Safety and Efficacy of Reduced-Dose Versus Full-Dose Alteplase for Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Multicenter Observational Comparative Effectiveness Study.

OBJECTIVES: Systemic thrombolysis improves outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) but is associated with the risk of hemorrhage. The data on efficacy and safety of reduced-dose alteplase are limited. The study objective was to compare the characteristics, outcomes, and complications of patients with PE treated with full- or reduced-dose alteplase regimens. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital and 15 community and academic centers of a large healthcare system. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with PE treated with systemic alteplase. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pre- and post-alteplase hemodynamic and respiratory variables, patient outcomes, and complications were compared. Propensity score (PS) weighting was used to adjust for imbalances of baseline characteristics between reduced- and full-dose patients. Separate analyses were performed using the unweighted and weighted cohorts. Ninety-eight patients were treated with full-dose (100 mg) and 186 with reduced-dose (50 mg) regimens. Following alteplase, significant improvements in shock index, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and supplemental oxygen requirements were observed in both groups. Hemorrhagic complications were lower with the reduced-dose compared with the full-dose regimen (13% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.014), and most were minor. Major extracranial hemorrhage occurred in 1.1% versus 6.1%, respectively ( p = 0.022). Complications were associated with supratherapeutic levels of heparin anticoagulation in 37.5% of cases and invasive procedures in 31.3% of cases. The differences in complications persisted after PS weighting (15.4% vs. 24.7%, p = 0.12 and 1.3% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.067), but did not reach statistical significance. There were no significant differences in mortality, discharge destination, ICU or hospital length of stay, or readmission after PS weighting. CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective, PS-weighted observational study, when compared with the full-dose, reduced-dose alteplase results in similar outcomes but fewer hemorrhagic complications. Avoidance of excessive levels of anticoagulation or invasive procedures should be considered to further reduce complications.

Empirical antimicrobial prescribing for pyelonephritis in patients discharged from 15 US Emergency Departments: an opportunity for improvement.

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are commonly treated in the emergency department (ED), and unfortunately, resistance to first-line agents is increasing. OBJECTIVES: To characterize treatment of pyelonephritis in a nationally representative sample of ED patients and to identify patient- and treatment-specific factors associated with receiving initial inactive antibiotics. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, observational cohort study utilizing the Emergency Medicine PHARMacotherapy Research NETwork (EMPHARM-NET), comprising 15 geographically diverse US EDs. All patients ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of pyelonephritis between 2018 and 2020 were included. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received initial inactive empirical antibiotic therapy and to identify predictive factors of inactive antibiotic therapy. RESULTS: Of the 3714 patients evaluated, 223 had culture-positive pyelonephritis. Median patient age was 50.1 years and patients were mostly female (78.3%). Overall, 40.4% of patients received an IV antibiotic, most commonly ceftriaxone (86.7%). The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were cefalexin (31.8%), ciprofloxacin (14.3%), cefdinir (13.5%) and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (12.6%). Overall, 10.3% of patients received initial inactive therapy. After adjustment in a multivariable analysis, long-acting IV antibiotic was predictive of inactive therapy (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: In our prospective, multicentre observational study, we found that only 40.4% of patients with pyelonephritis received empirical IV antibiotics in the ED, contributing to inactive therapy. Receipt of long-acting IV antibiotics was independently associated with a decreased rate of initial inactive therapy. This reinforces guideline recommendations to administer long-acting IV antibiotics empirically in the ED upon suspicion of pyelonephritis.

