Relationship Between Glucose Time in Range in Diabetic and Non-Diabetic Patients and Mortality in Critically Ill Patients.

Background: Shorter time spent in specific blood glucose ranges is associated with mortality benefit in critically ill patients. However, various time in range values are reported, each based on a specific blood glucose range. Objective: To evaluate relationship between percentage of time spent at various blood glucose ranges (TIR) and mortality in critically ill patients. Methods: Single-center, retrospective, cohort study that included adult patients admitted to ICU for at least one day. We evaluated the relationship between TIR at prespecified blood glucose ranges and hospital mortality in diabetic and non-diabetic patients Results: Of the 5287 patients included, 3705 (70.0%) were non-diabetic and 1582 were diabetic (29.9%). Diabetic patients had higher in-hospital mortality rate (15.8%) compared to non-diabetic patients (11.3%), p < 0.0001, and with higher incidence of hyperglycemia (77.8% vs. 39.4%) and hypoglycemia (14.3% vs. 10%) compared to non-diabetic patients, p < 0.0001. The highest median TIR for both diabetic [76% (49.1 - 97.8%)] and non-diabetic patients [100% (92.3--100%)] was at blood glucose range of 70-180 mg/dL. In non-diabetic cohort, the only optimal TIR of 40% at blood glucose range of 70-120 mg/dL was identified. Non-diabetic patients stratified into TIR 70-120 mg/dL > 40% reported significantly lower mortality (7.0%) rate compared to patients with TIR 70-120 mg/dL < 40% (15.7%), OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27-0.97, adjusted-p = 0.03. In diabetic patients, no relationship was detected between TIR at all predefined glucose ranges and hospital mortality. Conclusion: Critically ill non-diabetic patients who spent at least 40% of time in blood glucose range of 70-120 mg/dL had improved survival. This association was not observed in diabetic patients.

Narrative Review: Addressing Covid-19 Vaccine Concerns in Special and Vulnerable Populations.

Public health advocates and healthcare professionals (HCPs) have been challenged with vaccine hesitancy and addressing misinformation. In order for HCPs and pharmacists, in particular, to serve as effective stewards of COVID-19 vaccine science in the interest of the public good, it is imperative for HCPs to appreciate the various factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy and vaccine distrust. A PubMed search was performed and relevant articles on COVID-19 vaccine in populations of interest were included. Information from health agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as well as established professional health societies was incorporated for guidance. This review focuses on COVID-19 vaccine concerns in the populations of children, pregnancy and lactation, immunocompromised, and religious and ethnic disparities. We also discuss post emergency use authorization experience with respect to vaccine safety including annotations on Guillain-Barré Syndrome, myocarditis and pericarditis, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.

Vitamin C for Sepsis and Septic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis remains a leading cause of death in the critically ill. The combination of thiamine, vitamin C, and hydrocortisone has recently emerged as a potential adjunctive therapy and supportive care for patients with sepsis and septic shock. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Several randomized and observational controlled trials evaluated the role of vitamin C in sepsis and septic shock. However, there are variabilities in the findings of these studies that led to a substantial global debate on incorporating vitamin C therapy in clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: A PubMed and Embase English language literature search through April 2021 was performed using the following terms: ascorbic acid, vitamin C, corticosteroid, hydrocortisone, thiamine, HAT, sepsis, and shock. Citations, including controlled trials, observational studies, review articles, guidelines, and consensus statements, were reviewed. The risk of bias for each clinical study was systematically evaluated. Relevant clinical data focusing on efficacy, safety, and special considerations regarding the use of vitamin C with and without thiamine and hydrocortisone in sepsis and septic shock were narratively summarized. RESULTS: The most commonly used vitamin C dosing in sepsis and septic shock is 1.5 g every 6 hours with and without thiamine and hydrocortisone. Current literature is limited because of heterogeneity in vitamin C regimen used, initiation time, and duration of treatment. This limitation led to variability in outcomes evaluated. Vitamin C decreases proinflammatory mediators and slows the progression of endothelial injury in severe sepsis. There is an inconsistency between randomized controlled trials and observational controlled trials regarding mortality, resolution in organ failure, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay findings with the use of vitamin C in septic shock. Vitamin C seems to be safe in comparison with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies with consistent end points, initiation time with an emphasis on early initiation, and standard vitamin C dosing regimen are needed to determine the overall benefit of vitamin C in sepsis.

