Clevidipino como antihipertensivo en la cirugía de feocromocitoma / Clevidipine for hypertension treatment in pheochromocytoma surgery

El feocromocitoma es un tumor productor de catecolaminas y su tratamiento de elección es la adrenalectomía laparoscópica. Durante la insuflación del neumoperitoneo y la manipulación tumoral hay alto riesgo de liberación masiva de catecolaminas y crisis hipertensivas. Tras la exéresis tumoral es frecuente la hipotensión arterial grave por vasodilatación relativa y por el efecto residual de los fármacos antihipertensivos utilizados. Presentamos el caso clínico de un paciente con feocromocitoma intervenido de adrenalectomía laparoscópica. Durante la manipulación quirúrgica hubo un pico hipertensivo brusco que pudo controlarse rápidamente con clevidipino en perfusión. Tras la resección tumoral se detuvo la perfusión y no se produjo hipotensión arterial en ningún momento. El clevidipino es un nuevo antagonista del calcio intravenoso con inicio de acción rápido y vida media corta que no tiene efecto residual y no causa hipotensión tras la resección tumoral, por lo que puede ser un fármaco de primera elección esta cirugía

Pheochromocytoma is a catecholamine-producing tumour and laparoscopic adrenalectomy is its treatment of choice. During pneumoperitoneum insufflation and tumour handling there is a high risk of massive catecholamine release and hypertensive crisis. After tumour excision, severe arterial hypotension is a common effect, due to relative vasodilation and the residual effect of antihypertensive drugs. We report the case of a patient with pheochromocytoma who was treated with laparoscopic adrenalectomy. During surgical manipulation there was a sudden hypertensive peak that could be controlled quickly with clevidipine infusion. After tumour resection, clevidipine perfusion was stopped and there were no arterial hypotension episodes. Clevidipine is a new intravenous calcium antagonist with rapid onset of action and short half-life that has no residual effect and does not produce arterial hypotension after tumour resection. For these reasons, it can be a first-choice drug for this kind of surgery

Clevidipine for hypertension treatment in pheochromocytoma surgery. / Clevidipino como antihipertensivo en la cirugía de feocromocitoma.

Pheochromocytoma is a catecholamine-producing tumour and laparoscopic adrenalectomy is its treatment of choice. During pneumoperitoneum insufflation and tumour handling there is a high risk of massive catecholamine release and hypertensive crisis. After tumour excision, severe arterial hypotension is a common effect, due to relative vasodilation and the residual effect of antihypertensive drugs. We report the case of a patient with pheochromocytoma who was treated with laparoscopic adrenalectomy. During surgical manipulation there was a sudden hypertensive peak that could be controlled quickly with clevidipine infusion. After tumour resection, clevidipine perfusion was stopped and there were no arterial hypotension episodes. Clevidipine is a new intravenous calcium antagonist with rapid onset of action and short half-life that has no residual effect and does not produce arterial hypotension after tumour resection. For these reasons, it can be a first-choice drug for this kind of surgery.

Prevalencia y enfoque terapéutico del dolor en el servicio de urgencias de un hospital universitario / Prevalence and therapeutic management of pain in the emergency department of a university hospital

Objetivo: conocer la prevalencia de dolor y su enfoque terapéutico en un servicio de urgencias. Material y métodos: estudio transversal llevado a cabo en el Servicio de Urgencias de un hospital universitario durante 7 días consecutivos. El médico de triaje interrogó sobre la presencia de dolor a los pacientes mayores de 15 años que acudían a urgencias. Se excluyeron los pacientes atendidos en el Servicio de Psiquiatría, Obstetricia-Ginecología y aquellos cuya gravedad no permitía la valoración del dolor en el triaje. Se revisó posteriormente el tratamiento analgésico previo a la visita, la evaluación del dolor, el tratamiento analgésico aplicado durante su estancia en urgencias y el tratamiento pautado al alta. Resultados: se analizaron 668 de los 2.287 pacientes que acudieron a urgencias durante el periodo del estudio. Presentaron dolor 501 pacientes (75 %), de los que 45 ingresaron y 456 fueron dados de alta a domicilio (240 pacientes procedentes de nivel 1 y 216 de nivel 2). El 24,5 % de los 501 pacientes que manifestaron tener dolor realizaba tratamiento analgésico previo. De los 216 pacientes atendidos en el nivel 2, el 41,7 % recibió tratamiento analgésico durante su estancia [paracetamol (80,2 %), antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINE) (50 %), coanalgésicos (1 %), opioides débiles (20,8 %), opioides fuertes (3,1 %)]. El 32,7 % de los 196 pacientes sin registro de evaluación del dolor recibió tratamiento analgésico a demanda. En un 69,4 % de los 456 pacientes que no precisaron ingreso, al alta se pautó analgesia o se modificó el tratamiento analgésico previo [paracetamol (55 %), AINE (67 %), co-analgésicos (10 %), opioides débiles (10 %), opioides fuertes (1,1 %)]. Conclusiones: se evidencia una elevada prevalencia de dolor (75 %) en los pacientes que acuden al servicio de urgencias. El 41,7 % de los pacientes que presentaban dolor recibió tratamiento analgésico durante su estancia y en el 69,4 % de los pacientes que no precisaron ingreso se pautó analgesia al alta. Destaca la baja prescripción de opioides (AU)

Aim: To know the prevalence of pain and the therapeutic approach in an emergency department (ED). Material and methods: Cross-sectional study in the ED of a university hospital during 7 consecutive days was performed. The presence of pain was asked by a physician to patients older than 15 years admitted at ED. Patients admitted at Psychiatry, Obstetrics-Gynecology Emergency Department and those whose serious condition would not allow pain assessment in triage were excluded. The previous analgesic treatment, pain assessment, analgesic treatment in the ED and also scheduled treatment at discharge were later reviewed. Results: Six hundred and sixty-eight from 2,287 patients who were admitted at ED were analyzed. Five hundred and one patients reported pain (75 %), of which 45 were admitted and 456 were discharged at home (240 patients in level 1, 216 at level 2). The 24.5 % of the 501 patients who reported pain at admission were previously treated with analgesics. The 41.7 % of the 216 patients treated at level 2 received analgesic treatment during their stay [paracetamol (80.2 %), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (50.0 %), co-analgesics (1.0 %), weak opioids (20.8 %), strong opioids (3.1 %)]. The 32.7 % of the 196 patients without documented pain assessment received analgesic treatment as required. In 69.4 % of the 456 patients who did not require hospitalization, analgesic treatment was prescribed or modified at discharge [paracetamol (55 %), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (67 %), co-analgesics (10 %), weak opioids (10 %), strong opioids (1.1 %)]. Conclusions: A high prevalence of pain (75 %) was found in patients admitted at ED. The 41.7 % received analgesic treatment during their stay and in 69.4 % of patients analgesia was prescribed at discharge. Low opioid prescription was detected (AU)