Impact of Continuous Infusion Ketamine Compared to Continuous Infusion Benzodiazepines on Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate rates of delirium or coma-free days between continuous infusion sedative-dose ketamine and continuous infusion benzodiazepines in critically ill patients. Materials and Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort adult patients were screened for inclusion if they received continuous infusions of either sedative-dose ketamine or benzodiazepines (lorazepam or midazolam) for at least 24 h, were mechanically ventilated for at least 48 h and admitted to the intensive care unit of a large quaternary academic center between 5/5/2018 and 12/1/2021. Results: A total of 165 patients were included with 64 patients in the ketamine group and 101 patients in the benzodiazepine group (lorazepam n = 35, midazolam n = 78). The primary outcome of median (IQR) delirium or coma-free days within the first 28 days of hospitalization was 1.2 (0.0, 3.7) for ketamine and 1.8 (0.7, 4.6) for benzodiazepines (p = 0.13). Patients in the ketamine arm spent a significantly lower proportion of time with RASS -3 to +4, received significantly higher doses and longer durations of propofol and fentanyl infusions, and had a significantly longer intensive care unit length of stay. Conclusions: The use of sedative-dose ketamine had no difference in delirium or coma-free days compared to benzodiazepines.

Risk of arrhythmia in post-resuscitative shock after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with epinephrine versus norepinephrine.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of clinically significant tachyarrhythmias and mortality in the management of post-resuscitative shock after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who receive a continuous epinephrine versus norepinephrine infusion. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A large multi-site health system with hospitals across the United States. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted for OHCA with post-resuscitative shock managed with either epinephrine or norepinephrine infusions within 6 h of ROSC. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Between May 5th, 2018, to January 31st, 2022, there were 221 patients admitted for OHCA who received post-resuscitative epinephrine or norepinephrine infusions. There was no difference in the rate of tachyarrhythmias between epinephrine and norepinephrine infusion in univariate (47.1% vs 41.7%, OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.71-2.20) or multivariable analysis (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.68-2.62). Patients treated with epinephrine were more likely to die during hospitalization than those treated with norepinephrine (90.0% vs 54.3%, OR 6.21, 95% CI 2.37-16.25, p < 0.001). Epinephrine treated patients were more likely to have re-arrest during hospital admission (55.7% vs 14.6%, OR 5.77, 95% CI 2.74-12.18, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in clinically significant cardiac tachyarrhythmias in post-OHCA patients treated with epinephrine versus norepinephrine infusions after ROSC. Re-arrest rates and in-hospital mortality were higher in patients who received epinephrine infusions in the first 6 h post-ROSC. Results of this study add to the literature suggesting norepinephrine may be the vasopressor of choice in post-OHCA patients with post-resuscitative shock after ROSC.

Norepinephrine versus epinephrine for hemodynamic support in post-cardiac arrest shock: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: The preferred vasopressor in post-cardiac arrest shock has not been established with robust clinical outcomes data. Our goal was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing rates of in-hospital mortality, refractory shock, and hemodynamic parameters in post-cardiac arrest patients who received either norepinephrine or epinephrine as primary vasopressor support. METHODS: We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from 2000 to 2022. Included studies were prospective, retrospective, or published abstracts comparing norepinephrine and epinephrine in adults with post-cardiac arrest shock or with cardiogenic shock and extractable post-cardiac arrest data. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. Other outcomes included incidence of arrhythmias or refractory shock. RESULTS: The database search returned 2646 studies. Two studies involving 853 participants were included in the systematic review. The proposed meta-analysis was deferred due to low yield. Crude incidence of in-hospital mortality was numerically higher in the epinephrine group compared with norepinephrine in both studies, but only statistically significant in one. Risk of bias was moderate to severe for in-hospital mortality. Additional outcomes were reported differently between studies, minimizing direct comparison. CONCLUSION: The vasopressor with the best mortality and hemodynamic outcomes in post-cardiac arrest shock remains unclear. Randomized studies are crucial to remedy this.

EDucated: The emergency medicine pharmacotherapy literature of 2023.

