Impact of intravenous accessibility and prehospital epinephrine use on survival outcomes of adult nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.

BACKGROUND: This study compared out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patient outcomes based on intravenous (IV) access and prehospital epinephrine use. METHODS: A retrospective study in Ulsan, South Korea, from January 2017 to December 2022, analyzed adult nontraumatic OHCA cases. Patients were grouped: Group 1 (no IV attempts), Group 2 (failed IV access), Group 3 (successful IV access without epinephrine), and Group 4 (successful IV access with epinephrine), with comparisons using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 2,656 patients, Group 4 had significantly lower survival to hospital discharge (adjusted OR 0.520, 95% CI 0.346-0.782, p = 0.002) and favorable neurological outcomes (adjusted OR 0.292, 95% CI 0.140-0.611, p = 0.001) than Group 1. Groups 2 and 3 showed insignificant survival to hospital discharge (adjusted OR 0.814, 95% CI 0.566-1.171, p = 0.268) and (adjusted OR 1.069, 95% CI 0.810-1.412, p = 0.636) and favorable neurological outcomes (adjusted OR 0.585, 95% CI 0.299-1.144, p = 0.117) and (adjusted OR 1.075, 95% CI 0.689-1.677, p = 0.751). In the shockable rhythm group, Group 3 had better survival to hospital discharge (adjusted OR 1.700, 95% CI 1.044-2.770, p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Successful IV access with epinephrine showed worse outcomes in both rhythm groups than no IV attempts. Outcomes for failed IV and successful IV access without epinephrine were inconclusive. Importantly, successful IV access without epinephrine showed favorable survival to hospital discharge in the shockable rhythm group, warranting further research into IV access for fluid resuscitation in shockable rhythm OHCA patients.

Perioperative anaphylactic shock caused by propofol.

Perioperative anaphylaxis is rare and the diagnosis is difficult to distinguish from normal side effects from anaesthesia. Anaesthetists should be able to diagnose anaphylaxis and treat promptly with adrenaline and fluids. Allergy investigation should be performed subsequently. This is a case report of perioperative anaphylaxis to propofol. Propofol contains refined soya oil and egg lecithin, but no connection between allergy to soy, egg or peanut and allergy to propofol has been proven, and international guidelines recommend that propofol can be used in patients with these food allergies.

[EPIPEN INSTRUCTIONS FOR ANAPHYLAXIS PATIENTS DURING DISPENSING: FACTORS RELATED TO THE QUALITY OF PHARMACISTS' INSTRUCTIONS].

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We previously reported that pharmacists working in pharmacies don't have enough knowledge and enough experience teaching anaphylaxis (An) and EpiPen use. We administered a questionnaire survey to pharmacists with experience handling EpiPen prescriptions. We investigated the relationship between the questionnaire results and the factors in the pharmacists' background regarding the explanation and guidance to patients. RESULTS: The percentage of pharmacists working in pharmacies who provided guidance using visual information and demonstrations was insufficient. Moreover, this figure decreased after the second guidance session. Objective confirmation of patient understanding was also insufficient. The results indicated that self-examination and participation in drug information sessions were important background factors for pharmacists who provided detailed guidance to patients. DISCUSSION: For appropriate long-term management of their condition, An patients must master the EpiPen technique. Pharmacists' guidance plays a critical role in this regard. A support system should be established for proper instruction of pharmacy patients by improving pharmacists' self-education and other educational opportunities.

Food Allergy.

Food allergy is a growing health problem affecting both pediatric and adult patients. Food allergies are often immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated but other food-induced non-IgE-mediated diseases exist. Diagnosis of food allergy relies on the combination of clinical and reaction history, skin and IgE testing as well as oral food challenges. Although oral immunotherapy has been able to achieve sustained unresponsiveness in some patients, no cure for food allergies has been found to date. Avoidance of the inciting food as well as availability of epinephrine autoinjectors remains the mainstay of treatment.