Phenobarbital Monotherapy for the Management of Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome in Surgical-Trauma Patients.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepine is first-line therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS), and phenobarbital is an alternative therapy. However, its use has not been well validated in the surgical-trauma patient population. OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of fixed-dose phenobarbital monotherapy for the management of patients at risk for AWS in the surgical-trauma intensive care unit. METHODS: Surgical-trauma critically ill patients who received phenobarbital monotherapy, loading dose followed by a taper regimen, for the management of AWS were included in this evaluation. The effectiveness of phenobarbital monotherapy to treat AWS and prevent development of AWS-related complications were evaluated. Safety end points assessed included significant hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients received phenobarbital monotherapy; the majority of patients were at moderate risk for developing AWS (n = 20; 65%) versus high risk (n = 11; 35%). None of the patients developed AWS-related complications; all patients were successfully managed for their AWS. Nine patients (29%) received nonbenzodiazepine adjunct therapy for agitation post-phenobarbital initiation. Three patients (10%) experienced hypotension, and 3 (10%) were intubated. None of the patients had clinically significant bradycardia or respiratory depression. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Fixed-dose phenobarbital monotherapy appears to be well tolerated and effective in the management of AWS. Further evaluation is needed to determine the extent of benefit with the use of phenobarbital monotherapy for management of AWS.

Sedation, Analgesia, and Paralysis in COVID-19 Patients in the Setting of Drug Shortages.

The rapid spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to a global pandemic. The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) presents with a spectrum of symptoms ranging from mild to critical illness requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a major complication in patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Currently, there are no recognized pharmacological therapies for COVID-19. However, a large number of COVID-19 patients require respiratory support, with a high percentage requiring invasive ventilation. The rapid spread of the infection has led to a surge in the rate of hospitalizations and ICU admissions, which created a challenge to public health, research, and medical communities. The high demand for several therapies, including sedatives, analgesics, and paralytics, that are often utilized in the care of COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, has created pressure on the supply chain resulting in shortages in these critical medications. This has led clinicians to develop conservation strategies and explore alternative therapies for sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in COVID-19 patients. Several of these alternative approaches have demonstrated acceptable levels of sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in different settings but they are not commonly used in the ICU. Additionally, they have unique pharmaceutical properties, limitations, and adverse effects. This narrative review summarizes the literature on alternative drug therapies for the management of sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in COVID-19 patients. Also, this document serves as a resource for clinicians in current and future respiratory illness pandemics in the setting of drug shortages.

