期刊文献+

低谷浓度和高谷浓度万古霉素疗效与安全性比较 被引量:18

Clinical Efficacy and Nephrotoxicity of High or Low Vancomycin Trough Concentration Therapy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:比较低谷浓度和高谷浓度万古霉素的疗效和安全性。方法:采用回顾性队列研究方法,回顾性收集2009~2011年135例成年患者的数据,依照平均谷浓度分为低浓度组(<15 mg.L-1)与高浓度组(≥15 mg.L-1),分别比较其临床失败率、细菌清除失败率、在院死亡率和肾毒性发生率。结果:135名患者中低浓度组与高浓度组人数分别为91例和44例。两组的临床失败率、细菌清除失败率、在院死亡率分别为37.4%vs 43.2%(校正比值比0.849)、37.4%vs 31.8%(校正比值比0.575)、7.7%vs 13.6%(校正比值比0.613),均没有显著差异,而高浓度组肾毒性发生率显著增加。结论:高谷浓度与低谷浓度万古霉素相比疗效没有显著性差异,但其肾毒性发生显著增加。 Objective: To examine the clinical outcomes of high or low vancomycin serum trough concentration in treated subjects. Methods: A retrospective cohort study evaluating 135 adults from 2009 to 2011 was conducted. Patients were stratified by mean vancomycin trough levels [low (〈15 mg·L ^-1), high (≥15mg·L^-1))]. Outcomes were clinical failure, microbiological failure, in-hospital mortality and nephrotoxicity. Results: The 135 patients in the study were stratified into low (n=91) and high (n=44) groups. Clinical failure, microbiological failure and in-hospital mortality occurred in the low vs high groups, respectively, as 37.4% vs 43.2% (adjusted OR 0.849), 37.4% vs 31.8% (adjusted OR 0.575) and 7.7% vs 13.6% (adjusted OR 0.613). Nephrotoxicity rate was higher in the high trough level group. Conclusion: In conclusion, clinical efficacies were similar regardless the trough concentrations, while high trough levels may place patients at an increased risk of nephrotoxicity.
出处 《药学与临床研究》 2013年第1期74-77,共4页 Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research
关键词 万古霉素 谷浓度 疗效 肾毒性 Vancomycin Trough concentration Efficacy Nephrotoxicity
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1Wang G, Hindler JF, Ward KW, et al. Increased van- comycin MICs for Staphylococcus aureus clinical iso- lates from a university hospital during a 5-year period [J]. J Clin Microbiol, 2006, 44(11): 3883-6.
  • 2Rybak M, Lomaestro B, Rotschafer JC, et al. Thera- peutic monitoring of vancomycin in adult patients: a consensus review of the American society of health- system pharmacists, the infectious diseases society of America, and the society of infectious diseases pharma- cists[J]. Am J Health Syst Pharm, 2009, 66(1): $2-98.
  • 3Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, et al. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children: executive summary[J]. Clin Infect Dis, 20ll, 52(3): 285-92.
  • 4Niederman MS, Craven DE, Bonten M J, et al. Guide- lines for the management of adults with hospital-ac- quired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia [J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2005. 171 (4): 388-416.
  • 5Clemens EC, Chan JD, Lynch JB, et al. Relationships between vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration, dosing strategies, and outcomes in methicillin-resistantS,qdtylococcmre,s bacteremia [J]. Diagtz Microbiol, 2011. 71(4): 408-14.
  • 6Chan JD, Pharn TN, Wong J, et a1. Clinical outcomes of linezolid vs vancomycin in methicillin =resistant Staphylococcus aureus ventilator -associated pneumonia: retrospective analysis [J].J Intensive Care Med, 2011, 26(6): 385-91.
  • 7Kullar R, Davis SL, Levine DP, et a1. Impact of van-comycin exposure on outcomes in patients with methi-cillin =resistant S/,apillococcus aureus bacteremia: sup-port for consensus guidel i nes suggested targets [J]. Clin. Infect Dis, 2011, 52(8): 975-81.
  • 8Roberts .lA, Taccone FS, Udy AA, et al. Vancomycin dosing in critically ill patients: robust methods for im-proved continuous-infusion regimens [J]. A ruimicrob A-gents Chemother, 2011, 55(6): 2704-9.
  • 9Spa pen HD, van Doorn KJ, Diltoer M, et al. Retro-spective evaluation of possible renal toxicity associated with continuous infusion of vancomycin in critically ill patients[J]. Ann lntensiue Care, 2011, 1(1): 26.
  • 10Wong DT, Crofts SL, Gomez M, et al. Evaluation of predictive ability of APACHE II system and hospital outcome in Canadian intensive care unit patients [J]. Cri: Care Med, 1995, 23(7): 1177-83.

二级参考文献26

  • 1李家泰,魏瑾.甲氧西林耐药金葡菌(MRSA)感染的诊断与治疗[J].中国临床药理学杂志,1993,9(2):97-108. 被引量:24
  • 2International Conference on Harmonisation Steering Committee.Guidance on ethnic factors in the acceptability of foreign clinical data[J]. Fed Regist, 1998;63: 31790 -31796.
  • 3Sowinski KM, Lima J J, Burlew BS, et al. Racial differences in propranolol enantionmer kinetics following simultaneous i.v. and oral administration [ J]. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 1996 ;42:339 - 346.
  • 4Lin KM, Lau JK, Smith R, et al. Comparison of alprazolam plasma levels in normal Asian and Caucasian male volunteers [ J]. Psychopharmacology, 1988; 96:365 - 369.
  • 5Lotte C, Wester RC, Rougier A, et al. Racial differences in the in vivo percutaneous absorption of some organic compounds: a comparison between black, Caucasian and Asian subjects [ J]. Arch Dermatol Res,1993; 284:456.
  • 6Abrams SA, Obrien KO, Liang LK, et al. Differences in calcium absorption and kinetics between black and white girls aged 5 - 16 years[J]. J Bone Miner Res, 1995; 10:829 - 833.
  • 7Lindholm A, Welsh M, Alton C, et al. Demographic factors influencing cyclosporine pharmacokinetic parameters in patients with uremia: racial differences in bioavailability [J]. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 1992; 52:359- 371.
  • 8Lown KS, Mayo RR, Leichtman AB, et al. Role of intestinal P - glycoprotein ( mdr1 ) in interpatient variation in the oral bioavailability of cyclosporine [ J ]. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 1997; 62:248 - 260.
  • 9Zhou HH, Adedoyin A, Wilkinson GR. Differences in plasma binding of drugs between Caucasians and Chinese subjects [ J]. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 1990 ;48:10 - 17.
  • 10Hosseine SJ, Farid R, Ghalighi MR, et al. Interethnic differences in drug protein binding and alpha 1 acid glycoprotein concentration [ J]. Ir J Med Sci, 1995; 164:26-27.

共引文献57

同被引文献119

引证文献18

二级引证文献120

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部