New Frontiers in Wide-Awake Surgery.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Explain the most important benefits of wide-awake surgery to patients. 2. Tumesce large parts of the body with minimal pain local anesthesia injection technique to eliminate the need for sedation for many operations. 3. Apply tourniquet-free surgery to upper and lower limb operations to avoid the sedation required to tolerate tourniquet pain. 4. Move many procedures out of the main operating room to minor procedure rooms with no increase in infection rates to decrease unnecessary cost and solid waste in surgery. SUMMARY: Three disruptive innovations are changing the landscape of surgery: (1) minimally painful injection of large-volume, low-concentration tumescent local anesthesia eliminates the need for sedation for many procedures over the entire body; (2) epinephrine vasoconstriction in tumescent local anesthesia is a good alternative to the tourniquet and proximal nerve blocks in extremity surgery (sedation for tourniquet pain is no longer required for many procedures); and (3) evidence-based sterility and the elimination of sedation enable many larger procedures to move out of the main operating room into minor procedure rooms with no increase in infection rates. This continuing medical education article explores some of the new frontiers in which these changes affect surgery all over the body.

Mortality, morbidity & clinical outcome with different types of vasopressors in out of hospital cardiac arrest patients- a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of various vasopressors in cardiac arrest patients in terms of clinical, morbidity, and mortality outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using online databases (MeSH terms: MEDLINE (Ovid), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from 1997 to 2023 for relevant English language studies. The primary outcomes of interest for this study included short-term survival leading to death, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, neurological outcomes, survival to hospital admission, myocardial infarction, and incidence of arrhythmias. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, 26 studies, including 16 RCTs and ten non-RCTs, were evaluated. The focus was on the efficacy of epinephrine, vasopressin, methylprednisolone, dopamine, and their combinations in medical emergencies. Epinephrine treatment was associated with better odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 1.52, 95%CI [1.20, 1.94]; p < 0.001) and achieving ROSC (OR = 3.60, 95% CI [3.45, 3.76], P < 0.00001)) over placebo but not in other outcomes of interest such as short-term survival/ death at 28-30 days, survival to hospital admission, or neurological function. In addition, our analysis indicates non-superiority of vasopressin or epinephrine vasopressin-plus-epinephrine therapy over epinephrine monotherapy except for survival to hospital admission where the combinatorial therapy was associated with better outcome (0.76, 95%CI [0.64, 0.92]; p = 0.004). Similarly, we noted the non-superiority of vasopressin-plus-methylprednisolone versus placebo. Finally, while higher odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 3.35, 95%CI [1.81, 6.2]; p < 0.001) and ROSC (OR = 2.87, 95%CI [1.97, 4.19]; p < 0.001) favoring placebo over VSE therapy were observed, the risk of lethal arrhythmia was not statistically significant. There was insufficient literature to assess the effects of dopamine versus other treatment modalities meta-analytically. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicated that only epinephrine yielded superior outcomes among vasopressors than placebo, albeit limited to survival to hospital discharge and ROSC. Additionally, we demonstrate the non-superiority of vasopressin over epinephrine, although vasopressin could not be compared to placebo due to the paucity of data. The addition of vasopressin to epinephrine treatment only improved survival to hospital admission.

Evaluation of treatment and long-term management of anaphylaxis in pediatric departments of Greece: a 2-year nationwide survey.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis proportions of incidence are increasing globally. However, limited data are available regarding anaphylaxis in the pediatric population of Greece. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate management of anaphylaxis in Greek pediatric departments. METHODS: We performed a questionnaire-based study of children aged less than 16 years presenting with anaphylaxis in 10 national pediatric hospitals over a period of 2 years. Management of anaphylaxis was assessed prior to and after an informative intervention. RESULTS: In all, 127 cases of anaphylaxis were identified. Epinephrine was administered in almost half of all cases (51.2%), predominantly through intramuscular route (88.5%), while the majority of anaphylaxis patients were treated with antihistamines (92.9%) and corticosteroids (70.1%). Epinephrine was more likely administered by physicians if the elicitor was a drug (P < 0.003). Regarding long-term management, an epinephrine auto-injector was prescribed in 66.9% of patients. Follow-up information was available for most of the patients (92.9%), the majority of whom (76.3%) were referred to an allergist. More than half of these patients (63.6%) had a documented allergy follow-up, which identified a causative allergen in 53.3% of cases. No statistically significant differences were recorded prior to and after the intervention regarding management of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study highlighted the necessity of further improvement in terms of anaphylaxis treatment and secondary prevention measures. This presupposes appropriate education and training of healthcare professionals, thus contributing to proper and comprehensive care of the pediatric population.

