A retrospective review of implementation of an inhaled epoprostenol protocol in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Inhaled epoprostenol is a selective pulmonary vasodilator that has shown a potentially broad number of applications in the management of critically ill patients. To date, the vast majority of the literature with regard to efficacy, indications for use, and adverse effects of inhaled epoprostenol is focused on use of this agent in critical care settings, with relatively little literature describing use of inhaled epoprostenol in the Emergency Department. This retrospective review sought to examine instances in which inhaled epoprostenol was administered in the Emergency Department of a tertiary-care, Level I trauma center following implementation of a clinical pathway for administration of this medication for cases of refractory hypoxemia, RV dysfunction, and refractory hypoxemia. Primary outcomes were monitoring for adverse effects (i.e. hypotension), trend in FiO2 requirement over time, and clinical indication for initiation of inhaled epoprostenol. METHODS: An automated review was performed to query cases in which inhaled epoprostenol had been initiated in the Emergency Department following adoption of the inhaled epoprostenol clinical pathway. Cases were excluded if the medication was initiated in the prehospital setting, ordered but not administered, or administered for a period of <1 h. Vital signs and co-administration of vasopressors were followed before and following epoprostenol administration to assess for change over time. Clinical indication of epoprostenol administration was assessed via manual chart review. RESULTS: Inhaled epoprostenol was administered in 20 instances, with 15 cases ultimately meeting inclusion criteria. There were no cases of clinically significant hypotension (MAP <65) in any of the cases in which inhaled epoprostenol was administered in the Emergency Department, and mean vasopressor requirement did not increase over time. A majority of patients saw a reduction in FiO2 requirement following administration of inhaled epoprostenol. The most common indication for initiation of inhaled epoprostenol based on manual chart review was pulmonary embolism. DISCUSSION: In this review of cases in which inhaled epoprostenol was administered following adoption of a clinical pathway for medication administration, there were no cases of hypotension or other adverse effects that appear to be attributable to medication administration. Pulmonary embolism and refractory hypoxemia were the most common noted indications for administration of inhaled epoprostenol. Further research is warranted regarding development of clinical protocols for administration of inhaled pulmonary vasodilators in the Emergency Department setting.