Critical Care Research and Practice最新文献

Background: Studies report discrepancies between CVP and JVP measurements. The mid-thoracic plane (MTP) at the anterior fourth intercostal space level indicates the zero-reference level (ZRL) for venous pressure measurement, and the midaxillary line (MAL) at fourth intercostal space is a point near the ZRL in the supine position. JVP is usually measured from the sternal angle (SA) with further addition of 5 cm (JVP-SA + 5) and CVP in the supine position from MAL (CVP-MAL). However, no report has compared CVP measured from MTP (CVP-MTP) with CVP-MAL and with JVP from MTP (JVP-MTP) and JVP-SA + 5.

Methods: We measured JVP-MTP and JVP-SA + 5 in appropriate reclining positions and subsequently CVP-MTP and CVP-MAL in the supine position blindly in 150 patients. We compared the pressures by Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman plots.

Results: CVP-MTP and CVP-MAL demonstrated similar means (p = 0.129), strong positive linear relationship (r = 0.908), and good agreement (near-zero mean difference) with each other. JVP-MTP was about 1 cm higher than JVP-SA + 5 (p < 0.001). JVP-MTP displayed higher correlation coefficients and better agreements with both CVPs than JVP-SA+5. Correlation coefficients and mean differences of both CVPs with JVP-MTP were almost equal, about 0.83 and 1 cm, and with JVP-SA + 5 also almost equal, about 0.72 and 2 cm, respectively.

Conclusions: JVP tallies better with CVP examined in the supine position when both are measured from MTP as the identical external reference point (ERP), and MAL can be used as MTP to measure CVP in the supine position. Our findings indicate the way to explore the matching of CVP and JVP to the full extent possible by standardizing their measurements from other identical ERPs to that from the zero-reference level MTP. Their further study in similar higher reclining positions from identical ERPs, such as MTP, MAL, and SA with the addition of higher numbers instead of 5 cm, is warranted standardizing other measurements to that from MTP.

Purpose: To assess the agreement in 24-hour area under the curve (AUC₂₄) value estimates between commonly used vancomycin population pharmacokinetic models in the critically ill.

Materials and methods: Adults admitted to intensive care who received intravenous vancomycin and had a serum vancomycin concentration available were included. AUC₂₄ values were determined using Tucuxi (revision cd7bd7a8) for dosing intervals with a vancomycin concentration using three models (Goti 2018, Colin 2019, and Thomson 2009) previously evaluated in the critically ill. AUC₂₄ values were categorized as subtherapeutic (<400 mg·h/L), therapeutic (400-600 mg·h/L), or toxic (>600 mg·h/L), assuming a minimum inhibitory concentration of 1 mg/L. AUC₂₄ value categorization was compared across the three models and reported as percent agreement.

Results: Overall, 466 AUC₂₄ values were estimated in 188 patients. Overall, 52%, 42%, and 47% of the AUC₂₄ values were therapeutic for the Goti, Colin, and Thomson models, respectively. The agreement of AUC₂₄ values between all three models was 48% (223/466), Goti-Colin 59% (193/466), Goti-Thomson 68% (318/466), and Colin-Thomson 67% (314/466).

Conclusion: In critically ill patients, vancomycin AUC₂₄ values obtained from different pharmacokinetic models are often discordant, potentially contributing to differences in dosing decisions. This highlights the importance of selecting the optimal model.