Limb Necrosis in the Setting of Vasopressor Use.

BACKGROUND: It remains poorly understood why only some hemodynamically unstable patients who receive aggressive treatment with vasopressor medications develop limb necrosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of limb necrosis and the factors associated with it following high-dose vasopressor therapy. METHODS: A retrospective case-control medical records review was performed of patients aged 18 to 89 years who received vasopressor therapy between 2012 and 2021 in a single academic medical center. The study population was stratified by the development of limb necrosis following vasopressor use. Patients who experienced necrosis were compared with age- and sex-matched controls who did not experience necrosis. Demographic information, comorbidities, and medication details were recorded. RESULTS: The incidence of limb necrosis following vasopressor administration was 0.25%. Neither baseline demographics nor medical comorbidities differed significantly between groups. Necrosis was present in the same limb as the arterial catheter most often for femoral catheters. The vasopressor dose administered was significantly higher in the necrosis group than in the control group for ephedrine (P = .02) but not for the other agents. The duration of therapy was significantly longer in the necrosis group than in the control group for norepinephrine (P = .001), epinephrine (P = .04), and ephedrine (P = .01). The duration of vasopressin administration did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that medication-specific factors, rather than patient and disease characteristics, should guide clinical management of necrosis in the setting of vasopressor administration.

A retrospective, multi-agency 'target trial emulation' for the comparison of post-resuscitation epinephrine to norepinephrine.

INTRODUCTION: Epinephrine and norepinephrine are the two most commonly used prehospital vasopressors in the United States. Prior studies have suggested that use of a post-ROSC epinephrine infusion may be associated with increased rearrest and mortality in comparison to use of norepinephrine. We used target trial emulation methodology to compare the rates of rearrest and mortality between the groups of OHCA patients receiving these vasopressors in the prehospital setting. METHODS: Adult (18-80 years of age) non-traumatic OHCA patients in the 2018-2022 ESO Data Collaborative datasets with a documented post-ROSC norepinephrine or epinephrine infusion were included in this study. Logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate the association between vasopressor agent and outcome using two sets of covariables. The first set of covariables included standard Utstein factors, the dispatch to ROSC interval, the ROSC to vasopressor interval, and the follow-up interval. The second set added prehospital systolic blood pressure and SpO2 values. Kaplan-Meier time-to-event analysis was also conducted and the vasopressor groups were compared using a multivariable Cox regression model. RESULTS: Overall, 1,893 patients treated by 309 EMS agencies were eligible for analysis. 1,010 (53.4%) received an epinephrine infusion and 883 (46.7%) received a norepinephrine infusion as their initial vasopressor. Adjusted analyses did not discover an association between vasopressor agent and rearrest (aOR: 0.93 [0.72, 1.21]) or mortality (aOR: 1.00 [0.59, 1.69]). CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-agency target trial emulation, the use of a post-resuscitation epinephrine infusion was not associated with increased odds of rearrest in comparison to the use of a norepinephrine infusion.

National survey conducted among Italian pediatricians examining the therapeutic management of croup.

OBJECTIVES: Practice-to-recommendations gaps exist in croup management and have not been critically investigated. This study examined the therapeutic management of croup among a national sample of Italian pediatric providers. METHODS: A survey was administered online to a sample of primary care and hospital-based pediatricians. Demographic data, perception regarding disease severity, treatment and knowledge of croup, choices of croup treatment medications, and knowledge of and adherence to treatment recommendations were compared between hospital and primary care pediatricians. Oral corticosteroids alone, oral corticosteroids with or without nebulized epinephrine and nebulized epinephrine plus oral or inhaled corticosteroids were considered the correct management in mild, moderate and severe croup, respectively. The determinants for correct management were examined using multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Six hundred forty-nine pediatricians answered at least 50% of the survey questions and were included in the analysis. Providers reported extensive use of inhaled corticosteroids for mild and moderate croup. Recommended treatment for mild, moderate and severe croup was administered in 46/647 (7.1%), 181/645 (28.0%) and 263/643 (40.9%) participants, respectively. Provider's age and knowledge of Westley Croup Score were significant predictors for correct management of mild croup. Being a hospital pediatrician and perception of croup as a clinically relevant condition were significant for moderate croup. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist between recommended guidelines and clinical practice in croup management. This study suggests wide variability in both the treatment of croup and clinical decision making strategies among hospital and primary care pediatricians. Addressing this issue could lead to noteworthy clinical and economic benefits.

