Department of Pharmacy, Stanford Health Care, Stanford, California.
Department of Information Technology Services, Stanford Health Care, Stanford, California.
Pharmacotherapy. 2019 Apr;39(4):433-442. doi: 10.1002/phar.2234. Epub 2019 Mar 18.
The optimal pharmacodynamic parameter for the prediction of efficacy of vancomycin is the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), and current published data indicate that dosing based on vancomycin trough concentrations is an inaccurate substitute. In this study, our objective was to compare the achievement of therapeutic target attainment after switching from a trough-based to an AUC-based dosing strategy as a part of our institution's vancomycin-per-pharmacy protocol.
Prospective observational quality assurance study.
Academic medical center.
A total of 296 hospitalized adults who received vancomycin and monitoring under our institution's vancomycin-per-pharmacy protocol were included in the analysis. The preimplementation retrospective comparison group consisted of 179 patients in whom vancomycin was initiated using a trough-based dosing strategy between November 22, 2017, and January 22, 2018. The postimplementation group included 117 patients in whom vancomycin was initiated using an AUC-based dosing strategy using two-point sampling between June 19, 2018, and July 19, 2018, after hospital-wide implementation of this protocol on June 19, 2018.
AUC values were calculated from two vancomycin concentrations (peak and trough). The primary outcome was achievement of therapeutic AUC values (400-800 mg·hr/L) in the postimplementation group or therapeutic trough level values (10-20 mg/L) in the preimplementation group. Only 98 (55%) of 179 initial trough values were therapeutic in the preimplementation group (trough-only dosing method) versus 86 (73.5%) of 117 initial AUC values in the postimplementation group (AUC-based dosing method) (p=0.0014). A lower proportion of supratherapeutic AUC values was observed in the postimplementation group compared with supratherapeutic trough concentrations in the preimplementation group (1.7% vs 18%, p<0.0001). Overall, 62% of patients with initially therapeutic AUC values had subsequent trough value increases of 25% or greater, occurring at a median of 6 days of vancomycin therapy. Nephrotoxicity occurred in 11% of patients in the preimplementation versus 9.4% in the postimplementation group (p=0.70).
Compared with a trough concentration-based dosing strategy, AUC-based dosing using two-point sampling improved therapeutic target attainment. Implementation is feasible at any hospital that performs vancomycin peak concentration testing and is a workable alternative to using Bayesian software for estimating AUC. This approach should also be directly compared with AUC-based dosing using Bayesian software.
预测万古霉素疗效的最佳药效学参数是浓度时间曲线下面积(AUC),目前已发表的数据表明,基于万古霉素谷浓度的给药是不准确的替代方法。在这项研究中,我们的目的是比较从基于谷浓度的给药策略转换为基于 AUC 的给药策略后,实现治疗目标的情况,这是我们机构万古霉素药物管理方案的一部分。
前瞻性观察性质量保证研究。
学术医疗中心。
共纳入 296 名在我们机构的万古霉素药物管理方案下接受万古霉素治疗和监测的住院成人患者。在分析中,预实施回顾性比较组包括 179 名患者,他们在 2017 年 11 月 22 日至 2018 年 1 月 22 日期间使用基于谷浓度的给药策略开始使用万古霉素。实施后组包括 117 名患者,他们在 2018 年 6 月 19 日在医院范围内实施该方案后,于 2018 年 6 月 19 日至 2018 年 7 月 19 日期间使用两点采样的基于 AUC 的给药策略开始使用万古霉素。
AUC 值由两种万古霉素浓度(峰浓度和谷浓度)计算得出。主要结局是在实施后组中实现治疗性 AUC 值(400-800mg·hr/L)或在预实施组中实现治疗性谷浓度值(10-20mg/L)。在预实施组中,仅 179 个初始谷值中有 98 个(55%)是治疗性的(仅谷浓度给药方法),而在实施后组中,117 个初始 AUC 值中有 86 个(73.5%)是治疗性的(基于 AUC 的给药方法)(p=0.0014)。与预实施组中较高的治疗性 AUC 值相比,实施后组中观察到较低比例的超治疗性 AUC 值(1.7%比 18%,p<0.0001)。总体而言,62%的初始 AUC 值为治疗性的患者随后出现谷值增加 25%或更高,中位时间为万古霉素治疗的 6 天。预实施组中有 11%的患者发生肾毒性,而实施后组中为 9.4%(p=0.70)。
与基于谷浓度的给药策略相比,基于两点采样的 AUC 给药可提高治疗目标的实现率。任何进行万古霉素峰值浓度检测的医院都可以实施这种方法,并且是替代使用贝叶斯软件估计 AUC 的可行方法。这种方法还应该与基于贝叶斯软件的 AUC 给药直接进行比较。