Exploring the Median Effective Dose of Ciprofol for Anesthesia Induction in Elderly Patients: Impact of Frailty on ED50.

Purpose: Explore the median effective dose of ciprofol for inducing loss of consciousness in elderly patients and investigate how frailty influences the ED50 of ciprofol in elderly patients. Patients and Methods: A total of 26 non-frail patients and 28 frail patients aged 65-78 years, with BMI ranging from 15 to 28 kg/m2, and classified as ASA grade II or III were selected. Patients were divided into two groups according to frailty: non-frail patients (CFS<4), frail patients (CFS≥4). With an initial dose of 0.3 mg/kg for elderly non-frail patients and 0.25 mg/kg for elderly frail patients, using the up-and-down Dixon method, and the next patient's dose was dependent on the previous patient's response. Demographic information, heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO2), mean blood pressure (MBP), and bispectral index (BIS) were recorded every 30 seconds, starting from the initiation of drug administration and continuing up to 3 minutes post-administration. Additionally, the total ciprofol dosage during induction, occurrences of hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, and injection pain were recorded. Results: The calculated ED50 (95% confidence interval [CI]) and ED95 (95% CI) values for ciprofol-induced loss of consciousness were as follows: 0.267 mg/kg (95% CI 0.250-0.284) and 0.301 mg/kg (95% CI 0.284-0.397) for elderly non-frail patients; and 0.263 mg/kg (95% CI 0.244-0.281) and 0.302 mg/kg (95% CI 0.283-0.412) for elderly frail patients. Importantly, no patients reported intravenous injection pain, required treatment for hypotension, or experienced significant bradycardia. Conclusion: Frailty among elderly patients does not exert a notable impact on the median effective dose of ciprofol for anesthesia induction. Our findings suggest that anesthesiologists may forego the necessity of dosage adjustments when administering ciprofol for anesthesia induction in elderly frail patients.

Effect of Dexmedetomidine on Intraoperative Hemodynamics and Blood Loss in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective Dexmedetomidine (Dex) is a highly selective α2 adrenoceptor agonist that reduces blood pressure and heart rate. However, its ability to provide stable hemodynamics and a clinically significant reduction in blood loss in spine surgery is still a matter of debate. This study aimed to investigate the effects of Dex on intraoperative hemodynamics and blood loss in patients undergoing spine surgery.Methods The Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to February 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including patients undergoing spine surgeries under general anaesthesia and comparing Dex and saline. A fixed- or random-effect model was used depending on heterogeneity.Results Twenty-one RCTs, including 1388 patients, were identified. Dex added the overall risk of intraoperative hypotension (odds ratio [OR]: 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.24 - 3.58; P=0.006) and bradycardia (OR: 2.48; 95%CI: 1.57 - 3.93; P=0.0001). The use of a loading dose of Dex led to significantly increased risks of intraoperative hypotension (OR: 2.00; 95%CI: 1.06 - 3.79; P=0.03) and bradycardia (OR: 2.28; 95%CI: 1.42 - 3.66; P=0.0007). For patients receiving total intravenous anesthesia, there was an increased risk of hypotension (OR: 2.90; 95%CI: 1.24 - 6.82; P=0.01) and bradycardia (OR: 2.66; 95%CI: 1.53 - 4.61; P=0. 0005). For patients in the inhalation anesthesia group, only an increased risk of bradycardia (OR: 4.95; 95%CI: 1.41 - 17.37; P=0.01) was observed. No significant increase in the risk of hypotension and bradycardia was found in the combined intravenous-inhalation anesthesia group. The incidence of severe hypotension (OR: 2.57; 95%CI: 1.05 - 6.32; P=0.04), but not mild hypotension, was increased. Both mild (OR: 2.55; 95%CI: 1.06 - 6.15; P=0.04) and severe (OR: 2.45; 95%CI: 1.43 - 4.20; P=0.001) bradycardia were associated with a higher risk. The overall analyses did not reveal significant reduction in intraoperative blood loss. However, a significant decrease in blood loss was observed in total inhalation anesthesia subgroup (mean difference [MD]: -82.97; 95%CI: -109.04 - -56.90; P<0.001).Conclusions Dex increases the risks of intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia in major spine surgery. The administration of a loading dose of Dex and the utilization of various anesthesia maintenance methods may potentially impact hemodynamic stability and intraoperative blood loss.

