Safety of Intravenous Push Valproate Compared with Intravenous Piggyback at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Data are limited regarding the safety associated with administering valproate sodium by intravenous push (IVP) compared with intravenous piggyback (IVPB). The objective of this retrospective pre-post analysis was to compare the safety profile of valproate administration via IVPB from March to May 2022 and IVP from June to August 2022. METHODS: A total of 890 IVPB and 440 IVP administrations were included. The major endpoint of this analysis was the incidence of infusion site reactions (infiltration or phlebitis). RESULTS: The incidence of documented intravenous (IV) site reactions demonstrated minimal differences between both IVPB and IVP administration cohorts. Based on the Naranjo algorithm, all IVPB and IVP infusion site reactions were classified as possible or doubtful. Additional safety endpoints included bradycardia, hypotension, or sedation attributable to valproate sodium administration. Similar safety profiles were observed, including valproate-associated bradycardia, hypotension, and sedation events. All safety events were further classified as possible or doubtful by the Naranjo algorithm. Time from pharmacist verification to valproate administration was also collected. The mean time from pharmacist order verification to valproate administration was significantly faster in the IVP cohort compared to the IVPB cohort. CONCLUSION: IVP valproate administration may be considered safe, allowing for more optimal clinical and operational outcomes in the acute care setting.

Comparison of trauma-dosed tranexamic acid versus aminocaproic acid in cardiac surgery in the setting of drug shortage.

BACKGROUND: Antifibrinolytic agents, tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA), are often used during cardiac surgery to decrease the number of allogenic blood transfusions and to prevent perioperative bleeding. Weight-based TXA dosing regimens have been compared to fixed-dose regimens of EACA with variable outcomes in perioperative blood product transfusions and chest tube output. Serious adverse events, including seizures, have been reported with higher doses of TXA. Fixed-dose TXA regimens have been evaluated in trauma and orthopedic surgery but there is a paucity of evidence in the cardiac surgery population. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To compare the safety and efficacy of fixed-dose TXA versus EACA in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective chart review was conducted at a 793-bed tertiary care academic teaching hospital comparing cardiac surgery patients receiving either fixed-dose TXA 1000 mg followed by a 500-1000 mg infusion or EACA-7.5 g intravenous boluses followed by a 1-1.25 g/h infusion for the duration of the surgery. The major endpoint included chest tube output at 12 h, 24 h, and 7 days postoperatively. Minor endpoints included quantity and incidence of blood product transfusions and reported safety events. RESULTS: There were 1544 patients included. Chest tube output was similar between groups and the TXA group required more intraoperative blood product transfusions (22.7% vs. 18.2%, p = .03). There were no differences in the median quantity of total blood products administered postoperatively at 24 h or at 7 days. Reported safety events were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Both fixed-dose TXA and EACA may be considered safe and effective options for antifibrinolytic therapy in cardiac surgery patients.