Comparison of phenobarbital monotherapy to a benzodiazepine-based regimen for management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in the trauma population. Benzodiazepines (BZDs) are standard of care for AWS; however, given the risk of delirium with BZDs and reports of BZD-refractory withdrawal, phenobarbital (PHB) has emerged as an alternative therapy for AWS. Safety and efficacy studies of PHB for AWS in trauma patients are lacking. Our aim was to compare a BZD versus PHB protocol in the management of AWS in trauma patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at a level 1 trauma center of patients at risk for AWS managed with either a BZD or a low-dose oral PHB regimen. Patients were excluded if they were taking BZDs or barbiturates before admission, received propofol or dexmedetomidine before initiation of the study drug, presented with delirium tremens or seizures, or died or discharged within 24 hours of presentation. The primary outcome was complicated AWS (seizures or alcohol withdrawal delirium/delirium tremens). Secondary outcomes included uncomplicated AWS; therapy escalation; oversedation; delirium-, intensive care unit-, and ventilator-free days; and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 411 patients were identified; 118 received BZD, and 293 received PHB. The odds of developing complicated AWS with PHB versus BZD-based therapy were not statistically significant (odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-1.39); however, patients receiving PHB were less likely to develop uncomplicated AWS (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.04-0.14) and less likely to require escalation of therapy (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.84). The PHB group had a length of stay 3.1 days shorter than the BZD group ( p = 0.002). There was no difference in intensive care unit-, ventilator-, or delirium-free days. CONCLUSION: A PHB-based protocol for the management of AWS is a safe and effective alternative to BZD-based regimens in trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Use of Tissue Plasminogen Activator Alteplase Purge Solution in an Impella 5.5 Heart Pump.

Standardized Impella purge solutions have traditionally consisted of 5-40% dextrose with or without unfractionated heparin as a means of anticoagulation. Such a solution serves to create a pressure barrier preventing entry of blood into the pump's motor housing with heparin providing adequate purge pathway patency in the event of this occurring. We present a case of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA, Activase) utilization in lieu of the recommended purge solution due to concern for thrombus formation of the purge pathway in a 51-year-old male with cardiogenic shock status-post Impella 5.5 heart pump placement for hemodynamic support while awaiting heart transplantation. The purge solution was successfully administered for 48 hours without complication and a reduction in average purge pressure with increase in purge flow rate was observed.

Treatment of Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome: Phenobarbital vs CIWA-Ar Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepine-based therapy for alcohol withdrawal is associated with agitation and respiratory depression. Treatment can be complicated by a need for adjunctive therapy to control these symptoms and in patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Strong evidence for the effectiveness of alternative treatment modalities is lacking, despite the availability of promising pharmacological agents such as phenobarbital. OBJECTIVE: To compare the standard of care for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal-a symptom-triggered benzodiazepine protocol used in conjunction with the revised Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol (CIWA-Ar) scale-with a phenobarbital protocol. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study conducted from January 2016 through June 2017 at a 42-bed medical intensive care unit in a private teaching hospital in Nashville, Tennessee. The primary outcome was intensive care unit length of stay. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation, and use of adjunctive pharmacotherapy. RESULTS: Patients who received phenobarbital had significantly shorter stays in the intensive care unit than did those who received therapy based on the CIWA-Ar scale (mean [SD], 2.4 [1.5] vs 4.4 [3.9] days; P < .001). Those who received phenobarbital also had significantly shorter hospital stays (4.3 [3.4] vs 6.9 [6.6] days; P = .004). The incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation was lower in the phenobarbital group (1 [2%] vs 14 [23%] patients; P < .001), as was use of adjunctive agents for symptom control, including dexmedetomidine (4 [7%] vs 17 [28%] patients; P = .002). CONCLUSION: A phenobarbital protocol for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal is an effective alternative to the standard-of-care protocol of symptom-triggered benzodiazepine therapy.