Donepezil-induced bradycardia in a schizophrenic patient with comorbid neurocognitive disorder: a case report and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Trials of cholinergic and glutamatergic agents have improved cognition and memory for the geriatric schizophrenic population. Donepezil is an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor that improves cognition by preventing postsynaptic degradation of hippocampal acetylcholine in patients with mild-to-moderate dementia. Donepezil has been attributed to some adverse effects, especially gastrointestinal symptoms. However, cardiovascular adverse effects are not common as there remains a dearth of literature regarding donepezil-induced bradycardia. CASE REPORT: Hence, we present the case of a 70-year-old Hispanic female with past psychiatry history of schizophrenia who developed bradycardia and syncope following the commencement of low-dose donepezil in the inpatient unit and subsequent resolution with cessation. She had no prior cardiovascular symptoms or diagnosis. DISCUSSION: Considering there is no baseline cardiac monitoring requirement guideline for patients on Donepezil treatment, pre-assessment electrocardiogram is advised before the commencement of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. Finally, routine monitoring of vital signs for at least the first 72 hours following the start of donepezil might be good proactive practice for all psychiatrists. Extending this practice to inpatient and outpatient service settings will be worthwhile.

Randomized Double-Blinded Comparison of Intermittent Boluses Phenylephrine and Norepinephrine for the Treatment of Postspinal Hypotension in Patients with Severe Pre-Eclampsia During Cesarean Section.

Background: Norepinephrine has fewer negative effects on heart rate (HR) and cardiac output (CO) for treating postspinal hypotension (PSH) compared with phenylephrine during cesarean section. However, it remains unclear whether fetuses from patients with severe pre-eclampsia could benefit from the superiority of CO. The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of intermittent intravenous boluses of phenylephrine and norepinephrine used in equipotent doses for treating postspinal hypotension in patients with severe pre-eclampsia during cesarean section. Methods: A total of 80 patients with severe pre-eclampsia who developed PSH predelivery during cesarean section were included. Eligible patients were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive either phenylephrine or norepinephrine for treating PSH. The primary outcome was umbilical arterial pH. Secondary outcomes included other umbilical cord blood gas values, Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min, changes in hemodynamic parameters including CO, mean arterial pressure (MAP), HR, stroke volume (SV), and systemic vascular resistance (SVR), the number of vasopressor boluses required, and the incidence of bradycardia, hypertension, nausea, vomiting, and dizziness. Results: No significant difference was observed in umbilical arterial pH between the phenylephrine and norepinephrine groups (7.303±0.38 vs 7.303±0.44, respectively; P=0.978). Compared with the phenylephrine group, the overall CO (P=0.009) and HR (P=0.015) were greater in the norepinephrine group. The median [IQR] total number of vasopressor boluses required was comparable between the two groups (2 [1 to 3] and 2 [1 to 3], respectively; P=0.942). No significant difference was found in Apgar scores or the incidence of maternal complications between groups. Conclusion: A 60 µg bolus of phenylephrine and a 4.5 µg bolus of norepinephrine showed similar neonatal outcomes assessed by umbilical arterial pH and were equally effective when treating PSH during cesarean section in patients with severe pre-eclampsia. Norepinephrine provided a higher maternal CO and a lower incidence of bradycardia.

Safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine vs. midazolam in complex gastrointestinal endoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for complex digestive endoscopy procedures, with the goal of offering comprehensive clinical evidence. METHODS: Following predefined inclusion criteria, five databases were systematically searched, with a focus on identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the administration of dexmedetomidine and midazolam during complex digestive endoscopy procedures. The statistical software Stata 15.1 was employed for meticulous data analysis. RESULTS: Sixteen RCTs were encompassed, involving a total of 1218 patients. In comparison to the midazolam group, dexmedetomidine administration was associated with a reduced risk of respiratory depression (RR=0.25, 95 %CI: 0.11-0.56) and hypoxemia (RR=0.22, 95 %CI: 0.12-0.39). Additionally, the dexmedetomidine group exhibited lower incidence rates of choking (RR=0.27, 95 %CI: 0.16-0.47), physical movement (RR=0.16, 95 %CI: 0.09-0.27), and postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR=0.56,95 %CI: 0.34-0.92). Patients and endoscopists in the dexmedetomidine group reported higher levels of satisfaction (patient satisfaction: SMD=0.73, 95 %CI: 0.26-1.21; endoscopist satisfaction: SMD=0.84, 95 %CI: 0.24-1.44). The incidence of hypotension and anesthesia recovery time did not significantly differ between the two groups (hypotension: RR=1.73,95 %CI:0.94-3.20; anesthesia recovery time: SMD=0.02, 95 %Cl: 0.44-0.49). It is noteworthy that the administration of dexmedetomidine was associated with a significant increase in the incidence of bradycardia in patients. CONCLUSION: Compared to midazolam, dexmedetomidine exhibits a favorable safety profile for use in complex gastrointestinal endoscopy by significantly reducing the risk of respiratory depression and hypoxemia. Despite this, dexmedetomidine is associated with a higher incidence of bradycardia. These findings underscore the need for further research through larger, multi-center studies to thoroughly investigate dexmedetomidine's safety and efficacy.

Hypertensive emergency secondary to atropine.

Atropine, a competitive antagonist of acetylcholine muscarinic receptors, is commonly used to treat severe bradycardia by blocking parasympathetic activity. We present a rare case of hypertensive emergency following atropine administration, with only one previous report in the literature. A 78-year-old woman with essential hypertension and hypercholesterolemia was admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit for non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. During coronary angiography, an occlusion of the right coronary artery was identified. While removing the diagnostic catheter through the right radial artery, the patient experienced intense pain and discomfort, accompanied by a vasovagal reflex characterized by bradycardia and hypotension. Intravenous atropine (0.5mg) was administered, leading to a rapid rise in heart rate with frequent ventricular ectopy. Subsequently, a progressive and exaggerated elevation in arterial blood pressure occurred, peaking at 294/121mmHg approximately 10min after atropine administration. The patient developed hypertensive acute pulmonary edema, successfully treated with intravenous nitroglycerine (10mg) and furosemide (60mg). Blood pressure normalized after approximately 14min. The exact mechanism of atropine-induced hypertensive emergency remains unknown. While hypertensive emergencies with atropine are exceedingly rare, healthcare professionals should be aware of this potential effect and be prepared for prompt intervention.

Heart rate in newborns is associated with age, sex and maternal levothyroxine therapy.

AIM: To evaluate the definition and causes of neonatal bradycardias. METHODS: This retrospective study included 135 term-born newborns referred for 24-hour Holter monitoring due to bradycardia. Bradycardia was defined as either a heart rate below 80 beats per minute (standard definition) or a heart rate below our recently published age-specific reference values for neonatal heart rate. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age was 6.1 (1.3) days. With standard definition, 107 newborns (79%) had bradycardia, whereas only 20 (15%) had a minimum heart rate lower than the age-specific reference. Younger newborns had lower heart rates. Each day increased the minimum, mean and maximum heart rate by 1.8 (95% CI: 1.0, 2.6), 4.2 (95% CI: 3.0, 5.3) and 2.1 beats per minute (95% CI: 0.3, 3.8), respectively. Male sex and maternal levothyroxine medication were negatively associated with the mean and maximum heart rate. None of the newborns had a cardiac cause for low heart rate. CONCLUSION: Among term newborns with bradycardias, younger age, male sex and maternal levothyroxine medication were associated with a lower heart rate on Holter monitoring. Given the age-related increase in heart rate, the 80 beats per minute limit as a universal threshold for abnormal heart rate in newborns appears inappropriate.