The purpose of this article is to summarize pharmacotherapy related emergency medicine (EM) literature indexed in 2023. Articles were selected utilizing a modified Delphi approach. The table of contents from pre-determined journals were reviewed and independently evaluated via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system by paired authors. Pharmacotherapy-related publications deemed to be GRADE 1A and 1B were reviewed by the collective group for inclusion in the review. In all, this article summarizes and provides commentary on the potential clinical impact of 13 articles, 6 guidelines, and 5 meta-analyses covering topics including guideline releases and updates on rapid sequence intubation in the critically ill, managing cardiac arrest or life-threatening toxicity due to poisoning, and management of major bleeding following trauma. Also discussed are ongoing controversies surrounding fluid resuscitation, time and treatment modalities for ischemic stroke, steroid use in community-acquired pneumonia, targeted blood product administration, and much more.

Implementation of Tenecteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Acute ischemic stroke is a neurologic emergency, requiring rapid recognition and treatment with intravenous thrombolysis. Since the publication of the 2019 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Guidelines that recommend tenecteplase as an alternative agent, several centers across the United States are transitioning from alteplase to tenecteplase as the agent of choice for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: Our health system transitioned to tenecteplase for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in 2021 due to increasing evidence for efficacy and potential for improved door-to-needle time. Herein we describe our experience and provide guidance for other institutions to implement this change. CONCLUSION: Emergency nurses are vital to the care of acute ischemic stroke patients. There are several pharmacologic and logistical differences between alteplase and tenecteplase for this indication. This paper outlines these key differences.

Pharmacotherapy optimization for rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department.

PURPOSE: Rapid-sequence intubation (RSI) is the process of administering a sedative and neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) in rapid succession to facilitate endotracheal intubation. It is the most common and preferred method for intubation of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). The selection and use of medications to facilitate RSI is critical for success. The purpose of this review is to describe pharmacotherapies used during the RSI process, discuss current clinical controversies in RSI medication selection, and review pharmacotherapy considerations for alternative intubation methods. SUMMARY: There are several steps to the intubation process requiring medication considerations, including pretreatment, induction, paralysis, and post-intubation sedation and analgesia. Pretreatment medications include atropine, lidocaine, and fentanyl; but use of these agents in clinical practice has fallen out of favor as there is limited evidence for their use outside of select clinical scenarios. There are several options for induction agents, though etomidate and ketamine are the most used due to their more favorable hemodynamic profiles. Currently there is retrospective evidence that etomidate may produce less hypotension than ketamine in patients presenting with shock or sepsis. Succinylcholine and rocuronium are the preferred neuromuscular blocking agents, and the literature suggests minimal differences between succinylcholine and high dose rocuronium in first-pass success rates. Selection between the two is based on patient specific factors, half-life and adverse effect profiles. Finally, medication-assisted preoxygenation and awake intubation are less common methods for intubation in the ED but require different considerations for medication use. AREAS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH: The optimal selection, dosing, and administration of RSI medications is complicated, and further research is needed in several areas. Additional prospective studies are needed to determine optimal induction agent selection and dosing in patients presenting with shock or sepsis. Controversy exists over optimal medication administration order (paralytic first vs induction first) and medication dosing in obese patients, but there is insufficient evidence to significantly alter current practices regarding medication dosing and administration. Further research examining awareness with paralysis during RSI is needed before definitive and widespread practice changes to medication use during RSI can be made.

