留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码
x 关闭 永久关闭

应中央军委要求，2022年9月起，《药学实践杂志》将更名为《药学实践与服务》，双月刊，正文96页；2023年1月起，拟出版月刊，正文64页，数据库收录情况与原《药学实践杂志》相同。欢迎作者踊跃投稿！

比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析

郑丽丽,  轩辕欢,  姜倩,  范芳芳,  姚莉,  赵生俊

downloadPDF
文章导航 > 药学实践与服务  > 2018 >  36(2): 136-139,146
郑丽丽, 轩辕欢, 姜倩, 范芳芳, 姚莉, 赵生俊. 比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析[J]. 药学实践与服务, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
引用本文: 郑丽丽, 轩辕欢, 姜倩, 范芳芳, 姚莉, 赵生俊. 比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析[J]. 药学实践与服务, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
shu
ZHENG Lili, XUAN Yuanhuan, JIANG Qian, FAN Fangfang, YAO Li, ZHAO Shengjun. Meta-analysis on renal toxicity of vancomycin given by continuous infusion vs intermittent infusion[J]. Journal of Pharmaceutical Practice and Service, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
Citation: ZHENG Lili, XUAN Yuanhuan, JIANG Qian, FAN Fangfang, YAO Li, ZHAO Shengjun. Meta-analysis on renal toxicity of vancomycin given by continuous infusion vs intermittent infusion[J]. Journal of Pharmaceutical Practice and Service, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
shu

比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析

doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009

  • 新疆医科大学附属中医医院药学部, 新疆 乌鲁木齐 830054

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（81460603）

Meta-analysis on renal toxicity of vancomycin given by continuous infusion vs intermittent infusion

  • Department of Pharmacy, Traditional Chinese Medical Hospital Affiliated to Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China

