Vancomycin dosing in critically ill patients: robust methods for improved continuous-infusion regimens
- PMID: 21402850
- PMCID: PMC3101407
- DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01708-10
Vancomycin dosing in critically ill patients: robust methods for improved continuous-infusion regimens
Abstract
Despite the development of novel antibiotics active against Gram-positive bacteria, vancomycin generally remains the first treatment, although rapidly achieving concentrations associated with maximal efficacy provides an unresolved challenge. The objective of this study was to conduct a population pharmacokinetic analysis of vancomycin in a large population of critically ill patients. This was a retrospective data collection of 206 adult septic critically ill patients who were administered vancomycin as a loading dose followed by continuous infusion. The concentration-versus-time data for vancomycin in serum was analyzed by a nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach using NONMEM. Monte Carlo simulations were performed using the final covariate model. We found that the best population pharmacokinetic model consisted of a one-compartment linear model with combined proportional and additive residual unknown variability. The volume of distribution of vancomycin (1.5 liters/kg) was described by total body weight and clearance (4.6 liters/h) by 24-hour urinary creatinine clearance (CrCl), normalized to body surface area. Simulation data showed that a 35-mg/kg loading dose was necessary to rapidly achieve vancomycin concentrations of 20 mg/liter. Daily vancomycin requirements were dependent on CrCl, such that a patient with a CrCl of 100 ml/min/1.73 m² would require at least 35 mg/kg per day by continuous infusion to maintain target concentrations. In conclusion, we have found that higher-than-recommended loading and daily doses of vancomycin seem to be necessary to rapidly achieve therapeutic serum concentrations in these patients.
Figures




References
-
- Bauer L. A., Black D. J., Lill J. S. 1998. Vancomycin dosing in morbidly obese patients. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 54:621–625 - PubMed
-
- Beal S. L., Sheiner L. B. 1998. NONMEM user guides (I-VIII). University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
-
- Blot S. I., Vandewoude K. H., Hoste E. A., Colardyn F. A. 2002. Outcome and attributable mortality in critically ill patients with bacteremia involving methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Arch. Intern. Med. 162:2229–2235 - PubMed
-
- Burton D. C., Edwards J. R., Horan T. C., Jernigan J. A., Fridkin S. K. 2009. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus central line-associated bloodstream infections in US intensive care units, 1997–2007. JAMA 301:727–736 - PubMed
-
- De Backer D., et al. 2010. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N. Engl. J. Med. 362:779–789 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical