Should cefepime or meropenem be used in the treatment of hypotensive (low blood pressure) septic shock?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: March 26, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

From the Research

For hypotensive septic shock, meropenem is generally preferred over cefepime due to its broader coverage against gram-negative organisms and lower risk of neurotoxicity. The recommended dose for meropenem is 1-2 grams intravenously every 8 hours, as supported by a study published in 2021 1. This study compared two empirical prolonged infusion dosing regimens for meropenem in patients with septic shock and found that both regimens led to a sufficiently high percentage of time the free drug concentration was above various target MICs for pathogens with target MICs < 4 mg/L.

Key Considerations

  • Meropenem offers broader coverage against gram-negative organisms including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producers, and anaerobes, making it more appropriate for critically ill patients with septic shock where source control is paramount.
  • Meropenem has better central nervous system penetration and a lower risk of neurotoxicity compared to cefepime, which is particularly important in critically ill patients who may have altered renal function.
  • When initiating meropenem, it should be combined with other antibiotics like vancomycin (15-20 mg/kg IV every 8-12 hours) for MRSA coverage until cultures return.
  • Meropenem should be administered as an extended infusion over 3 hours rather than a bolus to maximize time above MIC, as supported by a study published in 2017 2.
  • Dose adjustments are necessary for renal impairment, and therapy should be de-escalated based on culture results as soon as possible to minimize resistance development.

Additional Evidence

A study published in 2023 3 compared the effect of meropenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam in critically ill patients with sepsis and septic shock, and found that meropenem had a lower mortality rate on ventilator-free days, vasopressor-free days, and hospital-free days. Another study published in 2020 4 compared the empirical high-dose and low-dose of meropenem in critically ill patients with sepsis and septic shock, and found that high-dose meropenem may be more effective in treating septic shock. However, the most recent and highest quality study 1 supports the use of meropenem as the preferred treatment for hypotensive septic shock.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.