Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Association of Acute Kidney Injury with the Concomitant Use of Vancomycin and Piperacillin-Tazobactam in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concomitant use of vancomycin plus piperacillin/tazobactam (TZP) has been associated with increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) in hospitalized adults. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed and EMBASE for pediatric studies examining this hypothesis, with reference to vancomycin monotherapy or in combination with another beta-lactam antibiotic. Out of 1381 non-duplicate studies, 10 met our inclusion criteria. We performed a random effects meta-analysis, based on crude odds ratios, and we accounted for both quality of included studies and publication bias. In primary analysis, concomitant vancomycin and TZP use yielded a statistically significant association with the development of AKI. More specifically, children with AKI had higher odds to have been exposed to vancomycin plus TZP, in comparison with vancomycin monotherapy (OR 8.15; 95% CI: 3.49-18.99), or vancomycin plus any other beta-lactam antibiotic (OR 3.48; 95% CI: 2.71-4.46). Based on the results of the Newcastle Ottawa Scale quality assessment, a secondary analysis including only higher quality studies (6 out of 10 studies) yielded again higher odds of exposure to vancomycin plus TZP, compared to vancomycin plus another beta-lactam antibiotic (OR 3.76; 95% CI: 2.56-5.51). Notably, even after controlling for possible publication bias our results remained statistically significant (OR 3.09; 95% CI: 2.30-4.14). In conclusion, the concomitant use of vancomycin and TZP could be associated with AKI development and the clinical significance of this potential association needs to be studied further in the pediatric population.
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 | 0.013 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".