Andexanet Alfa Versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Reversal of Factor Xa Inhibitors in Intracranial Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: There are limited data on the risks and benefits of using andexanet alfa (AA) in comparison with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) to reverse factor Xa inhibitors (FXi) associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). We sought to describe our experience with AA or 4F-PCC in patients with oral FXi-related traumatic and spontaneous ICH. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive adult patients with FXi-related ICH who received AA or 4F-PCC. FXi-related ICH cases included traumatic and spontaneous intracranial hemorrhages. Our primary analysis evaluated ICH stability on head computed tomography scan (CT), defined as a similar amount of blood from the initial scan at the onset of ICH to subsequent scans, at 6-h and 24-h post-administration of AA or 4F-PCC. For the subset of spontaneous intraparenchymal hemorrhages, volume was measured at 6-h and 24-h post-reversal. In secondary analyses, we evaluated good functional outcome at discharge, defined as a Modified Rankin Score of less than 3, and the incidence of thrombotic events after AA or 4F-PCC adminstration, during hospitalization. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients (16 traumatic and 28 spontaneous ICH) with median age of 79 years [72-86], 36% females, with a FXi-related ICH, were included in this study. The majority of spontaneous ICHs were intraparenchymal 19 (68%). Twenty-eight patients (64%) received AA and 16 patients (36%) received 4F-PCC. There was no difference between AA and 4F-PCC in terms of CT stability at 6 h (21 [78%] vs 10 [71%], p = 0.71) and 24 h (15 [88%] vs 6 [60%], p = 0.15). In a subgroup of patients with spontaneous intraparenchymal hemorrhage, there was no difference in the degree of achieved hemostasis based on hematoma volume between AA and 4F-PCC at 6 h (9.3 mL [6.9-26.4] vs 10 mL [9.4-22.1], adjusted p = 0. 997) and 24-h (9.2 mL [6.1-18.8] vs 9.9 [9.4-21.1], adjusted p = 1). The number of patients with good outcome based on mRS on discharge were 10 (36%) and 6 (38%) in the AA and 4F-PCC groups, respectively (adjusted p = 0.81). The incidence of thromboembolic events was similar in the AA and 4F-PCC groups (2 [7%] vs 0, p = 0.53). CONCLUSION: In this limited sample of patients, we found no difference in neuroimaging stability, functional outcome and thrombotic events when comparing AA and 4F-PCC in patients with FXi-related ICH. Since our analysis is likely underpowered, a multi-center collaborative network devoted to this question is warranted.

Variation in Fluid and Vasopressor Use in Shock With and Without Physiologic Assessment: A Multicenter Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the association between the use of physiologic assessment (central venous pressure, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, stroke volume variation, pulse pressure variation, passive leg raise test, and critical care ultrasound) with fluid and vasopressor administration 24 hours after shock onset and with in-hospital mortality. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study between September 2017 and February 2018. SETTINGS: Thirty-four hospitals in the United States and Jordan. PATIENTS: Consecutive adult patients requiring admission to the ICU with systolic blood pressure less than or equal to 90 mm Hg, mean arterial blood pressure less than or equal to 65 mm Hg, or need for vasopressor. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 1,639 patients enrolled, 39% had physiologic assessments. Use of physiologic assessment was not associated with cumulative fluid administered within 24 hours of shock onset, after accounting for baseline characteristics, etiology and location of shock, ICU types, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III, and hospital (beta coefficient, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.15). In multivariate analysis, the use of physiologic assessment was associated with a higher likelihood of vasopressor use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.45-2.71) and higher 24-hour cumulative vasopressor dosing as norepinephrine equivalent (beta coefficient, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19-0.55). The use of vasopressor was associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.27-2.78). In-hospital mortality was not associated with the use of physiologic assessment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: The use of physiologic assessment in the 24 hours after shock onset is associated with increased use of vasopressor but not with fluid administration.

Evaluation of Vasopressor Exposure and Mortality in Patients With Septic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to: 1) determine the association between vasopressor dosing intensity during the first 6 hours and first 24 hours after the onset of septic shock and 30-day in-hospital mortality; 2) determine whether the effect of vasopressor dosing intensity varies by fluid resuscitation volume; and 3) determine whether the effect of vasopressor dosing intensity varies by dosing titration pattern. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study between September 2017 and February 2018. Vasopressor dosing intensity was defined as the total vasopressor dose infused across all vasopressors in norepinephrine equivalents. SETTING: Thirty-three hospital sites in the United States (n = 32) and Jordan (n = 1). PATIENTS: Consecutive adults requiring admission to the ICU with septic shock treated with greater than or equal to 1 vasopressor within 24 hours of shock onset. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Out of 1,639 patients screened, 616 were included. Norepinephrine (93%) was the most common vasopressor. Patients received a median of 3,400 mL (interquartile range, 1,851-5,338 mL) during the 24 hours after shock diagnosis. The median vasopressor dosing intensity during the first 24 hours of shock onset was 8.5 µg/min norepinephrine equivalents (3.4-18.1 µg/min norepinephrine equivalents). In the first 6 hours, increasing vasopressor dosing intensity was associated with increased odds ratio of 30-day in-hospital mortality, with the strength of association dependent on concomitant fluid administration. Over the entire 24 hour period, every 10 µg/min increase in vasopressor dosing intensity was associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.16-1.53), and this association did not vary with the amount of fluid administration. Compared to an early high/late low vasopressor dosing strategy, an early low/late high or sustained high vasopressor dosing strategy was associated with higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing vasopressor dosing intensity during the first 24 hours after septic shock was associated with increased mortality. This association varied with the amount of early fluid administration and the timing of vasopressor titration.