Safety of peripheral 3% hypertonic saline bolus administration for neurologic emergency.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Hypertonic sodium chloride (HTS) is used for emergent treatment of acute cerebral edema and other neurologic emergencies. Central access is not commonly available in emergent situations and 3% HTS is utilized peripherally. Many studies have shown the safety of its administration at rates up to 75 mL/h, but there is a lack of data to establish the safety of peripherally administered, rapid bolus dosing in emergent situations. The objective of this study is to describe the safety of rapid, peripherally administered (≥ 250 mL/h) 3% HTS for neurologic emergencies. METHODS: This is a retrospective, cohort study including adult patients receiving 3% HTS via a peripheral IV site for elevated intracranial pressure, cerebral edema, or other neurological emergencies at a rate of at least 250 m/h between May 5, 2018 - September 30, 2021. Patients were excluded if they simultaneously received another hypertonic saline fluid. Baseline characteristics collected included HTS dose, rate and site of administration, indication for use and patient demographics. The primary safety outcome was incidence of extravasation and phlebitis within one hour of HTS administration. RESULTS: There were 206 patients receiving 3% HTS who were screened, and 37 patients met inclusion criteria. The most common reason for exclusion was administration at a rate < 250 m/h. The median age was 60 (IQR 45, 72) with 51.4% being male. The most common indications for HTS were traumatic brain injury (45.9%) and intracranial hemorrhage (37.8%). The most common administration location was the emergency department (78.4%). The median IV-gauge (n = 29) was 18 (IQR 18, 20), with the most common placement site being antecubital (48.6%). The median dose of HTS was 250 mL (IQR 250, 350), with a median administration rate of 760 mL/h (IQR 500, 999). There were no episodes of extravasation or phlebitis noted. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid, peripheral administration of 3% HTS boluses is a safe alternative for treatment of neurologic emergencies. Administration at rates up to 999 mL/h did not result in extravasation or phlebitis.

The incidence of cardiovascular instability in patients receiving various vasopressor strategies for peri-intubation hypotension.

INTRODUCTION: Patients frequently experience hypotension in the peri-intubation period. This can be due to the underlying disease process, physiologic response to the intervention, or adverse effect from medications. With the heterogeneity in cause for hypotension, the duration can also be short or prolonged. Initiation of vasopressors for peri-intubation hypotension includes various strategies using continuous infusion norepinephrine (NE) or push-dose phenylephrine (PDPE) to obtain goal mean arterial pressure. There is a paucity of data describing cardiovascular stability outcomes in patients receiving vasopressors for peri-intubation hypotension. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study including emergency department patients across three academic medical centers and smaller health system sites who received vasopressors for hypotension within 30 min of intubation. Patients were matched based on factors likely to influence vasopressor selection and were divided into groups if they received PDPE alone, continuous infusion NE alone, or PDPE followed by continuous infusion NE. The primary outcome was a composite of the incidence of hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg), bradycardia (HR < 60 beats per minute), and cardiac arrest within 2 h following initiation of vasopressors. RESULTS: Screening occurred for 2518 patients, with 105 patients undergoing matching. Mean time to vasopressor initiation was 10 min following intubation. The composite primary outcome was not statistically different between groups and occurred 88.6%, 80.0%, and 88.6% in the NE, PDPE, and PDPE+NE groups, respectively. A subgroup analysis of patients with an ED diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock were more likely to receive PDPE before starting continuous infusion NE (41.3% vs. 27.1%, p = 0.075) and more frequently experienced the primary composite outcome (p = 0.045) but was not correlated with vasopressor strategy (p = 0.55). DISCUSSION: Cardiovascular instability following vasopressor initiation for peri-intubation hypotension was no different depending on the selected vasopressor strategy. This held true in patients with a sepsis or septic shock diagnosis. Selection of vasopressors should continue to include patient specific factors and product availability.