  • 摘要: 目的 比较万古霉素两种给药方式（持续输注与间断输注）引起的肾毒性。 方法 计算机检索Embase、PubMed、The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials和CBM、CNKI、万方数据库。采用Cochrane协作网提供的Revman5.2软件进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入2篇随机对照试验（RCT）和8篇观察性研究，共纳入患者1 764例，其中持续输注1 037例，间断输注727例。持续输注与间断输注引起的肾毒性发生率无显著性差异（P>0.05）。 结论 万古霉素持续输注较间断输注不能有效降低肾毒性的发生率。
    Abstract: Objective To compare the renal toxicity of vancomycin with continuous infusion vs intermittent infusion. Methods The databases of EMBASE, PUBMED, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CBM, CNKI and WanFang were searched. The Cochrane Revman5.2 software was used for Meta-analysis. Results Two RCTs and eight observational studies were included in the systematic literature search with total of 1 764 patients. 1 037 patients received vancomycin with continuous infusion while 727 patients with intermittent infusion. The Meta-analysis indicated that there was no significant difference in renal toxicity between continuous infusion group and intermittent infusion group(P>0.05). Conclusion Vancomycin continuous infusion cannot effectively reduce the incidence of renal toxicity.
  • [1] 万古霉素临床应用剂量专家组.万古霉素临床应用剂量中国专家共识[J].中华传染病杂志,2012,30(11):641-646.
    [2] Liu C,Bayer A,Cosgrove S E,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,2011,52(3):285-292.
    [3] 耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌感染防治专家委员会.耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌感染防治专家共识[J].中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版),2010,4(2):215-223.
    [4] 陈春辉,李光辉.美国感染病学会治疗成人及儿童甲氧西林耐药金黄色葡萄球菌感染临床实践指南[J].中国感染与化疗杂志,2011,11(6):428-435.
    [5] Rybak M, Lomaestro B, Rotschafer JC, et al.Therapeutic 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 Pharmacists[J]. Am J Health Syst Pharm,2008,66(1):82-98.
    [6] van Hal SJ, Paterson DL, Lodise TP. Systematic review and meta-analysis of vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity associated with dosing schedules that maintain troughs between 15 and 20 milligrams per liter[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2013,57(2):734-744.
    [7] 黄榜江,肖政,汪成琼,等.我国慢性阻塞性肺病院内真菌感染特征及高危药物因素的Meta分析[J].实用医学杂志,2015,31(1):110-115.
    [8] Higgins Jpt GS. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0[J]. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,2011,2011(2):S38.
    [9] 吴泰相,商洪才,卞兆祥.随机对照实况试验的概念,设计和实施[J].中国循证医学杂志,2009,9(12):1277-1280.
    [10] 陈耀龙,李晓,梅又文,等.循证医学术语介绍V[J].中国循证医学杂志,2009,9(7):734-739.
    [11] Wysocki M, Thomas F, Wolff MA, et al. Comparison of continuous with discontinuous intravenous infusion of vancomycin in severe MRSA infections[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 1995,35(2):352-354.
    [12] Wysocki M, Delatour F, Faurisson F, et al. Continuous versus intermittent infusion of vancomycin in severe staphylococcal infections:prospective multicenter randomized study[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2001,45(9):2460-2467.
    [13] Vuagnat A, Stern R, Lotthe A, et al. High dose vancomycin for osteomyelitis:continuous vs. intermittent infusion[J]. J Clin Pharm Ther,2004,29(4):351-357.
    [14] Hutschala D, Kinstner C, Skhirdladze K, et al. Influence of vancomycin on renal function in critically ill patients after cardiac surgery:continuous versus intermittent infusion[J]. Anesthesiology,2009,111(2):356-365.
    [15] Ingram PR, Lye DC, Fisher DA, et al. Nephrotoxicity of continuous versus intermittent infusion of vancomycin in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2009,34(6):570-574.
    [16] Schmelzer TM, Christmas AB, Norton HJ, et al. Vancomycin intermittent dosing versus continuous infusion for treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia in trauma patients[J]. Am Surg, 2013,79(11):1185-1190.
    [17] Hanrahan TP, Harlow G, Hutchinson J, et al. vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity in the critically ill:a retrospective multivariate regression analysis[J]. Crit Care Med, 2014,42(12):2527-2536.
    [18] Di Filippo A,De Gaudio AR,Novelli A,et al.Continuous infusion of vancomycin in methicillin-resistant staphylococcus infection[J].Chemotherapy,1998,44(1):63-68.
    [19] Akers KS,Cota JM,Chung KK,et al.Serum vancomycin levels resulting from continuous or intermittent infusion in critically ill burn patients with or without continuous renal replacement therapy[J].J Burn Care Res,2012,33(6):e254-e262.
    [20] Saugel B,Nowack MC, Hapfelmeier A,et al.Continuous intravenous administration of vancomycin in medical intensive care unit patients[J].J Crit Care,2013,28(1):9-13.
    [21] 薛敬一,徐晓涵,陈恳,等.万古霉素持续输注与间断输注的系统评价与Meta分析[J].中国临床药理学杂志,2015,31(13):1348-1352.
  • [1] 刘丽艳, 余小翠, 孙传铎.  纳武利尤单抗治疗非小细胞肺癌有效性及安全性的Meta分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(10): 451-456. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202310044
    [2] 黄韵, 张正银, 金英, 郑怡菁, 李铁军, 孙莉莉.  耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯菌及大肠埃希菌临床分离株耐药性及耐药基因分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(10): 439-444. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202309059
    [3] 张艺昕, 关欣怡, 王博宁, 闻俊, 洪战英.  二氢吡啶类钙离子拮抗药物手性分析及其立体选择性药动学研究进展 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(8): 319-324. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202308062
    [4] 史生辉, 石飞, 雷琼, 王亚峰, 吴雪花.  青藏高原肺结核合并念珠菌感染患者的病原菌分布特点及耐药率分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(6): 260-262, 272. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202304014
    [5] 戴菲菲, 傅翔, 陈琼年, 俞苏纯.  上海某二级医院革兰阴性菌流行特征的回顾性分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(): 1-5. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202305005
    [6] 刘依秦, 王超群, 邱娇娜.  胆宁片预处理在糖尿病患者结肠镜检查前的应用效果分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(9): 407-410. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202407037
    [7] 瞿文君, 白若楠, 崔力, 周琰.  基于联合库存的公立医院多院区药品采购模式分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(7): 315-318. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202401002
    [8] 宋红卫, 王燕, 方铭, 马云鹏, 钟超, 徐一新, 徐峰, 周婷.  2021−2023年我院药品不良反应的特点分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(): 1-6. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202404041
    [9] 张晶晶, 索丽娜, 郑兆红.  89例细菌性肝脓肿的临床特征及抗感染治疗分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(6): 267-272. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202302039
    [10] 崔晓林, 付晓菲, 杜艳红, 刘娟, 朱茜, 刘子祺.  临床药师参与吉瑞替尼致QTc间期延长的病例分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(6): 263-266. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202309050
    [11] 尹小娟, 台力丽, 肖俊峰, 季波.  铜绿假单胞菌合并按蚊伊丽莎白菌肺部感染的病例分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(5): 223-226. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202310042
    [12] 张岩, 李炎君, 刘家荟, 邓娇, 原苑, 张敬一.  药物性肝损伤不良反应分析 . 药学实践与服务, 2024, 42(): 1-5. doi: 10.12206/j.issn.2097-2024.202404034
  • 加载中
WeChat 点击查看大图
计量
  • 文章访问数:  3390
  • HTML全文浏览量:  365
  • PDF下载量:  479
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2017-06-30
  • 修回日期:  2017-09-28

