IMPORTANCE: Protein binding of valproate varies among ICU patients, altering the biologically active free valproate concentration (VPAC). Free VPAC is measured at few laboratories and is often discordant with total VPAC. Existing equations to predict free VPAC are either not validated or are inaccurate in ICU patients. OBJECTIVES: We designed this study to derive and validate a novel equation to predict free VPAC using data from ICU patients and to compare its performance to published equations. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Patients older than 18 years old with concomitant free and total VPACs measured in the ICU were included in the derivation cohort if admitted from 2014 to 2018, and the validation cohort if admitted from 2019 to 2022. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Multivariable linear regression was used to derive an equation to predict free VPAC. Modified Bland-Altman plots and the rate of therapeutic concordance between the measured and predicted free VPAC were compared. RESULTS: Demographics, median free and total VPACs, and valproate free fractions were similar among 115 patients in the derivation cohort and 147 patients in the validation cohort. The Bland-Altman plots showed the new equation performed better (bias, 0.3 [95% limits of agreement, –13.6 to 14.2]) than the Nasreddine (–9.2 [–26.5 to 8.2]), Kodama (–9.7 [–30.0 to 10.7]), Conde Giner (–7.9 [–24.9 to 9.1]), and Parent (–9.9 [–30.7 to 11.0]) equations, and similar to Doré (–2.0 [–16.0 to 11.9]). The Doré and new equations had the highest therapeutic concordance rate (73%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For patients at risk of altered protein binding such as ICU patients, existing equations to predict free VPAC are discordant with measured free VPAC. A new equation had low bias but was imprecise. External validation should be performed to improve its precision and generalizability. Until then, monitoring free valproate is recommended during critical illness.
Evaluation of Free Valproate Concentration in Critically Ill Patients
OBJECTIVES: Protein binding of valproate is variable in ICU patients, and the total valproate concentration does not predict the free valproate concentration, even when correcting for albumin. We sought to quantify valproate free concentration among ICU patients, identify risk factors associated with an increasing free valproate concentration, and evaluate the association between free valproate concentration with potential adverse drug effect. DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Two academic medical centers. PATIENTS: Patients greater than or equal to 18 years of age with concomitant free and total valproate concentrations collected in the ICU. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two-hundred fifty-six patients were included in the study, with a median age of 56 years (42–70) and 65% of patients were male. The median total valproate concentration was 53 µg/mL (38–70 µg/mL), the free valproate concentration was 12 µg/mL (7–20 µg/mL), and the free fraction was 23.6% (17.0–33.9%). Therapeutic discordance between the free and total valproate concentration occurred in 70% of patients. On multivariable analysis, increased free valproate concentration was associated with higher total valproate concentration (per 5 µg/mL increase, increase 1.72 µg/mL, 95% CI, 1.48–1.96) and lower serum albumin (per 1 g/dL decrease, increase 4.60 µg/mL, 95% CI, 2.71–6.49). There was no association between free valproate concentration and adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The valproate total and free concentration was discordant in the majority of patients (70%). Increased valproate free concentration was associated with hypoalbuminemia and total valproate concentration. Clinical decisions based on total valproate concentration may be incorrect for many ICU patients. Prospective, controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings and their clinical relevance.
Prospective Validation of Sedation Scale Scores That Identify Light Sedation: A Pilot Study
Background Intensive care unit (ICU) sedation guidelines recommend targeting a light sedation level, but light sedation has no accepted definition, and inconsistent levels have been proposed. Objective To determine Sedation-Agitation Scale and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale scores that best describe patients’ ability to follow voice commands. Methods This prospective, observational pilot study enrolled a convenience sample of ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Pairs of trained investigators evaluated scores on the Sedation-Agitation Scale and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and ability to follow commands before and up to 2 hours after sedation lightening in a blind, independent, simultaneous fashion. Positive predictive values (PPVs) and likelihood ratios (LRs) of Sedation-Agitation Scale and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale scores associated with light sedation (ability to follow at least 3 commands) were calculated. Results Ninety-six assessments (50 before and 46 after lightening of sedation) were performed in medical ICU patients. Scores best associated with ability to follow at least 3 commands were Sedation-Agitation Scale score of 4 (PPV, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70-0.98; LR, 14.0) and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score of −1 (PPV, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.61-0.93; LR, 10.7), superior to previously recommended thresholds of Sedation-Agitation Scale score of 3 (PPV, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.75; LR, 3.1) and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score of −3 (PPV, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.39-0.64; LR, 2.0). Conclusions The level of sedation most associated with the ability to follow commands appears higher than previously recommended. Further study is needed regarding the effects of sedation level on ICU patients’ ability to follow commands and assessment of delirium, pain, and patient preferences.
809: Free Fraction of Valproate Is Elevated in Critically Ill Patients
Study ObjectiveHigh‐dose intravenous vitamin C is a potential treatment option for patients with sepsis and may interfere with point‐of‐care (POC) blood glucose (BG) testing. This study aimed to determine if vitamin C dosing used for sepsis affected POC BG level results.DesignProspective observational pilot study.SettingIntensive care unit in a large academic tertiary care medical center.PatientsFive consecutive critically ill adults hospitalized between April 1 and June 1, 2017, who received two or more doses of intravenous vitamin C 1500 mg for the treatment of sepsis and had at least two paired POC BG levels and laboratory venous BG levels measured within 1 hour of each other during vitamin C therapy.Measurements and Main ResultsThe performance of POC BG level measurement was compared with the reference method of laboratory BG level measurement. The concordance to minimum accuracy criteria for BG meters set forth by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2013, the measurement of agreement between POC BG level and laboratory BG level using the Bland‐Altman method, and the clinical accuracy through Parkes error grid analysis were assessed. A total of 16 paired POC and laboratory BG level measurements from the five patients were included. The accuracy of POC BG with laboratory BG level measurements during vitamin C administration according to ISO 15197:2013 criteria was 81.3%, which did not meet the minimum accuracy criteria of 95%. The Bland‐Altman analysis showed a mean difference between POC and laboratory BG levels of 8.9 mg/dl, and the Parkes error grid analysis showed that the differences between POC and laboratory BG level measurements would not have resulted in a change in clinical action.ConclusionThe accuracy and agreement of POC and laboratory BG level measurements in critically ill patients receiving vitamin C were consistent with previously published reports in critically ill patients not receiving vitamin C and did not demonstrate clinically significant interference due to vitamin C dosing for sepsis.