Continuous Versus Intermittent Infusion of Vancomycin and the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

Critically ill patients routinely receive vancomycin as empiric antibiotic therapy. A continuous infusion administration strategy may be superior to intermittent infusion by minimizing peak concentrations and variability thereby optimizing safety. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the impact of vancomycin infusion strategy on acute kidney injury in critically ill adults. A systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Google Scholar was undertaken. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies evaluating acute kidney injury in critically ill adults comparing vancomycin administered by intermittent and continuous infusion. Secondary outcomes included mortality and pharmacokinetic target attainment. Eleven studies were identified for analysis with baseline demographics, endpoints, protocol definitions, and outcomes extracted. When compared with intermittent infusion, continuous infusion was associated with a reduction in acute kidney injury in critically ill adults (odds ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34-0.65) and a 2.6 greater odds of pharmacokinetic target attainment (odds ratio, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.52-4.57). No difference in mortality was observed (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.35). When administered via a continuous infusion, vancomycin is associated with a 53% reduction in the odds of acute kidney injury and a 2.6-fold higher odds of pharmacokinetic target attainment when compared with intermittent infusion without influencing overall mortality.