The Use of Metaraminol as a Vasopressor in Critically Unwell Patients: A Narrative Review and a Survey of UK Practice.

Background: Major international guidelines state that norepinephrine should be used as the first-line vasopressor to achieve adequate blood pressure in patients with hypotension or shock. However, recent observational studies report that in the United Kingdom and Australia, metaraminol is often used as second line medication for cardiovascular support. Aim of the study: The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of metaraminol use for management of shock in critically unwell patients and carry out a survey evaluating whether UK critical care units use metaraminol and under which circumstances. Methods: A systematic review literature search was conducted. A short telephone survey consisting of 6 questions regarding metaraminol use was conducted across 30 UK critical care units which included a mix of tertiary and district general intensive care units. Results: Twenty-six of thirty contacted centres responded to our survey. Metaraminol was used in 88% of them in various settings and circumstances (emergency department, theatres, medical emergencies on medical wards), with 67% reporting use of metaraminol infusions in the critical care setting. The systematic literature review revealed several case reports and only two studies conducted in the last 20 years investigating the effect of metaraminol as a stand-alone vasopressor. Both studies focused on different aspects of metaraminol use and the data was incomparable, hence we decided not to perform a meta-analysis. Conclusions: Metaraminol is widely used as a vasopressor inside and outside of the critical care setting in the UK despite limited evidence supporting its safety and efficacy for treating shock. Further service evaluation, observational studies and prospective randomised controlled trials are warranted to validate the role and safety profile of metaraminol in the treatment of the critically unwell patient.

ECCO2R as a bridge to a decision in type II respiratory failure.

INTRODUCTION: End-of-life decisions are often time consuming and difficult for everyone involved. In some of these cases extracorporeal life support systems could potentially be used not only as a bridge to treatment but as a tool to buy time to allow patient's participation in decision making and to avoid further futile invasive procedures. CASE REPORT: A previously healthy 53-year-old female patient presented with respiratory failure of unknown cause. In the course of treatment her condition was deemed irreversible and the only option for any chance of long-term survival was a lung transplant. During this whole time the patient's condition was managed with extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal system (ECCO2R). She remained compos mentis and expressed the wish to stop all the treatment as the option of lung transplant was not acceptable to her. Treatment was withdrawn and she passed away. DISCUSSION: In cases of end-of-life decisions, time can play an essential role. Even though extracorporeal life support systems have been conceptualised to be a bridge to treatment, they could be beneficial in a situation when time is needed to make a decision. ECCO2R has been used as a treatment method in different settings, however, in this case it served as a tool to maintain the patient alive and conscious for a sufficient time for her to participate in decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Our case report demonstrated that ECCO2R could serve as a bridge to decision in situations when time is limited and the decisions that need to be made are difficult.

Diagnosis of HELLP Syndrome: A 10-Year Survey in a Perinatology Centre.

HELLP (Hemolysis, Elevated Liver enzymes, Low Platelet count) syndrome is a severe and rapidly progressing condition that requires distinct diagnostic considerations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the Mississippi triple-class system on the HELLP syndrome diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in a perinatology centre during a 10-year period, and consider its effectiveness and necessity in everyday practice. A retrospective observational cohort study was carried out using the medical records of a tertiary perinatology centre with the diagnosis of HELLP syndrome from the period of time between 2005 and 2014. The patients who fit the HELLP syndrome diagnosis were grouped by the Mississippi triple-class system. The means of diagnosis and treatment outcomes within those groups were analysed statistically. There was insufficient statistical evidence of the blood pressure levels corresponding to the severity of patients' condition (p > 0.05 in all of the groups). The clinical presentation varied within all of the classes, and the only objective means of diagnosis and evaluation of progression of the condition were laboratory tests. Even though HELLP syndrome is considered a hypertensive multi-organ disorder of pregnancy, the level of hypertension does not correlate to the severity of the condition; hence, the diagnosis should be based on biochemical laboratory evidence. Vigilance in suspicion and the recognition of HELLP syndrome and appropriate treatment are essential in order to ensure better maternal and neonatal outcomes.