Beneficial Effects of Low-Dose Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Premedication in Patient Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Under General Anesthesia: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Purpose: Dexmedetomidine (Dex) is a potent and highly selective α2-adrenergic receptor agonist. Within an appropriate dose range, Dex can effectively attenuate the surgical stress response, provide intraoperative hemodynamic stability, and improve the patient recovery quality. High-dose Dex can delay patient awakening from anesthesia and increase the incidence of bradycardia. This randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the effects of low-dose intravenous Dex premedication in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Material and Methods: In total, 100 patients undergoing LC were equally randomized into Group C (premedication with saline) and Group D (premedication with 0.5 µg/kg Dex). The patients were premedicated with saline or Dex, depending on the group, before anesthesia induction. Following this, anesthesia induction and endotracheal intubation was performed, and anesthesia was maintained during surgery. Following the completion of the surgery, the patients were transferred the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and stayed there until they met the PACU discharge criteria. The hemodynamic parameters, consumption of anesthetics, surgical duration, postoperative awakening time, extubation time, postoperative pain, and complications were recorded. Results: No significant differences were observed in the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) between the two groups before premedication (P>0.05). The MAP and HR immediately after endotracheal intubation and immediately after extubation were significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05 for both). The incidence of bradycardia was significantly higher in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05), while atropine was used in neither group. Propofol and remifentanil consumption was significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05). The postoperative awakening and extubation times were significantly shorter in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05). The postoperative visual analog scale scores for pain and incidence of nausea, vomiting, and cough were significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05 for all). Conclusion: Our data suggest that premedication with dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) before general anesthesia induction can effectively attenuate intraoperative stress response and postoperative pain, maintain perioperative hemodynamic stability, and decrease the incidence of adverse events, which might be an effective and safe anesthetic protocol during LC worthy of further clinical application.

BRASH syndrome with a complete heart block- a case report.

INTRODUCTION: BRASH syndrome (Bradycardia, Renal failure, Atrioventricular (AV) nodal blocking agent, Shock and Hyperkalemia) is a recently emerging diagnosis that describes the profound bradycardia seen in patients on AV nodal blockers who present with acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyperkalemia. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of a 68 years old female patient with past history of hypertension taking atenolol and Enalapril presented to emergency department with the complaint of loss of consciousness of 02 hours duration. She had 03 days history of fatigue, poor oral intake, decreased urine output, appetite loss, vertigo and global headache. Her vital signs were blood pressure of 60/40 mmHg, absent radial pulse and temperature of 36.4 °C. Her systemic examination was remarkable for dry buccal mucosa; apical heart rate was 22 beats per minute. Glasgow Coma Scale was 13/15. Her laboratory tests showed creatinine of 1.83 mg/dL, blood urea nitrogen of 89 mg/dL and potassium elevated to the level of 6.39 mEq/dL. ECG revealed complete heart block with a normal QT interval and T waves and no U waves with ventricular rate of 22 beats per minute. Her previous medications were discontinued and the patient was resuscitated with intravenous (IV) fluids. She was given 03 doses of 1 mg atropine every 5 minutes but there was no increment in heart rate. She was given 50% dextrose with 10 international units of regular insulin, 1 g of calcium gluconate and Intravenous perfusion of norepinephrine and dopamine. Subsequently, after 14 hours of ICU admission the patient had a cardiac arrest with asystole and resuscitation was attempted but she couldn't survive. CONCLUSION: BRASH syndrome is largely an under-recognized life threatening clinical diagnosis. Physicians should have high index of suspicion for BRASH when they encounter patients with bradycardia, hyperkalemia, and renal failure, as timely diagnosis is crucial in the management.

Efficacy and safety of Ciprofol compared with Propofol during general anesthesia induction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT).