Endotracheal epinephrine at standard versus high dose for resuscitation of asystolic newborn lambs.

INTRODUCTION: Endotracheal (ET) epinephrine administration is an option during neonatal resuscitation, if the preferred intravenous (IV) route is unavailable. OBJECTIVES: We assessed whether endotracheal epinephrine achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and maintained physiological stability after ROSC, at standard and higher dose, in severely asphyxiated newborn lambs. METHODS: Near-term fetal lambs were asphyxiated until asystole. Resuscitation was commenced with ventilation and chest compressions. Lambs were randomly allocated to: IV Saline placebo (5 ml/kg), IV Epinephrine (20 micrograms/kg), Standard-dose ET Epinephrine (100 micrograms/kg), and High-dose ET Epinephrine (1 mg/kg). After three allocated treatment doses, rescue IV Epinephrine was administered if ROSC had not occurred. Lambs achieving ROSC were monitored for 60 minutes. Brain histology was assessed for microbleeds. RESULTS: ROSC in response to allocated treatment (without rescue IV Epinephrine) occurred in 1/6 Saline, 9/9 IV Epinephrine, 0/9 Standard-dose ET Epinephrine, and 7/9 High-dose ET Epinephrine lambs respectively. Blood pressure during CPR increased after treatment with IV Epinephrine and High-dose ET Epinephrine, but not Saline or Standard-dose ET Epinephrine. After ROSC, both ET Epinephrine groups had lower pH, higher lactate, and higher blood pressure than the IV Epinephrine group. Cortex microbleeds were more frequent in High-dose ET Epinephrine lambs (8/8 lambs examined, versus 3/8 in IV Epinephrine lambs). CONCLUSIONS: The currently recommended dose of ET Epinephrine was ineffective in achieving ROSC. Without convincing clinical or preclinical evidence of efficacy, use of ET Epinephrine at this dose may not be appropriate. High-dose ET Epinephrine requires further evaluation before clinical translation.

Disparities in pediatric anaphylaxis triggers and management across Asia.

BACKGROUND: The epidemiology and management of anaphylaxis are not well-reported in Asia. METHODS: A regional pediatric anaphylaxis registry was established by the Asia-Pacific Research Network for Anaphylaxis (APRA), using standardized protocols for prospective data collection, to evaluate the triggers and management of anaphylaxis in the Asia-Pacific region. Pediatric patients below 18 years presenting with anaphylaxis across four Asian countries/cities (Thailand, Singapore, Hong Kong (HK), and Qingdao) were included. Allergen triggers, symptoms, anaphylaxis severity, and management were compared. RESULTS: Between 2019 and 2022, 721 anaphylaxis episodes in 689 patients from 16 centers were identified. The mean age at anaphylaxis presentation was 7.0 years (SD = 5.2) and 60% were male. Food was the most common trigger (62%), particularly eggs and cow's milk in children aged 3 years and below. In school-age children, nut anaphylaxis was most common in HK and Singapore, but was rare in the other countries, and wheat was the top allergen in Bangkok. Shellfish anaphylaxis was most common in children aged 7-17. Adrenaline was administered in 60% of cases, with 9% given adrenaline before hospital arrival. Adrenaline devices were prescribed in up to 82% of cases in Thailand but none in Qingdao. CONCLUSIONS: The APRA identified food as the main trigger of anaphylaxis in children, but causative allergens differed even across Asian countries. Fewer than two-thirds of cases received adrenaline treatment, pre-hospital adrenaline usage was low, and adrenaline device prescription remained suboptimal. The registry recognizes an unmet need to strengthen anaphylaxis care and research in Asia-Pacific.