Narrative Review of Controversies Involving Vasopressin Use in Septic Shock and Practical Considerations.

Objective: To summarize literature evaluating vasopressin use, focusing on clinical controversies regarding initiation, dosing, and discontinuation and interaction of vasopressin with other therapies in septic shock patients. Data Sources: A PubMed English-language literature search (January 2008 to December 2019) was performed using these terms: arginine vasopressin, septic, shock, and sepsis. Citations, including controlled trials, observational studies, review articles, guidelines, and consensus statements, were reviewed. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant clinical data focusing on specific controversial questions regarding the utility of vasopressin in patients with septic shock were narratively summarized. Data Synthesis: Current literature does not strongly support the use of vasopressin as a first-line initial therapy for septic shock. Additionally, there are conflicting data for weight-based dosing of vasopressin in overweight patients. Evidence for vasopressin renal protection and interaction with corticosteroids is minimal. However, vasopressin has the ability to reduce catecholamine requirements in septic shock patients and may provide a mortality benefit in specific subgroups. Discontinuation of vasopressin last, not second to last, in resolving septic shock may reduce hypotension development. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review addresses specific clinical controversies that drive vasopressin use in septic shock patients in real-world practice. Conclusion: Vasopressin should remain second-line adjunct to norepinephrine to augment mean arterial pressures. Dosing should be initiated at 0.03 U/min, and higher doses offer minimal benefit. There are conflicting data on the impact of weight on vasopressin response. Studies have failed to show renal benefit with vasopressin use or an interaction with corticosteroid therapy.

Application of Cannabinoids in Neurosciences: Considerations and Implications.

Medicinal cannabinoid use continues to evolve across the United States, although legitimate federal recognition for medicinal purpose is lacking. Variability exists across states within the United States with respect to legislation, and health care institutions encounter challenges when patients present with a history of medicinal cannabinoid use. Emerging evidence in the field of neurosciences suggests a role of cannabinoids for neurologic medical conditions such as Parkinson disease, multiple sclerosis, and epilepsy. We aim to provide an overview of cannabinoids including a historical perspective, pharmacology, applications in neurosciences, and challenges in health care and academia. Knowledge of the appropriate role of cannabinoids in the clinical setting is essential for all health care practitioners including nursing.

Inhaled Epoprostenol Through Noninvasive Routes of Ventilator Support Systems.

BACKGROUND: The administration of inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) through noninvasive routes of ventilator support systems has never been previously evaluated. OBJECTIVE: Describe the use of iEPO when administered through noninvasive routes of ventilator support systems. METHODS: Critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit who received iEPO through noninvasive routes were analyzed. Improvements in respiratory status and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. Safety end points assessed included hypotension, rebound hypoxemia, significant bleeding, and thrombocytopenia. RESULTS: A total of 36 patients received iEPO through noninvasive routes: high-flow oxygen therapy through nasal cannula, n = 29 (81%) and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation, n = 7 (19%). Sixteen patients had improvement in their respiratory status: mean decrease in fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), 20% ± 13%; mean increase in partial pressure of arterial oxygen to FiO2 (PaO2/FiO2) ratio, 60 ± 50 mm Hg; and mean decrease in HFNC oxygen flow rate, 6 ± 3 liters per minute (LPM). Eight patients had declines in their respiratory status (mean increase in FiO2, 30% ± 20%; mean decrease in PaO2/FiO2 ratio, 38 ± 20 mm Hg; and mean increase in HFNC oxygen flow rate, 15 ± 10 LPM), and 12 patients had no change in their respiratory status. Conclusion and Relevance: This represents the first evaluation of the administration of iEPO through noninvasive routes of ventilator support systems and demonstrates that in critically ill patients, iEPO could be administered through a noninvasive route. Further evaluation is needed to determine the extent of benefit with this route of administration.