Real world utilization of Andexanet alfa in the management of oral factor Xa inhibitor-associated gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Andexanet alfa (AA) is approved for reversal of factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI) bleeds; however, there are limited reports of its use for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in real-world populations. The objective of this study was to report real-world utilization and evaluation of the effectiveness of AA for FXaI-associated GIB. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients receiving AA for FXaI-associated GIB (7/2018-2/2021). Demographics, blood product administration, hemostatic efficacy, rebleeding, thrombosis, and mortality rates were collected. Hemostatic efficacy (HE), based on corrected hemoglobin at 12 h compared to baseline, was categorized as excellent (<10% decrease), good (≤ 20% decrease), or poor (>20% decrease, > 2 units of additional coagulation intervention or death prior to repeat hemoglobin). Comparative transfusion requirements between efficacy groups was assessed by Wilcoxon-Rank test. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included (64% male, median (IQR) age 76 years (67, 80). Most patients (59%, n = 13) were on apixaban, and the primary anticoagulation indication was atrial fibrillation (64%, n = 14). Median initial hemoglobin was 7.5 g/dL (IQR 6.4, 8.8) and 50% (n = 11) were upper GIB. Hemostatic efficacy was excellent in 46% (n = 10), good in 23% (n = 5), and poor in 32% (n = 7). There was no statistically significant difference in red blood cells (RBCs) received between those with excellent/good hemostasis (median 2, IQR 1 to 2) and those with poor hemostasis (median 4, IQR 1.5 to 4.5). Two patients (9%) had arterial thrombotic events within 30 days of reversal. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter, single arm, real-world observational analysis of patients with factor Xa inhibitor associated GIB most patients achieved good hemostasis following administration of AA. There was a 9% 30-day thrombotic event rate. The lack of a control group limits the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn from this study.

Safety and effectiveness of benzodiazepines and antipsychotics for agitation in older adults in the emergency department.

PURPOSE: To examine the safety and effectiveness of benzodiazepines (BZD) as compared to antipsychotics for the management of acute agitation in older adults in the emergency department (ED). BASIC PROCEDURES: Retrospective observational cohort study of 21 EDs across four states in the US, including adults ≥60 years old who received either BZD or antipsychotics for acute agitation in the ED and subsequently were admitted to the hospital. Safety was measured as presence of adverse events: respiratory depression, cardiovascular effects, extrapyramidal side effects, or a fall during hospitalization. Effectiveness was measured as indicators of treatment failure: need for additional medication, one-to-one observation, or physical restraints following initial medication administration. Proportions and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess the association between potential risk factors and for efficacy and safety endpoints. MAIN FINDINGS: A total of 684 patients were included (63.9% received a BZD and 36.1% an antipsychotic). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between groups (20.6% vs 14.6%, difference 6.0%, 95% CI -0.2% to 11.8%), but there was a higher intubation rate in the BZD group (2.7% vs 0.4%, difference 2.3%). There were more treatment failures in the antipsychotic group for the composite primary efficacy endpoint (94.3% vs 87.6%, difference 6.7%, 95% CI 2.5% to 10.9%). This appears to have been driven by the need for 1:1 observation; sensitivity analysis excluding 1:1 observation in the composite outcome demonstrated no significant difference with a failure rate of 38.5% in the antipsychotic group and 35.2% in the benzodiazepine group. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Overall there are high rates of treatment failure among agitated older adults receiving pharmacological treatment for agitation in the emergency department. The optimal selection of pharmacological treatment for agitation in older adults should be made considering patient-specific factors that could increase the risk of adverse effects or treatment failure.

UpdatED: The emergency medicine pharmacotherapy literature of 2022.

The purpose of this article is to summarize pharmacotherapy related emergency medicine (EM) literature indexed in 2022. Articles were selected utilizing a modified Delphi approach. The table of contents from pre-determined journals were reviewed and independently evaluated via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system by paired authors, with disagreements adjudicated by a third author. Pharmacotherapy-related publications deemed to be GRADE 1A and 1B were reviewed by the group for inclusion in the review. In all, this article summarizes and provides commentary on the potential clinical impact of 13 articles, 4 guidelines, and 3 meta-analyses covering topics including anticoagulant reversal, tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke, guideline updates for heart failure and aortic aneurysm, magnesium in atrial fibrillation, sedation in mechanically ventilated patients and pain management strategies in the Emergency Department (ED), and tranexamic acid use in epistaxis and GI bleed.