El pediatra de Atención Primaria y la anafilaxia / The primary care pediatrician and anaphylaxis

La anafilaxia es una reacción alérgica grave de instauración rápida y potencialmente mortal. El diagnóstico de anafilaxia es clínico y debe realizarse de manera precoz. Aparece en las 2 primeras horas tras exposición al alérgeno, en los primeros 30 minutos en alergia alimentaria y más precozmente con medicamentos intravenosos o picaduras de himenópteros. Los síntomas cutáneos suelen ser los primeros en manifestarse y están presentes en la mayoría de los casos, más de un 80%. Pueden ser leves o transitorios e incluso no estar presentes en un 18% de los casos. Si se afecta el sistema cardiocirculatorio estaríamos ante un shock anafiláctico. La causa más frecuente en Pediatría son los alimentos. Existen cofactores cuya presencia aumenta la probabilidad de anafilaxia; los más importantes son: el ejercicio, los fármacos, la fiebre y el estrés. El tratamiento de elección es la adrenalina intramuscular. Tanto los padres como los niños deben saber identificar los signos y/o síntomas del inicio de la anafilaxia para instaurar el tratamiento pautado en el plan de acción escrito.

Anaphylaxis is a severe, rapid and potentially fatal allergic reaction. The diagnosis of anaphylaxis is clinical and must be early. It appears in the first 2 hours after exposure to the allergen, in the first 30 minutes in food allergy and earlier with intravenous drugs or hymenoptera stings. Cutaneous symptoms are generally the first to appear and are present in most cases, more than 80%. They may be mild or transitory, or absent in 18% of cases. If the cardio-circulatory system is affected, an anaphylactic shock occurs. The most frequent cause in pediatrics is nutrition. There are several cofactors whose presence increases the likelihood of anaphylaxis; the most important are: exercise, medication, fever and stress. The treatment of choice is intramuscular adrenaline. Parents and children should be able to identify the signs and/or symptoms of anaphylaxis in order to implement the treatment prescribed in the written action plan. (AU)

Metabolic effect of adrenaline infusion in people with type 1 diabetes and healthy individuals.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: As a result of early loss of the glucagon response, adrenaline is the primary counter-regulatory hormone in type 1 diabetes. Diminished adrenaline responses to hypoglycaemia due to counter-regulatory failure are common in type 1 diabetes, and are probably induced by exposure to recurrent hypoglycaemia, however, the metabolic effects of adrenaline have received less research attention, and also there is conflicting evidence regarding adrenaline sensitivity in type 1 diabetes. Thus, we aimed to investigate the metabolic response to adrenaline and explore whether it is modified by prior exposure to hypoglycaemia. METHODS: Eighteen participants with type 1 diabetes and nine healthy participants underwent a three-step ascending adrenaline infusion during a hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp. Continuous glucose monitoring data obtained during the week before the study day were used to assess the extent of hypoglycaemia exposure. RESULTS: While glucose responses during the clamp were similar between people with type 1 diabetes and healthy participants, plasma concentrations of NEFAs and glycerol only increased in the group with type 1 diabetes (p<0.001). Metabolomics revealed an increase in the most common NEFAs (p<0.01). Other metabolic responses were generally similar between participants with type 1 diabetes and healthy participants. Exposure to hypoglycaemia was negatively associated with the NEFA response; however, this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In conclusion, individuals with type 1 diabetes respond with increased lipolysis to adrenaline compared with healthy participants by mobilising the abundant NEFAs in plasma, whereas other metabolic responses were similar. This may suggest that the metabolic sensitivity to adrenaline is altered in a pathway-specific manner in type 1 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05095259.

Hospital Variation in Epinephrine Administration Before Defibrillation for Cardiac Arrest Due to Shockable Rhythm.

OBJECTIVES: Contrary to advanced cardiac life support guidelines that recommend immediate defibrillation for shockable in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), epinephrine administration before first defibrillation is common and associated with lower survival at a "patient-level." Whether this practice varies across hospitals and its association with "hospital-level" IHCA survival remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine hospital variation in rates of epinephrine administration before defibrillation for shockable IHCA and its association with IHCA survival. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Five hundred thirteen hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines Resuscitation Registry. PATIENTS: A total of 37,668 adult patients with IHCA due to an initial shockable rhythm from 2000 to 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Epinephrine before first defibrillation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Using multivariable hierarchical regression, we examined hospital variation in epinephrine administration before first defibrillation and its association with hospital-level rates of risk-adjusted survival. The median hospital rate of epinephrine administration before defibrillation was 18.8%, with large variation across sites (range, 0-68.8%; median odds ratio: 1.54; 95% CI, 1.47-1.61). Major teaching status and annual IHCA volume were associated with hospital rate of epinephrine administration before defibrillation. Compared with hospitals with the lowest rate of epinephrine administration before defibrillation (Q1), there was a stepwise decline in risk-adjusted survival at hospitals with higher rates of epinephrine administration before defibrillation (Q1: 44.3%, Q2: 43.4%; Q3: 41.9%; Q4: 40.3%; p for trend < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of epinephrine before defibrillation in shockable IHCA is common and varies markedly across U.S. hospitals. Hospital rates of epinephrine administration before defibrillation were associated with a significant stepwise decrease in hospital rates of risk-adjusted survival. Efforts to prioritize immediate defibrillation for patients with shockable IHCA and avoid early epinephrine administration are urgently needed.

