Search

Introduction: This study investigated the serum concentration of vancomycin during prolonged infusion in children. Population and methods: This retrospective cohort study included pediatric patients who received vancomycin from June 2017 to June 2020 at a tertiary referral hospital. The patients were divided into two groups according to infusion strategy, the SII (standard intermittent infusion) group and the PI (prolonged infusion) group. Demographic details, infusion period, serum creatinine, duration of vancomycin therapy, trough concentration of vancomycin, and pediatric intensive care unit stay were reviewed. Differences of the concentrations were measured. Results: Sixty-eight patients were included: 31 in the SII group and 37 in the PI group. The trough concentration of vancomycin was significantly higher in the PI group than in SII group (11.2 mg/L [5.9-13.7] vs. 7 mg/L [3.5- 9.3]; p = 0.02). The target attainment rate was higher in the PI group than in the SII group (59.4% and 19.3%, respectively; p = 0.001). There were no significant differences between the SII and PI groups regarding the peak concentrations of vancomycin, final creatinine and peak creatinine. There were no differences between the SII and PI groups regarding the failure events, PICU stay and duration of vancomycin therapy. The multivariable analysis showed that PI was significantly associated with higher trough serum concentrations of vancomycin (OR = 2.27; p = 0.005). Conclusion: Compared to the SII strategy, the PI strategy may be an optimized option to children with severe infection, as it can achieve higher trough concentrations and target concentration attainment., (Sociedad Argentina de Pediatría.)

Introduction: The benefits of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) in preterm infants are unclear. This study aimed to explore if noninvasive NAVA is more beneficial for preterm infants than nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP)., Study Design: Meta-analysis was performed in three clinical trials comprising two randomized controlled trials and one crossover study. We compared NIV-NAVA and NCPAP and reported treatment failure, mortality, and adverse events as the primary outcomes., Results: Three studies including 173 patients (89 of whom underwent NIV-NAVA) were eligible for this meta-analysis. This review found no difference in treatment failure between NIVNAVA and NCPAP (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.84; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.10-0.14; I2=33%, P=0.23). Similarly, there was no difference in mortality (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.51-4.52, heterogeneity not applicable). Compared with NCPAP, NIVNAVA significantly reduced the use of caffeine (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.98, I2=71%, P=0.03)., Conclusions: Compared with NCPAP, there is insufficient evidence to conclude on the benefits or harm of NIV-NAVA therapy for preterm infants. The findings of this review should be confirmed using methodologically rigorous and adequately powered clinical trials.