Presence of clinical pharmacists at the neurology unit may help in early detection of prescribing errors with increased patient safety.
The optimal dose of vancomycin in critically ill patients receiving continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to identify factors that significantly affect pharmacokinetic profiles and to further investigate the optimal dosage regimens for critically ill patients undergoing CVVH based on population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic analysis. A prospective population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed at the surgical intensive care unit in a level A tertiary hospital. We included 11 critically ill patients undergoing CVVH and receiving intravenous vancomycin. Serial blood samples were collected from each patient, with a total of 131 vancomycin concentrations analyzed. Nonlinear mixed effects models were developed using NONMEM software. Monte Carlo Simulation was used to optimize vancomycin dosage regimens. A two-compartment model with first-order elimination was sufficient to characterize vancomycin pharmacokinetics for CVVH patients. The population typical vancomycin clearance (CL) was 1.15 L/h and the central volume of distribution was 16.9 L. CL was significantly correlated with ultrafiltration rate (UFR) and albumin level. For patients with normal albumin and UFR between 20 and 35 mL/kg/h, the recommended dosage regimen was 10 mg/kg qd. When UFR was between 35 and 40 mL/kg/h, the recommended dosage regimen was 5 mg/kg q8h. For patients with hypoalbuminemia and UFR between 20 and 25 mL/kg/h, the recommended dosage regimen was 5 mg/kg q8h. When UFR was between 25 and 40 mL/kg/h, the recommended dosage regimen was 10 mg/kg q12h. We recommend clinicians choosing the optimal initial vancomycin dosage regimens for critically ill patients undergoing CVVH based on these two covariates.
Aims: To determine the risk of liver injury associated with the use of different intravenous lipid emulsions (LEs) in large populations in a real-world setting in China.Methods: A prescription sequence symmetry analysis was performed using data from 2015 Chinese Basic Health Insurance for Urban Employees. Patients newly prescribed both intravenous LEs and hepatic protectors within time windows of 7, 14, 28, 42, and 60 days of each other were included. The washout period was set to one month according to the waiting-time distribution. After adjusting prescribing time trends, we quantify the deviation from symmetry of patients initiating LEs first and those initiating hepatic protectors first, by calculating adjusted sequence ratios (ASRs) and relevant 95% confidence intervals. Analyses were further stratified by age, gender, and different generations of LEs developed.Results: In total, 416, 997, 1,697, 2,072, and 2,342 patients filled their first prescriptions with both drugs within 7, 14, 28, 42, and 60 days, respectively. Significantly increased risks of liver injury were found across all time windows, and the strongest effect was observed in the first 2 weeks [ASR 6.97 (5.77–8.42) ∼ 7.87 (6.04–10.61)] in overall patients. In subgroup analyses, female gender, age more than 60 years, and soybean oil-based and alternative-LEs showed higher ASRs in almost all time windows. Specially, a lower risk for liver injury was observed in the first 14 days following FO-LEs administration (ASR, 3.42; 95% CI, 0.81–14.47), but the risk started to rise in longer time windows.Conclusion: A strong association was found between LEs use and liver injury through prescription sequence symmetry analysis in a real-world setting, which aligns with trial evidence and clinical experience. Differences revealed in the risks of liver injury among various LEs need further evaluation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.