↓ Skip to main content

Penetration of Vancomycin into the Cerebrospinal Fluid: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacokinetics, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#33 of 1,610)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
58 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Penetration of Vancomycin into the Cerebrospinal Fluid: A Systematic Review
Published in
Clinical Pharmacokinetics, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40262-017-0548-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica E. Beach, Jerrold Perrott, Ricky D. Turgeon, Mary H. H. Ensom

Abstract

Infectious disease and pharmacokinetic textbooks indicate that vancomycin has poor penetration into the central nervous system due to its hydrophilic nature and high molecular weight. Recent literature suggests that penetration of vancomycin into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is higher than previously reported; therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess the penetration of vancomycin into CSF. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL electronic databases for English-language human studies evaluating serum and CSF concentrations of intravenous vancomycin. In 13 identified studies, the CSF-to-serum ratio of vancomycin varied from 0.00 to 0.81. CSF penetration ranged 0.06-0.81 in patients with meningitis, 0.05-0.17 in ventriculitis, 0.00-0.36 in other infections, and 0-0.13 in patients without infection. Despite variable CSF penetration, 83% of patients with meningitis and 100% of patients with ventriculitis achieved clinical cure. No factor predicted vancomycin CSF penetration. Contrary to prior belief, studies included in our review did not show universally low penetration of vancomycin into CSF. CSF vancomycin levels were variable and did not predict clinical cure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 10%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 26 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,166,088
of 25,608,265 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacokinetics
#33
of 1,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,699
of 325,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacokinetics
#2
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,608,265 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,852 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.