比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析

doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
  • 新疆医科大学附属中医医院药学部, 新疆 乌鲁木齐 830054
    • 基金项目:  国家自然科学基金（81460603）
  • 收稿日期: 2017-06-30
  • 修回日期: 2017-09-28

摘要: 目的 比较万古霉素两种给药方式（持续输注与间断输注）引起的肾毒性。 方法 计算机检索Embase、PubMed、The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials和CBM、CNKI、万方数据库。采用Cochrane协作网提供的Revman5.2软件进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入2篇随机对照试验（RCT）和8篇观察性研究，共纳入患者1 764例，其中持续输注1 037例，间断输注727例。持续输注与间断输注引起的肾毒性发生率无显著性差异（P>0.05）。 结论 万古霉素持续输注较间断输注不能有效降低肾毒性的发生率。

English Abstract

郑丽丽, 轩辕欢, 姜倩, 范芳芳, 姚莉, 赵生俊. 比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析[J]. 药学实践与服务, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
引用本文: 郑丽丽, 轩辕欢, 姜倩, 范芳芳, 姚莉, 赵生俊. 比较万古霉素持续输注与间断输注引起肾毒性的荟萃分析[J]. 药学实践与服务, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
shu
ZHENG Lili, XUAN Yuanhuan, JIANG Qian, FAN Fangfang, YAO Li, ZHAO Shengjun. Meta-analysis on renal toxicity of vancomycin given by continuous infusion vs intermittent infusion[J]. Journal of Pharmaceutical Practice and Service, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
Citation: ZHENG Lili, XUAN Yuanhuan, JIANG Qian, FAN Fangfang, YAO Li, ZHAO Shengjun. Meta-analysis on renal toxicity of vancomycin given by continuous infusion vs intermittent infusion[J]. Journal of Pharmaceutical Practice and Service, 2018, 36(2): 136-139,146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2018.02.009
shu

    全文HTML

参考文献 (21)

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回

    版权所有：《药学实践与服务》编辑委员会

    主管、主办: 中国人民解放军海军军医大学地址: 上海市杨浦区国和路325号邮政编码: 200433

    电话: （021）81871324,81871397 E-mail: yxsjzzs@163.com

    网站备案号 沪ICP备05003363号-1

    本系统由 北京仁和汇智信息技术有限公司 开发    百度统计