Effectiveness, safety, and Economic Comparison of Two Inhaled Epoprostentol Products (Flolan and Veletri) in Cardiothoracic Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: No previous studies exist examining two inhaled epoprosternol formulations (Flolan compared with Veletri) in a homogenous cardiothoracic surgery patient population. OBJECTIVE: To compare the impact of inhaled Flolan and inhaled Veletri on the effectiveness, safety, or cost in cardiothoracic surgery patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, noninferiority study comparing inhaled Flolan and inhaled Veletri in cardiothoracic surgery patients. Participants included were ≥18 years old, admitted to the cardiothoracic intensive care unit, and received inhaled Flolan or inhaled Veletri therapy for ≥1 hour. RESULTS: A total of 244 patients were included in the primary outcome analysis (122 patients per group). The primary outcome, change in the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio 1 hour after administration of inhaled Flolan or inhaled Veletri, did not cross the lower limit of the noninferiority margin (95% CI = -14.8 to 65.4). Significant differences in secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation (4.4 vs 2.6 days; P < 0.01), number of tracheostomies (24 vs 9; P = 0.01), number of patients initiated on dialysis (25 vs 12; P = 0.02), and cost per median duration of therapy ($257 vs $183; P = 0.02) in the inhaled Flolan and inhaled Veletri groups, with the average duration of therapy being 1.6 and 1.3 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Inhaled Veletri was demonstrated to be non-inferior to inhaled Flolan when comparing change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio 1 hour post -therapy initiation,and inhaled Veletri was an acceptable alternative to inhaled Flolan in a cardiothoracic surgery patient population.

Noninferiority of Inhaled Epoprostenol to Inhaled Nitric Oxide for the Treatment of ARDS.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled nitric oxide and inhaled epoprostenol have been evaluated for the management of hypoxemia in acute respiratory distress syndrome, with clinical trials demonstrating comparable improvements in oxygenation. However, these trials have several limitations, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions regarding clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the noninferiority and safety of inhaled epoprostenol compared with inhaled nitric oxide in mechanically ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients with a primary outcome of ventilator-free days from day 1 to day 28. METHODS: This was a retrospective, noninterventional, propensity-matched, noninferiority cohort study. Propensity score for receipt of inhaled nitric oxide was developed and patients were matched accordingly using a prespecified algorithm. Secondary objectives included evaluating day 28 intensive care unit-free days, changes in PaO2/FiO2 ratio after inhalation therapy initiation, and hospital mortality. Safety endpoints assessed included hypotension, methemoglobinemia, renal dysfunction, rebound hypoxemia, significant bleeding, and thrombocytopenia. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included, with 47 patients in each group. Patients were well-matched with similar baseline characteristics, except patients in inhaled nitric oxide group had lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio. Management of ARDS was similar between groups. Mean difference in ventilator-free days between inhaled epoprostenol and inhaled nitric oxide was 2.16 days (95% confidence interval = -0.61 to 4.9), with lower limit of 95% confidence interval greater than the prespecified margin, hence satisfying noninferiority. There were no differences in any secondary or safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled epoprostenol was noninferior to inhaled nitric oxide with regard to ventilator-free days from day 1 to day 28 in ARDS patients.

Free-standing carboxymethyl cellulose film incorporating nanoformulated pomegranate extract for meat packaging.