Characteristics of Opioid Prescribing in Non-surgical Medicine Patients with Acute Pain at Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic and new Joint Commission standards around opioid stewardship have made the appropriate prescribing of opioids a priority. A knowledge gap exists pertaining to the short-term prescription of opioids at hospital discharge for acute pain in non-surgical patients. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the quantity, type, and indication of opioids prescribed for non-surgical patients on hospital discharge and subsequent patient utilization. DESIGN: This multicenter, single-health system retrospective cohort study was conducted for quality improvement purposes from December 2019 to May 2020 with patient follow-up 15 to 29 days after hospital discharge. PARTICIPANTS: Patients discharged from a medicine service with new opioid prescriptions, defined as no opioid prescription documented within the past 90 days, were identified as eligible through the electronic health record. Surveys were attempted until a total of 200 were completed, with 374 surveys attempted and a 53% response rate. INTERVENTION: Patients were contacted via phone and surveyed post-discharge. Surveys consisted of 28 questions and assessed opioid consumption, duration of use, refills, patient satisfaction, and opioid disposal. MAIN MEASURES: Prescribing indications and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) quantities were collected for patients at discharge. Subsequently, the quantity of prescribed opioids utilized, remaining, and disposed of post-discharge were collected via patient self-reported survey responses. KEY RESULTS: Indications for opioid prescribing for 200 surveyed patients were grouped into eight broad prescribing categories. A median of 112.5 total MME was prescribed to patients at hospital discharge. Median MME consumed for surveyed patients was 45. The median total MME remaining at time of survey was 35 MME. Only 5.9% of patients who had leftover opioids reported disposal of the medication. CONCLUSIONS: Given the observed variation in opioid prescribing and utilization data, standardized indication-based opioid prescribing guidance in the non-surgical medical population would help curb the amount of opioids that remain unused post-discharge.

The Emergency Medicine Pharmacotherapy Literature of 2021.

This article highlights the most relevant emergency medicine (EM) pharmacotherapy publications indexed in 2021. A modified Delphi approach was utilized for selected journals to identify the most impactful EM pharmacotherapy studies via the GRADE system. After review of journal table of contents GRADE 1A and 1B articles were reviewed by authors. Twenty articles, 2 guidelines, 2 position papers, and 2 meta-analysis were selected for full summary. Articles included in this review highlight acute agitation management, acute appendicitis treatment, sexually transmitted infection updates, optimizing sepsis management and treatment, updates for the ideal thrombolytic agent in acute ischemic stroke and endovascular therapy candidates, indications for tranexamic acid, calicium for out of hospital cardiac arrest, optimial inotrope for cardiogenic shock, awareness during rapid sequence intubation paralysis, comparison of propofol or dexmedetomidine for sedation, treatment of cannabis hyperemsis syndrome, and prophylactic use of diphenhydramine to reduce neuroleptic side effects. Selected articles are summarized to include design, results, limitations, conclusions and impact.

Comparison of Intravenous Antihypertensives on Blood Pressure Control in Acute Neurovascular Emergencies: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Acute blood pressure (BP) management in neurologic patients is paramount. Different neurologic emergencies dictate various BP goals. There remains a lack of literature determining the optimal BP regimen regarding safety and efficacy. The objective of this study was to identify which intravenous antihypertensive is the most effective and safest for acute BP management in neurologic emergencies. METHODS: Ovid EBM (Evidence Based Medicine) Reviews, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception to August 2020. Randomized controlled trials or comparative observational studies that evaluated clevidipine, nicardipine, labetalol, esmolol, or nitroprusside for acute neurologic emergencies were included. Outcomes of interest included mortality, functional outcome, BP variability, time to goal BP, time within goal BP, incidence of hypotension, and need for rescue antihypertensives. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to evaluate the degree of certainty in the evidence available. RESULTS: A total of 3878 titles and abstracts were screened, and 183 articles were selected for full-text review. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria; however, the significant heterogeneity and very low quality of studies precluded a meta-analysis. All studies included nicardipine. Five studies compared nicardipine with labetalol, three studies compared nicardipine with clevidipine, and two studies compared nicardipine with nitroprusside. Compared with labetalol, nicardipine appears to reach goal BP faster, have less BP variability, and need less rescue antihypertensives. Compared with clevidipine, nicardipine appears to reach goal BP goal slower. Lastly, nicardipine appears to be similar for BP-related outcomes when compared with nitroprusside; however, nitroprusside may be associated with increased mortality. The confidence in the evidence available for all the outcomes was deemed very low. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the very low quality of evidence, an optimal BP agent for the treatment of patients with neurologic emergencies was unable to be determined. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the most promising agents.

