Takehiko Oami, Noriyuki Hattori, Yosuke Matsumura, Eizo Watanabe, Ryuzo Abe, Taku Oshima, Waka Takahashi, Shingo Yamazaki, Tatsuya Suzuki, Shigeto Oda
Abstract
Although vancomycin (VCM) is not absorbed from healthy intestinal mucosa, elevations in the serum VCM concentrations have been reported in some cases. The aims of this study are to evaluate the necessity of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) during enteral VCM administration in critically ill patients.
In this retrospective study, we enrolled 19 patients admitted to our intensive care unit who were treated with enteral VCM from December 2006 to January 2014. Clinical factors were compared between two groups: Group E whose serum concentrations were detectable, and Group N whose concentrations were below the detection limit of the VCM assay.
Group E comprises 7 patients, and Group N comprises 12 patients. The fasting duration in Group E was significantly longer compared with that in Group N (17 vs. 8 days, p = 0.023). Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between the serum VCM concentrations and the fasting duration (r = 0.79, p < 0.0001), and the amount of diarrhea (r = 0.46, p = 0.046). No difference was observed in the amount of diarrhea at the time of TDM (Group E; 1,850 mL vs. Group N; 210 mL, p = 0.055) and in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment subscore for the renal system at the time of TDM (Group E; 4.0 vs. Group N; 1.5, p = 0.068).
Long durations of fasting and massive diarrhea were associated with elevations in the serum VCM concentrations, which suggested that TDM might be necessary during enteral VCM administration in critically ill patients.
UMIN Clinical Trials Registry identifier UMIN000016955.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
1
8%
Psychology
1
8%
Immunology and Microbiology
1
8%
Other
0
0%
Unknown
4
31%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2019.
All research outputs
#13,557,147
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#2,138
of 5,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,595
of 317,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#34
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,740 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,335 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