Assessing the Efficacy of Buffered Versus Nonbuffered Lidocaine in Dental Extractions: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Injections using buffered lidocaine may decrease discomfort, have a quicker onset, and be a more efficacious local anesthetic. Previous studies have been inconclusive in the oral context. PURPOSE: To address if bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine can decrease pain from the use of local anesthesia, has a quicker onset time, and is more efficacious. STUDY DESIGN: The design was a single-center double-blinded randomized control trial, set in an outpatient oral and maxillofacial clinic housed in the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. Inclusion criteria for the study were patients requiring a single tooth extraction due either to caries or periodontal disease. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The predictor variable was the local anesthetic used either nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (control) or bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (study) was randomly assigned. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES: Primary outcome variables were injection pain score, and postoperative pain, time to anesthetic onset, and the number of rounds of injections required to achieve adequate anesthesia. COVARIATES: The covariates were jaw involved, age, sex, and race, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, current tobacco use, history of psychiatric illness, chronic pain, and preoperative pain score. ANALYSES: Test statistics were calculated using Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Spearman rank correlation test, χ2 test for bivariate analyses, and Fisher's exact test. P values ≤ .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The final sample was 114 subjects. The mean age of the sample was 42.97 years, standard deviation ±13.43 years. The sample was 39.47% male. The racial demographics were Caucasian (62.28%) and African American (33.33%). Buffered lidocaine did not have a statistically significant relationship with any of the outcomes. The jaw involved had a statistically significant association to the injection pain score (P value = .006), and the number of rounds of anesthetic required (P value = .047). Age showed a statistically significant association to injection pain score (P value = .032), and the number of rounds of anesthetic required (P value = .027). Finally, preoperative pain had a statistically significant relationship with injection pain score (P value = < .001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this study, bicarbonate buffered lidocaine did not exhibit any discernible advantages over nonbuffered lidocaine for any study outcomes.

Cumulative epinephrine dose during cardiac arrest and neurologic outcome after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Epinephrine is recommended without an apparent ceiling dosage during cardiac arrest. However, excessive alpha- and beta-adrenergic stimulation may contribute to unnecessarily high aortic afterload, promote post-arrest myocardial dysfunction, and result in cerebral microvascular insufficiency in patients receiving extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults (≥ 18 years) who received ECPR at large academic ECMO center from 2018 to 2022. Patients were grouped based on the amount of epinephrine given during cardiac arrest into low (≤ 3 mg) and high (> 3 mg) groups. The primary endpoint was neurologic outcome at hospital discharge, defined by cerebral performance category (CPC). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between cumulative epinephrine dosage during arrest and neurologic outcome. RESULTS: Among 51 included ECPR cases, the median age of patients was 60 years, and 55% were male. The mean cumulative epinephrine dose administered during arrest was 6.2 mg but ranged from 0 to 24 mg. There were 18 patients in the low-dose (≤ 3 mg) and 25 patients in the high-dose (> 3 mg) epinephrine groups. Favorable neurologic outcome at discharge was significantly greater in the low-dose (55%) compared to the high-dose (24%) group (p = 0.025). After adjusting for age, those who received higher doses of epinephrine during the arrest were more likely to have unfavorable neurologic outcomes at hospital discharge (odds ratio 4.6, 95% CI 1.3, 18.0, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: After adjusting for age, cumulative epinephrine doses above 3 mg during cardiac arrest may be associated with unfavorable neurologic outcomes after ECPR and require further investigation.