Staying InformED: Top emergency Medicine pharmacotherapy articles of 2020.

The year 2020 was not easy for Emergency Medicine (EM) clinicians with the burden of tackling a pandemic. A large focus, rightfully so, was placed on the evolving diagnosis and management of patients with COVID-19 and, as such, the ability of clinicians to remain up to date on key EM pharmacotherapy literature may have been compromised. This article reviews the most important EM pharmacotherapy publications indexed in 2020. A modified Delphi approach was utilized for selected journals to identify the most impactful EM pharmacotherapy studies. A total of fifteen articles, eleven trials and four meta-analyses, were identified. This review provides a summary of each study, along with a commentary on the impact to the EM literature and EM clinician.

Thromboelastography is a Marker for Clinically Significant Progressive Hemorrhagic Injury in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Coagulopathy in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is associated with increased risk of poor outcomes, but accurate prediction of clinically significant progressive hemorrhagic injury (PHI) in patients with severe TBI remains a challenge. Thromboelastography (TEG) is a real-time test of whole blood coagulation that provides dynamic information about global hemostasis. This study aimed to identify differences in TEG values between patients with severe TBI who did or did not experience clinically significant PHI. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adult patients with severe TBI. Patients were eligible for inclusion if initial Glasgow coma scale (GCS) was ≤ 8 and baseline head computed tomography (CT) imaging and TEG were available. Exclusion criteria included receipt of hemostatic agents prior to TEG. PHI was defined as bleeding expansion on CT within 24 h associated with 2-point drop in GCS, neurosurgical intervention, or mortality within 24 h. The primary endpoint was TEG value differences between patients with and without PHI. Secondary endpoints included differences in conventional coagulation tests (CCTs) between groups. RESULTS: Of the 526 patients evaluated, 141 met inclusion criteria. The most common reason for exclusion was lack of baseline TEG and receipt of reversal product prior to TEG. Sixty-four patients experienced PHI in the first 24 h after presentation. K time (2.03 min vs. 1.33 min, P = 0.035) and alpha angle (65° vs. 69°, P = 0.015) were found to be significantly different in patients experiencing PHI. R time (5.25 min vs. 4.71 min), maximum amplitude (61 mm vs. 63 mm), and clot lysis at 30 min after maximum clot strength (3.5% vs. 1.7%) were not significantly different between groups. Of the CCTs, only activated partial thromboplastin time (30.3 s vs. 27.6 s, P = 0.014) was found to be different in patients with PHI. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged K time and narrower alpha angle were found to be associated with developing clinically significant PHI in patients with severe TBI. Despite differences detected in alpha angle, median values in both groups were within normal reference ranges. These abnormalities may reflect pathologic hypoactivity of fibrinogen, and further study is warranted to evaluate TEG-guided cryoprecipitate administration in this patient population.

