Table 3.
Comparison to literature sources
| Study | Population | Analysis method | Scaled? | Vss | CL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adane et al.31 | Non‐ECMO | PopPK | Yes | 48.2 | 4.3 |
| Lim et al.32 | Non‐ECMO | PopPK | Yes | 81.4 | 4.0 |
| Donadello et al.29 | Non‐ECMO | NCA | No | 92.3 | 2.3 |
| Donadello et al.29 | ECMO | NCA | No | 99.3 | 2.4 |
| Wu et al.30 | Non‐ECMO | NCA | No | 76.6 ± 29.3 | 7.2 ± 4.3 |
| Wu et al.30 | ECMO | NCA | No | 79.4 ± 22.7 | 5.9 ± 3.5 |
| Mulla & Pooboni11 | ECMO | PopPK | Yes | 69.0 ± 26.5 | 3.8 ± 1.9 |
| Present | ECMO | PopPK | Yes | 56.5 ± 10.1 | 2.8 ± 1.1 |
This table includes parameter estimates of vancomycin PK in both ECMO and non‐ECMO patient populations. If the PK parameters were linked to weight and creatinine clearance, the final parameter was scaled to the current study population. Standard deviations were included if provided by the study. Volume at steady state (Vss) was calculated as the sum of the central volume and the peripheral volume if a two‐compartment model was selected or Vss was equal to the central volume if a one‐compartment model was selected. NCA, noncompartmental analysis; PopPK, population pharmacokinetic.