This study aimed to explore an innovative approach to enhancing the shelf-life and quality of meat products through the application of an active packaging system. The study involved the development of new free-standing carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) nanocomposite films incorporated with nanoencapsulated flavonoids derived from pomegranate extract. The loaded flavonoids, known for their antioxidant and antimicrobial properties, were nanoencapsulated via a self-assembly approach in a mixture of chitosan and sodium alginate to improve their stability, solubility, and controlled release characteristics. Chemical structure, size, and morphology of the obtained nanoparticles (Pg-NPs) were studied with FTIR, zeta-sizer, and TEM. The Pg-NPs showed particle size of 232 nm, and zeta-potential of -20.7 mV. Various free-standing nanocomposite films were then developed via incorporation of Pg-NPs into CMC-casted films. FTIR, SEM, thermal and mechanical properties, and surface wettability were intensively studied for the nanocomposite films. Barrier properties against water vapor were investigated at 2022 g·m-2d-1. The nanocomposite films possessed superior properties for inhibiting bacterial growth and extending the shelf-life of beef and poultry meat for 12 days compared with the Pg-NPs-free CMC films. This study presented a promising approach for development of active packaging systems with improved antimicrobial and antioxidant properties, and economic and environmental impacts.

Neuropharmacology in the Intensive Care Unit.

Clinicians must individualize pharmacotherapy for patients with acute neurological injury based on multiple factors, including age, comorbidities, and chronic medication use. Many pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties are altered during acute illness, particularly absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination, which may result in loss of drug effect or toxicity. This article provides clinicians with general pharmacologic knowledge of the following drug regimens commonly prescribed to neurocritically ill adults: sedatives, analgesics, osmotherapy, antiseizure medications, antishivering agents, vasoactive agents, and antithrombotic reversal agents.

Emergent external ventricular drain placement in patients with factor Xa inhibitor-associated intracerebral hemorrhage after reversal with andexanet alfa.

BACKGROUND: Andexanet alfa (AA), a factor Xa-inhibitor (FXi) reversal agent, is given as a bolus followed by a 2-hour infusion. This long administration time can delay EVD placement in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients. We sought to evaluate the safety of EVD placement immediately post-AA bolus compared to post-AA infusion. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study that included adult patients admitted with FXi-associated ICH who received AA and underwent EVD placement The primary outcome was the occurrence of a new hemorrhage (tract, extra-axial, or intraventricular hemorrhage). Secondary outcomes included mortality, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and discharge modified Rankin Score. The primary safety outcome was documented thrombotic events. RESULTS: Twelve patients with FXi related ICH were included (EVD placement post-AA bolus, N = 8; EVD placement post-AA infusion, N = 4). Each arm included one patient with bilateral EVD placed. There was no difference in the incidence of new hemorrhages, with one post-AA bolus patient had small, focal, nonoperative extra-axial hemorrhage. Morbidity and mortality were higher in post-AA infusion patients (mRS, post-AA bolus, 4 [4-6] vs. post-AA infusion 6 [5,6], p = 0.24 and post-AA bolus, 3 (37.5 %) vs. post-AA infusion, 3 (75 %), p = 0.54, respectively). One patient in the post-AA bolus group had thrombotic event. There was no difference in hospital LOS (post-AA bolus, 19 days [12-26] vs. post-AA infusion, 14 days [9-22], p = 0.55) and ICU LOS (post-AA bolus, 10 days [6-13] vs. post-AA infusion, 11 days [5-21], p = 0.86). CONCLUSION: We report no differences in the incidence of tract hemorrhage, extra-axial hemorrhage, or intraventricular hemorrhage post-AA bolus versus post-AA infusion. Larger prospective studies to validate these results are warranted.

