Clinical validation of an innovative dried whole-blood spot method to quantify simultaneously vancomycin and creatinine in adult patients.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
M Hassanzai, S Bahmany, H A W van Onzenoort, J van Oldenrijk, B C P Koch, B C M de Winter
{"title":"Clinical validation of an innovative dried whole-blood spot method to quantify simultaneously vancomycin and creatinine in adult patients.","authors":"M Hassanzai, S Bahmany, H A W van Onzenoort, J van Oldenrijk, B C P Koch, B C M de Winter","doi":"10.1093/jac/dkaf041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A drawback of vancomycin use is the need for therapeutic drug monitoring and renal function monitoring. Traditional blood sampling involves drawing blood through a venepuncture. An alternative method, dried blood spot (DBS) sampling allows for self-sampling at home.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To clinically validate a DBS method for simultaneous monitoring of vancomycin and creatinine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Hospitalized adults treated with intravenous vancomycin were included (trial registration NCT05257070). Blood sampling consisted of one venepuncture and one finger prick. Whole-blood DBS samples from patients were obtained by applying one drop of whole blood onto Whatman 903 filtrate paper. Bland-Altman analyses were used to assess the agreement and bias between the two measurements. Patients were asked to state their preferences for one of the two sampling methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study involved a final analysis of 39 patient samples for the clinical validation of vancomycin and 46 patient samples for the clinical validation of creatinine. The difference between plasma and DBS concentrations was ≤20% for 77% of the vancomycin samples, the mean bias was -0.1379% (95% limit of agreement -5.899-5.623). The difference between plasma and DBS concentrations was ≤20% for 89% of the creatinine samples, the mean bias was 2.656% (95% limit of agreement -26.16-31.47). Most patients (18 out of 31) preferred a finger prick over a venepuncture and 12 patients indicated no preference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is the first study that successfully clinically validated a DBS sampling method for simultaneous measurement of vancomycin and creatinine, allowing for direct use in (outpatient) practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":14969,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy","volume":" ","pages":"1097-1107"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11962379/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaf041","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A drawback of vancomycin use is the need for therapeutic drug monitoring and renal function monitoring. Traditional blood sampling involves drawing blood through a venepuncture. An alternative method, dried blood spot (DBS) sampling allows for self-sampling at home.

Objectives: To clinically validate a DBS method for simultaneous monitoring of vancomycin and creatinine.

Methods: Hospitalized adults treated with intravenous vancomycin were included (trial registration NCT05257070). Blood sampling consisted of one venepuncture and one finger prick. Whole-blood DBS samples from patients were obtained by applying one drop of whole blood onto Whatman 903 filtrate paper. Bland-Altman analyses were used to assess the agreement and bias between the two measurements. Patients were asked to state their preferences for one of the two sampling methods.

Results: The study involved a final analysis of 39 patient samples for the clinical validation of vancomycin and 46 patient samples for the clinical validation of creatinine. The difference between plasma and DBS concentrations was ≤20% for 77% of the vancomycin samples, the mean bias was -0.1379% (95% limit of agreement -5.899-5.623). The difference between plasma and DBS concentrations was ≤20% for 89% of the creatinine samples, the mean bias was 2.656% (95% limit of agreement -26.16-31.47). Most patients (18 out of 31) preferred a finger prick over a venepuncture and 12 patients indicated no preference.

Conclusions: This is the first study that successfully clinically validated a DBS sampling method for simultaneous measurement of vancomycin and creatinine, allowing for direct use in (outpatient) practice.

一种创新的干燥全血斑点法同时定量万古霉素和肌酐在成人患者中的临床验证。
背景:使用万古霉素的一个缺点是需要进行治疗药物监测和肾功能监测。传统的血液取样包括通过静脉穿刺抽血。另一种方法,干血斑(DBS)采样允许在家中自行采样。目的:临床验证DBS同时监测万古霉素和肌酐的方法。方法:纳入静脉注射万古霉素的住院成人(试验注册号NCT05257070)。血样包括一次静脉穿刺和一次手指穿刺。取患者全血DBS标本,取一滴全血滴在whatman903滤纸上。Bland-Altman分析用于评估两个测量值之间的一致性和偏倚。患者被要求陈述他们对两种抽样方法中的一种的偏好。结果:本研究最终分析了39例万古霉素患者样本进行临床验证,46例肌酐患者样本进行临床验证。77%的万古霉素样品血浆浓度与DBS浓度的差异≤20%,平均偏差为-0.1379%(95%一致性限为-5.899-5.623)。89%的肌酐样本血浆与DBS浓度差异≤20%,平均偏差为2.656%(95%一致性限为-26.16-31.47)。大多数患者(31人中有18人)更喜欢手指刺破而不是静脉穿刺,12名患者没有偏好。结论:这是第一个成功地在临床验证DBS取样方法同时测量万古霉素和肌酐的研究,允许直接在(门诊)实践中使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
5.80%
发文量
423
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal publishes articles that further knowledge and advance the science and application of antimicrobial chemotherapy with antibiotics and antifungal, antiviral and antiprotozoal agents. The Journal publishes primarily in human medicine, and articles in veterinary medicine likely to have an impact on global health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信