Tachydysrhythmia treatment and adverse events in patients with wolff-Parkinson-white syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend avoiding atrioventricular-nodal blocking agents (AVNB) when treating tachydysrhythmias in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome (WPW) patients. STUDY OBJECTIVES: We investigated medications selected and resulting outcomes for patients with tachydysrhythmias and WPW. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we searched a hospital-wide database for the following inclusion criteria: WPW, tachycardia, and intravenous antidysrhythmics. The composite outcome of adverse events was acceleration of tachycardia, new hypotension, new malignant dysrhythmia, and cardioversion. The difference in binomial proportions of patients meeting the composite outcome after AVNB or non-AVNB (NAVNB) treatment was calculated after dividing the groups by QRS duration. A random-effects mixed linear analysis was performed to analyze the vital sign response. RESULTS: The initial database search yielded 1158 patient visits, with 60 meeting inclusion criteria. Patients' median age was 52.5 years; 53% were male, 43% presented in wide complex tachycardia (WCT), with 75% in atrial fibrillation (AF) or flutter. AVNBs were administered in 42 (70%) patient visits. For those patients with WCT in AF, the difference in proportions of patients meeting the composite outcome after AVNBs vs. NAVNBs treatment was an increase of 3% (95% confidence interval [CI] -39%-49%), and for those with narrow complex AF it was a decrease of 13% (95% CI -37%-81%). No instances of malignant dysrhythmia occurred. Mixed linear analysis showed no statistically significant effects on heart rate, though suggested a trend toward increasing heart rate after AVNB in wide complex AF. CONCLUSION: In this sample of WPW-associated tachydysrhythmia patients, many were treated with AVNBs. The composite outcome was similarly met after use of either AVNB or NAVNB, and no malignant dysrhythmias were observed.

Transbuccal fentanyl for rapid relief of orthopedic pain in the ED.

OBJECTIVES: This study's objectives were to assess administration of a rapidly dissolving transbuccal fentanyl tablet to patients in emergency department (ED) with orthopedic extremity pain. The main end point was time required to achieve a 2-point drop on a 0 to 10 pain scale. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, subjects received either transbuccal fentanyl, 100 µg, and a swallowed placebo, or a swallowed oxycodone/acetaminophen, 5/325-mg pill, and a nonanalgesic transbuccal comparator. Pain assessment occurred every 5 minutes for an hour, and vital signs were monitored for 2 hours. RESULTS: Transbuccal fentanyl was associated with faster pain relief onset (median, 10 vs 35 minutes; P < .0001). Secondary end points (pain relief magnitude, rescue medication rate, subject preference for medication on future visit) favored transbuccal fentanyl. No vital sign abnormalities or significant side effects occurred in the ED or on 100% next-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Transbuccal fentanyl shows promise for continued investigation as a means to safely provide rapid and effective pain relief for ED patients.