Association Between Vancomycin Blood Brain Barrier Penetration and Clinical Response in Postsurgical Meningitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigated the association between vancomycin blood brain barrier penetration and clinical response in patients with postsurgical meningitis. METHODS: Adult patients with postsurgical meningitis were recruited. Eligible patients received vancomycin 500 mg every 6 h for at least 5 days. On day 3 or 4, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and simultaneous serum samples were obtained to determine CSF minimum concentrations (Cmin), serum Cmin and CSF to serum Cmin ratio. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (14 men and 8 women; mean age of 52.6± 12.1 years) were recruited. The vancomycin Cmin was 3.63 ± 1.64 mg/L in CSF and 13.38 ± 5.36 mg/L in serum, with the CSF to serum Cmin ratio of 0.291 ± 0.118. The Cmin in serum and in CSF showed a significant correlation (p=0.005, r =0.575). The vancomycin CSF Cmin had a significant correlation with the decline of white blood cell counts (WBCs) in CSF (p=0.003, r =0.609). CSF Cmin, serum Cmin and CSF to serum Cmin ratio all showed no significant correlation with clinical response (p=0.335, 0.100, 0.679, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There was a positive correlation between serum Cmin and CSF Cmin. However, only CSF Cmin is positively correlated with WBCs improvement in CSF. All other parameters such as serum Cmin, CSF Cmin and CSF to serum Cmin ratio had no correlation with clinical response. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".