Amantadine and Modafinil as Neurostimulants Following Acute Stroke: A Retrospective Study of Intensive Care Unit Patients.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Neurostimulants may improve or accelerate cognitive and functional recovery after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), ischemic stroke (IS), or subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), but few studies have described their safety and effectiveness in the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of this study was to describe amantadine and modafinil administration practices during acute stroke care starting in the ICU and to evaluate safety and effectiveness. METHODS: Consecutive adult ICU patients treated with amantadine and/or modafinil following acute non-traumatic IS, ICH, or SAH were evaluated. Neurostimulant administration data were extracted from the electronic medication administration record, including medication (amantadine, modafinil, or both), starting dose, time from stroke to initiation, and whether the neurostimulant was continued at hospital discharge. Patients were considered responders if they met two of three criteria within 9 days of neurostimulant initiation: increase in Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score ≥ 3 points from pre-treatment baseline, improved wakefulness or participation documented in caregiver notes, or clinical improvement documented in physical or occupational therapy notes. Potential confounders of the effectiveness assessment and adverse drug effects were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 87 patients were evaluable during the 3.7-year study period, including 41 (47%) with ICH, 29 (33%) with IS, and 17 (20%) with SAH. The initial neurostimulant administered was amantadine in 71 (82%) patients, modafinil in 13 (15%), or both in 3 (3%) patients. Neurostimulants were initiated a median of 7 (4.25, 12.75) days post-stroke (range 1-27 days) for somnolence (77%), not following commands (32%), lack of eye opening (28%), or low GCS (17%). The most common starting dose was 100 mg twice daily for both amantadine (86%) and modafinil (54%). Of the 79 patients included in the effectiveness evaluation, 42 (53%) were considered responders, including 34/62 (55%) receiving amantadine monotherapy and 8/24 (33%) receiving both amantadine and modafinil at the time they met the definition of a responder. No patient receiving modafinil monotherapy was considered a responder. The median time from initiation to response was 3 (2, 5) days. Responders were more frequently discharged home or to acute rehabilitation compared to non-responders (90% vs 62%, p = 0.006). Among survivors, 63/72 (88%) were prescribed a neurostimulant at hospital discharge. The most common potential adverse drug effect was sleep disruption (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Neurostimulant administration during acute stroke care may improve wakefulness. Future controlled studies with a neurostimulant administration protocol, prospective evaluation, and discretely defined response and safety criteria are needed to confirm these encouraging findings.

Stress-Related Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Stress-related mucosal bleeding (SRMB) occurs in approximately 2-4% of critically ill patients. Patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) have a (diffuse) space-occupying lesion, are critically ill, often require mechanical ventilation, and frequently receive anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy after aneurysm embolization, all of which may be risk factors for SRMB. However, no studies have evaluated SRMB in patients with aSAH. Aims of the study were to determine the incidence of SRMB in aSAH patients, evaluate the effect of acid suppression on SRMB, and identify specific risk factors for SRMB. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study conducted across 17 centers. Each center reviewed up to 50 of the most recent cases of aSAH. Patients with length of stay (LOS) < 48 h or active GI bleeding on admission were excluded. Variables related to demographics, aSAH severity, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, provision of SRMB prophylaxis, adverse events, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital LOS were collected for the first 21 days of admission or until hospital discharge, whichever came first. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. A multivariate logistic regression modeling was utilized to examine the relationship between specific risk factors and the incidence of clinically important GI bleeding in patients with aSAH. RESULTS: A total of 627 patients were included. The overall incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was 4.9%. Of the patients with clinically important GI bleeding, 19 (61%) received pharmacologic prophylaxis prior to evidence of GI bleeding, while 12 (39%) were not on pharmacologic prophylaxis at the onset of GI bleeding. Patients who received an acid suppressant agent were less likely to experience GI bleeding than patients who did not receive pharmacologic prophylaxis prior to evidence of bleeding (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.83). The multivariate regression analysis identified any instance of elevated intracranial pressure, creatinine clearance < 60 ml/min and the incidence of cerebral vasospasm as specific risk factors associated with GI bleeding. Cerebral vasospasm has not previously been described as a risk for GI bleeding (OR 2.5 95% CI 1.09-5.79). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important GI bleeding occurred in 4.9% of patients with aSAH, similar to the general critical care population. Risk factors associated with GI bleeding were prolonged mechanical ventilation (> 48 h), creatinine clearance < 60 ml/min, presence of coagulopathy, elevation of intracranial pressure, and cerebral vasospasm. Further prospective research is needed to confirm this observation within this patient population.