Contemporary hemodynamic management of acute spinal cord injuries with intravenous and enteral vasoactive agents: A narrative review.

PURPOSE: The pathophysiology and hemodynamic management of acute spinal cord injuries, including the use of intravenous and enteral vasoactive agents, are reviewed. SUMMARY: Spinal cord injuries are devastating neurological insults that in the acute setting lead to significant hemodynamic disturbances, including hypotension and bradycardia, that are influenced by the level of injury. High thoracic (usually defined as at or above T6) and cervical injuries often manifest with hypotension and bradycardia due to destruction of sympathetic nervous system activity and unopposed vagal stimulation to the myocardium, whereas lower thoracic injuries tend to result in hypotension alone due to venous pooling. Initial management includes maintaining euvolemia with crystalloids and maintaining or augmenting mean arterial pressure with the use of intravenous vasoactive agents to improve neurological outcomes. Choice of vasopressor should be based on patient-specific factors, particularly level of injury and presenting hemodynamics. This review includes the most recent literature on intravenous vasopressors as well as the limited evidence supporting the use of enteral vasoactive agents. Enteral vasoactive agents may be considered, when clinically appropriate, as a strategy to wean patients off of intravenous agents and facilitate transfer outside of the intensive care unit. CONCLUSION: The hemodynamic management of acute spinal cord injuries often requires the use of vasoactive agents to meet mean arterial pressure goals and improve neurological outcomes. Patient-specific factors must be considered when choosing intravenous and enteral vasoactive agents.

Family presence during brain death evaluation: a randomized controlled trial*.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if a family presence educational intervention during brain death evaluation improves understanding of brain death without affecting psychological distress. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Four ICUs at an academic tertiary care center. SUBJECTS: Immediate family members of patients suspected to have suffered brain death. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were group randomized to presence or absence at bedside throughout the brain death evaluation with a trained chaperone. All randomized subjects were administered a validated "understanding brain death" survey before and after the intervention. Subjects were assessed for psychological well-being between 30 and 90 days after the intervention. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Follow-up assessment of psychological well-being was performed using the Impact of Event Scale and General Health Questionnaire. Brain death understanding, Impact of Event Scale, and General Health Questionnaire scores were analyzed using Wilcoxon nonparametric tests. Analyses were adjusted for within family correlation. Fifty-eight family members of 17 patients undergoing brain death evaluation were enrolled: 38 family members were present for 11 brain death evaluations and 20 family members were absent for six brain death evaluations. Baseline understanding scores were similar between groups (median 3.0 [presence group] vs 2.5 [control], p = 0.482). Scores increased by a median of 2 (interquartile range, 1-2) if present versus 0 (interquartile range, 0-0) if absent (p < 0.001). Sixty-six percent of those in the intervention group achieved perfect postintervention "understanding" scores, compared with 20% of subjects who were not present (p = 0.02). Median Impact of Event Scale and General Health Questionnaire scores were similar between groups at follow-up (Impact of Event Scale: present = 20.5, absent = 23.5, p = 0.211; General Health Questionnaire: present = 13.5, absent = 13.0, p = 0.250). CONCLUSIONS: Family presence during brain death evaluation improves understanding of brain death with no apparent adverse impact on psychological well-being. Family presence during brain death evaluation is feasible and safe.