teicoplanin in the critically ill. J Antimicrob
Chemother 2005;55:33340.

[78] Adembri C, Fallani S, Cassetta MI, Arrigucci S, Ottaviano A,

Pecile P, et al. Linezolid pharmacokineticpharmacodynamic
profile in critically ill septic patients: intermittent versus
continuous infusion. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2008;31:1229.
[79] Lovering AM, Le Floch R, Hovsepian L, Stephanazzi J, Bret P,
Birraux G, et al. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of linezolid in
patients with major thermal injuries. J Antimicrob
Chemother 2009 [Epub ahead of print].