Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A multidisciplinary review finds subcutaneous antibiotics effective for patients with poor venous access, suggesting viable treatment options.
Subcutaneous antibiotic administration is increasingly recognized as a valuable alternative to intravenous therapy in selected clinical contexts. It is particularly advantageous for patients with poor venous access, frail or cachectic individuals, and in outpatient or palliative care settings, when oral options are not feasible. Subcutaneous delivery of antibiotics with predominantly time-dependent activity, particularly β-lactams (eg ceftriaxone, ertapenem) and glycopeptides (teicoplanin), allows attainment of therapeutic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) targets comparable to intravenous administration, while maintaining stable concentrations and reducing catheter-related complications. By contrast, PK/PD benefits are limited for agents with more concentration-dependent activity, such as aminoglycosides and fluoroquinolones due to reduced peak levels and local toxicity, whereas daptomycin shows favorable exposure and target attainment with acceptable tolerability. Available evidence suggests good tolerability, although regulatory frameworks remain limited. This multidisciplinary review, authored by infectious disease specialists, clinical pharmacologists, and nurses, summarizes current clinical experience, PK/PD data, and technical aspects of subcutaneous infusion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bella et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: