Endobronchial Phenylephrine in Airway Bleeding During Bronchoscopy Does not Cause Hypertension: A Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding is a known complication during bronchoscopy, with increased incidence in patients undergoing a more invasive procedure. Phenylephrine is a potent vasoconstrictor that can control airway bleeding when applied topically and has been used as an alternative to epinephrine. The clinical effects of endobronchial phenylephrine on systemic vasoconstriction have not been clearly evaluated. Here, we compared the effects of endobronchial phenylephrine versus cold saline on systemic blood pressure. METHODS: In all, 160 patients who underwent bronchoscopy and received either endobronchial phenylephrine or cold saline from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2022 were included in this retrospective observational study. Intra-procedural blood pressure absolute and percent changes were measured and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were no observed statistical differences in blood pressure changes between groups. The median absolute change between the median and the maximum intra-procedural systolic blood pressure in the cold saline group was 29 mm Hg (IQR 19 to 41) compared with 31.8 mm Hg (IQR 18 to 45.5) in the phenylephrine group. The corresponding median percent changes in SBP were 33.6 % (IQR 18.8 to 39.4) and 28% (IQR 16.8 to 43.5) for the cold saline and phenylephrine groups, respectively. Similarly, there were no statistically significant differences in diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure changes between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences in median intra-procedural systemic blood pressure changes comparing patients who received endobronchial cold saline to those receiving phenylephrine. Overall, this argues for the vascular and systemic safety of phenylephrine for airway bleeding as a reasonable alternative to epinephrine.

Mortality, morbidity & clinical outcome with different types of vasopressors in out of hospital cardiac arrest patients- a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of various vasopressors in cardiac arrest patients in terms of clinical, morbidity, and mortality outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using online databases (MeSH terms: MEDLINE (Ovid), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from 1997 to 2023 for relevant English language studies. The primary outcomes of interest for this study included short-term survival leading to death, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, neurological outcomes, survival to hospital admission, myocardial infarction, and incidence of arrhythmias. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, 26 studies, including 16 RCTs and ten non-RCTs, were evaluated. The focus was on the efficacy of epinephrine, vasopressin, methylprednisolone, dopamine, and their combinations in medical emergencies. Epinephrine treatment was associated with better odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 1.52, 95%CI [1.20, 1.94]; p < 0.001) and achieving ROSC (OR = 3.60, 95% CI [3.45, 3.76], P < 0.00001)) over placebo but not in other outcomes of interest such as short-term survival/ death at 28-30 days, survival to hospital admission, or neurological function. In addition, our analysis indicates non-superiority of vasopressin or epinephrine vasopressin-plus-epinephrine therapy over epinephrine monotherapy except for survival to hospital admission where the combinatorial therapy was associated with better outcome (0.76, 95%CI [0.64, 0.92]; p = 0.004). Similarly, we noted the non-superiority of vasopressin-plus-methylprednisolone versus placebo. Finally, while higher odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 3.35, 95%CI [1.81, 6.2]; p < 0.001) and ROSC (OR = 2.87, 95%CI [1.97, 4.19]; p < 0.001) favoring placebo over VSE therapy were observed, the risk of lethal arrhythmia was not statistically significant. There was insufficient literature to assess the effects of dopamine versus other treatment modalities meta-analytically. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicated that only epinephrine yielded superior outcomes among vasopressors than placebo, albeit limited to survival to hospital discharge and ROSC. Additionally, we demonstrate the non-superiority of vasopressin over epinephrine, although vasopressin could not be compared to placebo due to the paucity of data. The addition of vasopressin to epinephrine treatment only improved survival to hospital admission.

Limb Necrosis in the Setting of Vasopressor Use.

BACKGROUND: It remains poorly understood why only some hemodynamically unstable patients who receive aggressive treatment with vasopressor medications develop limb necrosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of limb necrosis and the factors associated with it following high-dose vasopressor therapy. METHODS: A retrospective case-control medical records review was performed of patients aged 18 to 89 years who received vasopressor therapy between 2012 and 2021 in a single academic medical center. The study population was stratified by the development of limb necrosis following vasopressor use. Patients who experienced necrosis were compared with age- and sex-matched controls who did not experience necrosis. Demographic information, comorbidities, and medication details were recorded. RESULTS: The incidence of limb necrosis following vasopressor administration was 0.25%. Neither baseline demographics nor medical comorbidities differed significantly between groups. Necrosis was present in the same limb as the arterial catheter most often for femoral catheters. The vasopressor dose administered was significantly higher in the necrosis group than in the control group for ephedrine (P = .02) but not for the other agents. The duration of therapy was significantly longer in the necrosis group than in the control group for norepinephrine (P = .001), epinephrine (P = .04), and ephedrine (P = .01). The duration of vasopressin administration did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that medication-specific factors, rather than patient and disease characteristics, should guide clinical management of necrosis in the setting of vasopressor administration.