Comparison of nimodipine formulations and administration techniques via enteral feeding tubes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Nimodipine improves outcomes following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) and current guidelines suggest that patients with aSAH receive nimodipine for 21 days. Patients with no difficulty swallowing will swallow the whole capsules or tablets; otherwise, nimodipine liquid must be drawn from capsules, tablets need to be crushed, or the commercially available liquid product be used to facilitate administration through an enteral feeding tube (FT). It is not clear whether these techniques are equivalent. The goal of the study was to determine if different nimodipine formulations and administration techniques were associated with the safety and effectiveness of nimodipine in aSAH. METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter observational cohort study conducted in 21 hospitals across North America. Patients admitted with aSAH and received nimodipine by FT for ≥3 days were included. Patient demographics, disease severity, nimodipine administration, and study outcomes were collected. Safety end points included the prevalence of diarrhea and nimodipine dose reduction or discontinuation secondary to blood pressure reduction. Predictors of the study outcomes were analyzed using regression modeling. RESULTS: A total of 727 patients were included. Administration of nimodipine liquid product was independently associated with higher prevalence of diarrhea compared to other administration techniques/formulations (Odds ratio [OR] 2.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41-3.67, p-value = 0.001, OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.37-5.55, p-value = 0.005, for old and new commercially available formulations, respectively). Bedside withdrawal of liquid from nimodipine capsules prior to administration was significantly associated with higher prevalence of nimodipine dose reduction or discontinuation secondary to hypotension (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.57-5.06, p-value = 0.001). Tablet crushing and bedside withdrawal of liquid from capsules prior to administration were associated with increased odds of delayed cerebral ischemia (OR 6.66, 95% CI 3.48-12.74, p-value <0.0001 and OR 3.92, 95% CI 2.05-7.52, p-value <0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that enteral nimodipine formulations and administration techniques might not be equivalent. This could be attributed to excipient differences, inconsistency and inaccuracy in medication administration, and altered nimodipine bioavailability. Further studies are needed.

Timing of vasoactive agents and corticosteroid initiation in septic shock.

Septic shock remains a health care concern associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock recommend early fluid resuscitation and antimicrobials. Beyond initial management, the guidelines do not provide clear recommendations on appropriate time to initiate vasoactive therapies and corticosteroids in patients who develop shock. This review summarizes the literature regarding time of initiation of these interventions. Clinical data regarding time of initiation of these therapies in relation to shock onset, sequence of treatments with regard to each other, and clinical markers evaluated to guide initiation are summarized. Early-high vasopressor initiation within first 6 h of shock onset is associated with lower mortality. Following norepinephrine initiation, the exact dose and timing of escalation to adjunctive vasopressor agents are not well elucidated in the literature. However, recent data indicate that timing may be an important factor in initiating vasopressors and adjunctive therapies, such as corticosteroids. Norepinephrine-equivalent dose and lactate concentration can aid in determining when to initiate vasopressin and angiotensin II in patients with septic shock. Future guidelines with clear recommendations on the time of initiation of septic shock therapies are warranted.

Use of droxidopa for blood pressure augmentation after acute spinal cord injury: case reports.

Hypotension secondary to autonomic dysfunction is a common complication of acute spinal cord injury (SCI) that may worsen neurologic outcomes. Midodrine, an enteral α-1 agonist, is often used to facilitate weaning intravenous (IV) vasopressors, but its use can be limited by reflex bradycardia. Alternative enteral agents to facilitate this wean in the acute post-SCI setting have not been described. We aim to describe novel application of droxidopa, an enteral precursor of norepinephrine that is approved to treat neurogenic orthostatic hypotension, in the acute post-SCI setting. Droxidopa may be an alternative enteral therapy for those intolerant of midodrine due to reflex bradycardia. We describe two patients suffering traumatic cervical SCI who were successfully weaned off IV vasopressors with droxidopa after failing with midodrine. The first patient was a 64-year-old male who underwent C3-6 laminectomies and fusion after a ten-foot fall resulting in quadriparesis. Post-operatively, the addition of midodrine in an attempt to wean off IV vasopressors resulted in significant reflexive bradycardia. Treatment with droxidopa facilitated rapidly weaning IV vasopressors and transfer to a lower level of care within 72 hours of treatment initiation. The second patient was a 73-year-old male who underwent C3-5 laminectomies and fusion for a traumatic hyperflexion injury causing paraplegia. The addition of midodrine resulted in severe bradycardia, prompting consideration of pacemaker placement. However, with the addition of droxidopa, this was avoided, and the patient was weaned off IV vasopressors on dual oral therapy with midodrine and droxidopa. Droxidopa may be a viable enteral therapy to treat hypotension in patients after acute SCI who are otherwise not tolerating midodrine in order to wean off IV vasopressors. This strategy may avoid pacemaker placement and facilitate shorter stays in the intensive care unit, particularly for patients who are stable but require continued intensive care unit admission for IV vasopressors, which can be cost ineffective and human resource depleting.