Λεπτομέρειες βιβλιογραφικής εγγραφής
| Τίτλος: |
Quantifying the Impact of Discrepancies Between Actual and Recorded Blood Sampling Times on Bayesian Forecasting for Area Under the Concentration–Time Curve Estimation of Vancomycin. |
| Συγγραφείς: |
Yamada, Tomoyuki1,2 (AUTHOR), Oda, Kazutaka3,4 (AUTHOR) kazutakaoda@kuh.kumamoto‐u.ac.jp, Hiyama, Yoko5,6 (AUTHOR), Ueda, Takashi7 (AUTHOR), Furusho, Hirokazu8 (AUTHOR), Katanoda, Tomomi3,4 (AUTHOR), Tomita, Takashi6 (AUTHOR), Matsuo, Hiroaki6 (AUTHOR), Ide, Takeshi9 (AUTHOR), Jingami, Sachiko8 (AUTHOR), Kusaka, Yusuke2,10 (AUTHOR), Jono, Hirofumi3,4 (AUTHOR) |
| Πηγή: |
Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology. Jul2026, Vol. 139 Issue 1, p1-16. 16p. |
| Θεματικοί όροι: |
*Blood sampling, *Bayes' estimation, *Drug monitoring, *Pharmacokinetics, *Critically ill patient care, *Vancomycin |
| Περίληψη: |
The effect of discrepancies in sampling time on the accuracy of area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) estimation remains unclear. We evaluated how discrepancies between actual and recorded blood sampling times impact vancomycin AUC estimation using one‐point (trough) and two‐point (trough and peak) strategies in critically ill patients. In total, 25 patients at five Japanese hospitals were enrolled; 21 underwent sampling on Day 1 (AUCday1) and 14 on Days 3–5 (AUCss). Reference AUCs were calculated using trapezoidal methods. Bayesian forecasting estimated AUCs from one‐ or two‐point sampling. Systematic trough (≤ 4 h earlier) and peak (−1 to +4 h) time discrepancies were introduced. Predictive performance was defined as estimated/reference AUC ratios within an acceptable range of 0.9–1.1. For AUCday1, two‐point sampling was more robust to trough discrepancies than one‐point sampling (acceptable interquartile range [IQR] up to 105 vs. 30 min) but highly sensitive to peak timing (acceptable IQR −20 and +10 min). For AUCss, similar trends were observed. Overall, two‐point sampling offers superior robustness against trough discrepancies. However, because peak sampling is highly sensitive to timing errors, if the exact peak sampling time cannot be verified, clinicians may consider remeasuring the concentration or switching to one‐point trough sampling. Plain Language Summary: Vancomycin exposure estimation often uses two blood samples (trough and peak) for better accuracy than one blood sample (trough), but the impact of sampling time discrepancies—actual versus recorded sampling times—is unclear. Our study found that two‐point sampling is more robust than one‐point sampling, providing stable exposure estimates even with trough sampling time discrepancies. However, two‐point sampling is highly sensitive to peak timing discrepancies. Therefore, while two‐point sampling offers superior robustness against trough timing discrepancies, clinicians must ensure accurate peak time recording. If peak sampling time is uncertain, clinicians may consider remeasuring the concentration or relying on one‐point trough sampling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Βάση Δεδομένων: |
Academic Search Index |