4.3 Article

Optimizing outcomes using vancomycin therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with MRSA bacteremia: trough concentrations or area under the curve?

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2021.115442

Keywords

Vancomycin; Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Bacteremia; Drug monitoring

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that the first measured vancomycin trough and AUC values were associated with treatment failure in patients with MRSA bacteremia. Trough values lower than 10.6 mg/L and AUC values lower than 410mg*h/L were more significantly associated with treatment failure.
Background: Vancomycin therapeutic drug monitoring is routinely performed but the specific measure used in practice is variable. Objective: To evaluate the relationship between the first measured vancomycin trough, area-under-the-curve (AUC), and failure in patients with MRSA bacteremia. Methods: This retrospective, cohort study included adult non-neutropenic patients with MRSA bacteremia who received vancomycin. The primary outcome was treatment failure. Initial trough and AUC values were compared between the failure and success groups. Classification and regression tree analysis was used to identify thresholds associated with failure. Multivariate analysis was performed to control for identified confounders. Results: There were 89 patients. Failure occurred in 23 (26%). Trough and AUC values associated with failure were < 10.6 mg/L (39% vs. 13%; P = 0.006) and AUC < 410mg*h/L (40% vs. 17%; P = 0.014). Both remained significant after controlling covariates (trough < 10.6 mg/L, OR [95% CI] = 4.91 [1.6-15]; AUC<410mg*h/L, OR [95% CI] = 3.13 [1.14-8.62]). Only AUC was predictive of nephrotoxicity. Conclusion: Failure was more common with troughs < 10.6 mg/L or AUC < 410 mg*h/L. Supratherapeutic AUCs, but not trough, were associated with nephrotoxicity. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available