RESUMEN
AIM: By analyzing the teicoplannin serum concentration in patients with severe infection and comparing the monitoring results in patients with hyperrenal function and non-hyperrenal function, to provide reference for clinical rational drug use. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 64 patients admitted to the department of critical care medicine of a tertiary level hospital from August 2019 to March 2021, and statistical analysis was performed on the monitoring results of teicoplannin, together with medication information and other biochemical indicators of these patients. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients had total 110 times of drug monitoring. 32.7% of ICU patients had renal hyperfunction, and the average serum concentration was 13.6 mg/L. Nearly half of blood concentrations of the monitored patients could not reach the therapeutic target of teicoplanin. For patients without argumented real clearance, increasing the maintenance dose of teicoplanin can significantly increase the blood concentration. While for those with argumented real clearance, the blood concentration of teicoplanin had no significant difference in different maintenance dose groups. Further correlation study found that the serum concentration of teicoplanin in patients with argumented real clearance was significantly positively correlated to cystatin C level, and significantly negatively correlated to albumin level. CONCLUSION: The incidence of renal hyperfunction in ICU patients is high, and the maintenance dose of teicoplanin 600 mg may not be effective for severe infection. To improve the effect of teicoplanin in severe patients, the drug concentration should be monitored to adjust the dose.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE To develop a whole-process intelligent model of pharmaceutical care for peritoneal dialysis （PD） patients， and to provide a reference for clinical pharmacists to provide standardized PD pharmaceutical care. METHODS The pharmaceutical care mode of PD patients at home and abroad was investigated and analyzed. Based on the actual situation of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University （hereinafter referred to as “our hospital”）， with “home→PD center outpatient→ inpatient department” as the main node， the recycling process of medication reconciliation was optimized. The whole-process intelligent pharmaceutical care model of PD was illustrated by improving the Chinese version of the drug-related problems （DRPs） classification tool， developing the corresponding pharmaceutical care process， and presenting specific cases. RESULTS Based on the medication therapy management （MTM） platform， our hospital had built a closed-loop PD whole-process intelligent pharmaceutical care model of “in-hospital pharmaceutical care （building document）-PD outpatient MTM-home pharmaceutical care （online App management）”. A “double cycle” workflow of “admission→discharge→outpatient” medication reconciliation cycle and “discovery-analysis-intervention-follow-up-record-evaluation” DRPs cycle was formed. CONCLUSIONS The establishment of the whole-process intelligent pharmaceutical care model for PD in our hospital provides experience for standardizing pharmaceutical care for PD patients， and can reduce DRPs.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE： To evaluate efficacy and safety of individualized antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease （CAD） systematically according to the results of laboratory examination， and to provide reference for individualized antiplatelet therapy in clinic. METHODS： Retrieved from PubMed， Embase and the Cochrane library during the establishment of database to Feb. 2018， RCTs about individualized antiplatelet therapy vs. routine antiplatelet therapy in CAD patients based on the results of laboratory examination were collected. Meta-analysis was conducted for the incidence of main adverse cardiovascular adverse events （MACE）， all-cause death， cardiovascular death， myocardial infarction， stent thrombosis， stroke and severe bleeding by using Rev Man 5.3 statistical software after data extraction and quality evaluation with Cochrane system evaluator manual 5.2.0. Subgroup analysis was carried out for different races， laboratory testing methods and intervention courses. RESULTS： Totally 7 RCTs involving 8 615 patients were included. Results of Meta-analysis showed that compared with routine antiplatelet therapy， there was no significant difference in the incidence of MACE [RR＝0.93， 95％CI （0.74， 1.16）， P＝0.51]， all-cause death [RR＝0.89， 95％CI （0.56， 1.41）， P＝0.61]， cardiovascular death [RR＝0.68， 95％CI （0.36， 1.25）， P＝0.21]， myocardial infarction [RR＝1.03， 95％CI （0.92， 1.16）， P＝0.56]， stent thrombosis [RR＝0.52， 95％CI （0.22， 1.24）， P＝0.14]， stroke [RR＝1.03， 95％CI （0.65， 1.63）， P＝0.90]， and severe bleeding [RR=0.78，95％CI （0.53， 1.14）， P＝0.20] based on the results of laboratory examination. Subgroup analysis showed according to CYP2C19 genotype， individualized medication could reduce the incidence of MACE [RR＝0.29， 95％CI （0.14， 0.64）， P＝0.002] and all-cause death [RR＝0.11， 95％CI （0.01， 0.87）， P＝0.04]， and trials with intervention duration of 6 months could significantly decrease the incidence of all-cause death [RR＝0.11， 95％CI （0.01， 0.87）， P＝0.04]， there were no significant difference between 2 groups in other subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS： Compared with routine antiplatelet therapy， individualized antiplatelet therapy based on the results of laboratory examination cannot reduce the incidence of MACE and bleeding event risk in real-world patients with CAD. Although subgroup analysis show that individualized medication on the basis of CYP2C19 genotype can significantly reduce the incidence of MACE and cardiovascular death. But more large-scale samples and high-quality studies are needed to confirm this conclusion.
RESUMEN
This study established a population pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics model of clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Fifty-nine patients were enrolled. The plasma concentration of clopidogrel active metabolite and vasodilator stimulated phosphoprotein platelet reactivity index (VASP-PRI) were selected as the pharmacokinetics index and the pharmacodynamics index, respectively. The covariates including demographic characteristics, laboratory indexes, combined medication, complications and genetic polymorphisms of related enzymes were screened for their influence on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics parameters. Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics data analysis was performed using NONMEM software. The general linear model and the indirectly effect model-turnover model for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis were selected as the basic model, respectively. The population typical values of K12, CL/F, V/F, EC50, K(in), and E(max) were 0.259 h(-1), 179 L x h(-1), 632 L, 1.57 ng x mL(-1), 4.29 and 0.664, respectively. CYP2C19 was the covariate in the final pharmacokinetic model, and the model was to design a prior dosage regimen.