Volatile anaesthetic for treatment of respiratory failure from status asthmaticus requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

A 37-year-old male smoker with asthma presented with status asthmaticus refractory to terbutaline, intravenous magnesium, continuous bronchodilators, steroids, heliox and theophylline infusion. He was intubated on hospital day 2 and cannulated for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) on hospital day 3 for refractory respiratory acidosis secondary to hypercapnia and hypoxemia despite maximum medical management over 4 days. He was started on inhaled isoflurane with improvement in peak airway pressures and respiratory acidosis, allowing for prompt weaning from V-V ECMO and extubation. Inhaled volatile anaesthetics exert a direct action on bronchiole smooth muscle causing relaxation with significant effect despite severely impaired pulmonary function. This treatment in patients on ECMO may allow for earlier decannulation and decreased risk of coagulopathy, ECMO circuit failure, infection, renal failure, pulmonary haemorrhage and central nervous system haemorrhage. However, major limitations exist in delivering volatile anaesthetics, which may make use inefficient and costly despite efficacy.

Undiagnosed hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is indicated for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients who have a very high or prohibitive surgical risk as assessed pre-procedurally by the Society of Thoracic Surgery Risk Score, EuroSCORE (II), frailty testing, and other predictors. When combined with another left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, careful consideration must be taken prior to proceeding with transcatheter aortic valve replacement because an additional masked left ventricular outflow tract pathology can lead to challenging hemodynamics in the peri-deployment phase, as reported in this case. CASE PRESENTATION: A 56-year-old Caucasian man with multiple comorbidities and severe aortic stenosis underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement under monitored anesthesia care. During the deployment phase, he developed dyspnea that progressed to pulmonary edema requiring emergent conversion to general anesthesia, orotracheal intubation, acute respiratory distress syndrome-type ventilation, and vasopressor medications. Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography was performed and hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy with systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve was discovered as an underlying pathology, undetected on preoperative imaging. After treatment with beta blockers, fluid resuscitation, and alpha-1 agonists, he stabilized and was eventually discharged from our hospital without any lasting sequelae. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with aortic stenosis most often develop symmetric hypertrophy; however, a small subset has asymmetric septal hypertrophy leading to left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. In cases of severe aortic stenosis, however, evidence of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction via both symptoms and echocardiographic findings may be minimized due to extremely high afterload on the left ventricle. Diagnosing a left ventricular outflow tract obstruction as the cause of hemodynamic instability during transcatheter aortic valve replacement, in the absence of abnormal findings on echocardiogram preoperatively, requires a high index of clinical suspicion. The management of acute onset left ventricular outflow tract obstruction intraoperatively consists primarily of medical therapy, including rate control, adequate volume resuscitation, and avoidance of inotropes. With persistently elevated gradients, interventional treatments may be considered.

Intravenous Cosyntropin Versus Epidural Blood Patch for Treatment of Postdural Puncture Headache.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy of IV cosyntropin as an alternative to epidural blood patch (EBP) for refractory or severe post-dural puncture headache (PDPH). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were randomized to receive EBP or intravenous cosyntropin after diagnosis with post-dural puncture headache. Efficacy was evaluated immediately after treatment and at 1 day, 3 days, and 7 days following treatment using self-reported verbal reported scores for pain and function related to their headache on a 10-point scale using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Baseline information for the control and study cohorts showed no difference based on intent to treat analysis. EBP showed significant improvement over cosyntropin at day 1 (P < 0.001) for VRS pain and function scores; however, cosyntropin demonstrated similar efficacy to EBP immediately after treatment and days 3 and 7 post treatment (respectively, P = 0.459, P = 0.391 and 0.925 for pain and P = 0.189 and 0.478 for function). Treatment effects remained at day 1 after multivariate analysis (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002 for pain and function, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: It is reasonable to consider IV cosyntropin as the treatment of choice for patients in whom EBP is contraindicated or in austere environments where there is limited or no access to anesthesia trained providers. Future research should compare efficacy and cost of prophylaxis to treatment of PDPH with intravenous cosyntropin and evaluate the most effective dosing regimen, including duration, number, and strength of doses.