The effect of vasopressor agents on pressure injury development in intensive care patients.

BACKGROUND: Vasopressors are life-saving agents that increase mean arterial pressure. The pharmacodynamic features of these agents and previous studies suggest that vasopressors may be an essential risk factor in developing pressure injuries. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the effect of vasopressors in medical-surgical intensive care patients on pressure injury development. DESIGN AND SETTINGS: This retrospective and correlational study was conducted between March 2021- May 2022. The electronic patient data were obtained from 148 surgical and medical patients exposed to vasopressor agents in the intensive care unit. Data on patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated using descriptive statistical methods (number, percentage, mean, standard deviation). Logistic regression modelling was used to assess independent relationships with pressure injury risk; results are reported as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: All patients were given norepinephrine agents, and dopamine infusion secondary to norepinephrine was found in only 28.3 % of patients (n = 42). Pressure injury incidence was 43.2 % (n = 64). Duration of norepinephrine infusion was recognized as an independent risk factor for ICU-acquired pressure injury development (OR 1.22, 95 % CI 1.11-1.35), while a medical admission diagnosis (instead of surgical) was protective against pressure injury risk (OR 0.24, 95 % CI 0.10-0.59). CONCLUSION: This study indicated that duration of norepinephrine infusion is a significant risk factor for pressure injury development. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Although norepinephrine use cannot be avoided entirely, its administration may be an early warning for nurses to increase pressure injury prevention strategies. Skin evaluation should be performed more frequently, and preventive strategies should be implemented meticulously. This study was registered on clincialtrials.gov (Identifier: NCT06163352).

Efficacy and safety of terlipressin and albumin vs. noradrenaline and albumin in adult patients with hepatorenal syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of cirrhosis treated with various medications. We aim to evaluate terlipressin and albumin's effectiveness and safety compared to albumin and noradrenaline in adult hepatorenal disease patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical trials from four databases were included. Cochrane's approach for calculating bias risk was utilized. We rated the quality evaluation by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). We included the following outcomes: serum creatinine (mg/dl), urine output (ml/24 h), mean arterial pressure (mmHg), reversal rate of HRS, mortality rate, blood plasma renin activity (ng/ml/h), plasma aldosterone concentration (pg/ml), urine sodium (mEq/l), and creatinine clearance (ml/min). RESULTS: Our analysis of nine clinical studies revealed that the noradrenaline group was associated with higher creatinine clearance (MD = 4.22 [0.40, 8.05]), (P = 0.03). There were no significant differences in serum creatinine levels (MD = 0.03 [-0.07, 0.13]), urinary sodium (MD = -1.02 [-5.15, 3.11]), urine output (MD = 32.75 [-93.94, 159.44]), mean arterial pressure (MD = 1.40 [-1.17, 3.96]), plasma renin activity (MD = 1.35 [-0.17, 2.87]), plasma aldosterone concentration (MD = 55.35 [-24.59, 135.29]), reversal rate of HRS (RR = 1.15 [0.96, 1.37]), or mortality rate (RR = 0.87 [0.74, 1.01]) between the two groups (p-values > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Noradrenaline is a safe alternative medical therapy for HRS.

Real-world comparison of terlipressin vs. octreotide as an adjuvant treatment in the management of variceal bleeding.

Variceal bleeding is a major complication and the leading cause of death in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of terlipressin vs octreotide as an adjuvant to endoscopic management of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding in a real-time scenario. We reviewed the medical records of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding from January 2005 to December 2020 at our tertiary care Aga Khan University Hospital. Mortality was assessed after 6 weeks. A total of 842 patients with variceal bleed were evaluated. 624 patients (74.1%) and 218 patients (25.9%) received Terlipressin and Octreotide respectively. On multiple regression analysis, cardiac events during hospital stay (OR: 11.22), presence of Porto-systemic encephalopathy (OR: 3.79), and elevated bilirubin levels at the time of presentation were found to be independent risk factors for increased six weeks mortality. Moreover, cardiac events during hospital stay (OR: 3.26), Porto-systemic encephalopathy at presentation (OR: 3.06), and octreotide administration (OR: 1.80) were identified as independent risk factors for increased length of hospital stay. Terlipressin and Octreotide have similar outcomes in terms of control of bleeding, hospital stay, mortality, and side effects when used as adjuvant therapy for the management of variceal bleeding.

Co-activation of Mas and pGCA receptors suppresses Endothelin-1-induced endothelial dysfunction via nitric oxide/cGMP system.

