We read the review by So et al. [1] with interest and would like to commend the authors for this much-needed compilation of updated information on the stability and compatibility of the commonly used antibiotics in peritoneal dialysis (PD) solutions [2–6]. Prompt treatment with antibiotics via the intraperitoneal (IP) route admixed with PD solutions with a minimum dwell time of 6 h, as recommended by the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis, remains the cornerstone for the treatment of peritonitis [7]. Therefore, robust data on the stability and compatibility of antibiotics in PD solutions is crucial for clinicians to ensure the safety and efficacy of antibiotics leading to good treatment outcomes. We also note that Ma et al. [8] published a review over 5 years ago on newer antibiotics that could be used for the treatment of drug-resistant PD-associated peritonitis. However, they provided limited information on their stability and compatibility with PD solutions and no information on the stability and compatibility of these antibiotics in low glucose degradation products PD solutions that come in multi-compartment bags, and are being increasingly used [9]. Moreover, available stability and compatibility data on some of these antibiotics have not been updated in the review by So et al. [1], which would be especially useful in regions and units with emerging antibiotic-resistant strains. Whilst we recognize that pharmacokinetic data is currently unavailable for many newer antibiotics for IP administration, the compilation of data on the stability and compatibility of antibiotics with PD solutions would facilitate the use of these antibiotics when more pharmacokinetic information becomes available. We therefore propose that an updated review that summarizes the chemical stability and physical compatibilities of newer antibiotics in PD solutions, not included in the review by So et al. [1], would provide more explicit guidance for clinicians when deciding the type of PD solution they could use to treat peritonitis due to multi-drug resistant organisms.
Contributor Information
Chau Wei Ling, School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Kamal Sud, Department of Renal Medicine, Nepean Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Nepean Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Peritoneal Dialysis Unit, Regional Dialysis Centre, Blacktown Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry Peritoneal Dialysis Working Group, South Australia, Australia; Departments of Renal Medicine, Blacktown and Westmead Hospitals, New South Wales, Australia.
Rahul P Patel, School of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Gregory M Peterson, School of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia; Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Ronald L Castelino, School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Department of Pharmacy, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, New South Wales, Australia.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
K.S. has received speaker's honoraria from Baxter Healthcare.
REFERENCES
- 1. So SWY, Chen L, Woo AYHet al. Stability and compatibility of antibiotics in peritoneal dialysis solutions. Clinical Kidney Journal 2022. 10.1093/ckj/sfac012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Patel RP, Farawahida S, Shastri Met al. Physical and chemical stability of ceftazidime and cefazolin in peritoneal dialysis solutions packaged in dual-chamber infusion bags. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2013; 70: 1477–1478 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Nguyen TT, Harmanjeet H, Wanandy Tet al. Pyridine levels in ceftazidime–peritoneal dialysis admixtures stored at body temperature. Perit Dial Int 2020; 40: 171–178 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Mendes K, Harmanjeet H, Sedeeq Met al. Stability of meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam with heparin in various peritoneal dialysis solutions. Perit Dial Int 2018; 38: 430–440 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Kandel S, Zaidi STR, Wanandy STet al. Stability of ceftazidime and heparin in four different types of peritoneal dialysis solutions. Perit Dial Int 2018; 38: 49–56 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Yousaf F, Zaidi ST, Wanandy Tet al. Stability of cefepime in pH-neutral peritoneal dialysis solutions packaged in dual-compartment bags. Perit Dial Int 2016; 36: 457–459 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Li PK, Chow KM, Cho Yet al. ISPD peritonitis guideline recommendations: 2022 update on prevention and treatment. Perit Dial Int 2022; 42: 110–1153 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Ma TK, Leung CB, Chow KMet al. Newer antibiotics for the treatment of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis. Clin Kidney J 2016; 9: 616–623 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. ANZDATA Registry . 43rd Report, Chapter 5: Peritoneal dialysis. Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Adelaide, Australia. 2020. http://www.anzdata.org.au, (17 April 2022, date last accessed) [Google Scholar]