BACKGROUND: The aortic endothelium is crucial in preserving vascular tone through endothelium-derived vasodilators and vasoconstrictors. Dysfunction in the endothelium is an early indicator of cardiovascular diseases. Our study explores the therapeutic potential of a dual-acting peptide (DAP) to co-activate Mas and pGCA receptors and restore the balance between vasodilators and vasoconstrictors on endothelial dysfunction in DOCA-salt-induced hypertensive rats. METHODS: DOCA-salt was administered to male wistar rats to induce hypertension, and various parameters, including blood pressure (BP), water intake and body weight were monitored. DAP, Ang1-7, BNP, and losartan were administered to hypertensive rats for three weeks. Histological analysis and isometric tension studies were carried out to assess endothelial function. In addition to this, we used primary aortic endothelial cells for detailed mechanistic investigations. RESULTS: DOCA-salt administration significantly elevated systolic, diastolic, mean arterial BP, and water intake whereas, downregulated the gene expression of Mas and pGCA receptors. However, DAP co-administration attenuated BP increase, upregulated the gene expression of Mas and pGCA receptors, normalized serum and urinary parameters, and effectively reduced fibrosis, inflammation, and vascular calcification. Notably, DAP outperformed the standard drug, Losartan. Our findings indicate that DAP restores aortic function by balancing the NO and ET1-induced pathways. CONCLUSION: Co-activating Mas and pGCA receptors with DAP mitigates vascular damage and enhances endothelial function, emphasizing its potential to maintain a delicate balance between vasodilatory NO and vasoconstrictor ET1 in endothelial dysfunction.

Terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The definition and diagnostic criteria of hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) has undergone recent changes. A major vasoconstrictor, terlipressin, has recently been approved as pharmacotherapy for HRS-AKI in the United States. The purpose of this review is to familiarize the readers with these new diagnostic criteria of HRS-AKI, and how best to use terlipressin. RECENT FINDINGS: Terlipressin is effective either as bolus dosing or continuous infusion and can achieve reversal of HRS-AKI in approximately 40% of patients. Continuous infusion allows lower daily dose with equal efficacy and less side effects but not an approved mode of administration in the United States. Response to terlipressin in the randomized controlled trials was defined as repeat reduction of serum creatinine to less than 1.5 mg/dl. Newer studies will likely require response to treatment to be defined as a repeat serum creatinine to be less than 0.3 mg/dl from baseline. Terlipressin use is associated with ischemic side effects and potential for respiratory failure development. SUMMARY: Careful patient selection and close monitoring are necessary for its use. Response to terlipressin with HRS-AKI reversal is associated with improved outcomes with better survival and less requirement for renal replacement therapy.

Administration of methylene blue in septic shock: pros and cons.

Septic shock typically requires the administration of vasopressors. Adrenergic agents remain the first choice, namely norepinephrine. However, their use to counteract life-threatening hypotension comes with potential adverse effects, so that non-adrenergic vasopressors may also be considered. The use of agents that act through different mechanisms may also provide an advantage. Nitric oxide (NO) is the main driver of the vasodilation that leads to hypotension in septic shock, so several agents have been tested to counteract its effects. The use of non-selective NO synthase inhibitors has been of questionable benefit. Methylene blue, an inhibitor of soluble guanylate cyclase, an important enzyme involved in the NO signaling pathway in the vascular smooth muscle cell, has also been proposed. However, more than 25 years since the first clinical evaluation of MB administration in septic shock, the safety and benefits of its use are still not fully established, and it should not be used routinely in clinical practice until further evidence of its efficacy is available.

Adverse Events of Peripherally Administered Norepinephrine During Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative treatment of hypotension by intravenous administration of norepinephrine in a peripheral vein can lead to adverse events, for example, tissue necrosis. However, the incidence and severity of adverse events during perioperative administration are unknown. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study conducted at 3 Swedish hospitals from 2019 to 2022. A total of 1004 patients undergoing surgery, who met the criteria for perioperative peripheral norepinephrine administration, were included. The infusion site was inspected regularly. If swelling or paleness of skin was detected, the infusion site was changed to a different peripheral line. Systolic blood pressure and pulse frequency were monitored during the infusion time and defined as adverse events at >220 mm Hg and <40 beats•min -1 . In case of adverse events, patients were observed for up to 48 hours. The primary outcome was prevalence of extravasation, defined as swelling around the infusion site. Secondary outcomes were all types of adverse events and associations between predefined clinical variables and risk of adverse events. RESULTS: We observed 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4%-3.2%) extravasation of infusion and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.7%) bradycardia. No cases of tissue necrosis or severe hypertension were detected. All adverse events had dissipated spontaneously within 48 hours. Proximal catheter placement was associated with more adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Extravasation of peripherally administrated norepinephrine in the perioperative period occurred at similar rates as in previous studies in critically ill patients. In our setting, where we regularly inspected the infusion site and shifted site in case of swelling or paleness of skin, we observed no case of severe adverse events. Given that severe adverse events were absent, the potential benefit of this preventive approach requires confirmation in a larger population.