BACKGROUND: Ciprofol, a newer entrant with similarities to propofol, has shown promise with a potentially improved safety profile, making it an attractive alternative for induction of general anesthesia. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ciprofol compared with propofol during general anesthesia induction. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Clinical Trial.gov, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to July 2023 to identify relevant studies. All statistical analyses were conducted using R statistical software version 4.1.2. RESULTS: Thirteen Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) encompassing a total of 1998 participants, were included in our analysis. The pooled analysis indicated that Ciprofol was associated with a notably lower incidence of pain upon injection [RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.23; I^2 = 43%, p < 0.0000001] and was non-inferior to propofol in terms of anesthesia success rate [RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.01; I^2 = 0%; p = 0.43]. In terms of safety, the incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the ciprofol group [RR:0.82; 95% CI:0.68 to 0.98; I^2 = 48%; p = 0.03]. However, no statistically significant differences were found for postoperative hypertension, bradycardia, or tachycardia. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Ciprofol is not inferior to Propofol in terms of its effectiveness in general anesthesia. Ciprofol emerges as a valuable alternative sedative with fewer side effects, especially reduced injection pain, when compared to Propofol. SUMMARY: Propofol, frequently utilized as an anesthetic, provides swift onset and quick recovery. However, it has drawbacks such as a narrow effective dosage range and a high occurrence of adverse effects, particularly pain upon injection. Ciprofol, a more recent drug with propofol-like properties, has demonstrated promise and may have an improved safety profile, making it a compelling alternative for inducing general anesthesia. This meta-analysis compared the safety and effectiveness of Ciprofol with Propofol for general anesthesia induction in a range of medical procedures, encompassing thirteen Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and 1998 individuals. The pooled analysis indicated that Ciprofol was associated with a notably lower incidence of pain upon injection [RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.23; I^2 = 43%, p < 0.0000001] and was non-inferior to propofol in terms of anesthesia success rate [RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.01; I^2 = 0%; p = 0.43]. In terms of safety, the incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the ciprofol group [RR:0.82; 95% CI:0.68 to 0.98; I^2 = 48%; p = 0.03]. However, no statistically significant differences were found for hypertension, bradycardia, or tachycardia. In conclusion, ciprofol is equally effective at inducing and maintaining general anesthesia as propofol. When compared to propofol, ciprofol is a better alternative sedative for operations including fiberoptic bronchoscopy, gynecological procedures, gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures, and elective surgeries because it has less adverse effects, most notably less painful injections.

The safety of remimazolam versus propofol in gastroscopic sedation: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis was designed to compare the safety and efficiency of remimazolam with those of propofol in patients undergoing gastroscope sedation. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid, Wanfang Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SINOMED, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies that reported on remimazolam versus propofol for gastroscope sedation from establishment to February 25, 2023. The sedative efficiency and the incidence of adverse events were assessed as outcomes. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Review Manager 5.4 and STATA 17 were used to perform all statistical analyses. RESULTS: A total of 26 randomized controlled trials involving 3,641 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that remimazolam had a significantly lower incidence of respiratory depression (risk ratio [RR] = 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.57; p < 0.01, GRADE high), hypoxemia (RR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23-0.49; p < 0.01, GRADE high), bradycardia (RR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23-0.51; p < 0.01, GRADE high), dizziness (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31-0.65; p < 0.01, GRADE high), injection site pain (RR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.03-0.13; p < 0.01, GRADE high), nausea or vomiting (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00; p = 0.05, GRADE moderate), and hypotension (RR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.26-0.48; p < 0.01, GRADE low). CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam can be used safely in gastroscopic sedation and reduces the incidence of respiratory depression, hypoxemia, bradycardia, injection site pain, and dizziness compared with propofol, and doesn't increase the incidence of nausea and vomiting.

QT-Interval Prolongation Associated with Supratherapeutic Guanfacine Concentration: A Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: Guanfacine, an alpha-2 adrenergic agonist, is used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Although cardiovascular effects including hypotension and bradycardia are common adverse effects of guanfacine, the effect of guanfacine on QT intervals remains unclear. The association between the serum concentration of guanfacine and its toxicity has also not been fully investigated. CASE REPORT: This is a case of a 21-year-old woman with ADHD who developed repeated presyncope 1 day before admission. She was taking 3 mg of extended-release guanfacine and 50 mg of sertraline. On admission, she had bradycardia and hypotension. An electrocardiogram (ECG) showed a QT interval of 0.68 s and a QTcF interval of 0.648 s. The QT intervals were manually measured and corrected by the Fridericia formula (QTcF = QT/RR1/3). Although she denied taking an overdose of guanfacine and other drugs, we suspected guanfacine toxicity. The serum guanfacine concentration was 13.0 ng/mL on admission and decreased to 3.2 ng/mL on day 1 and 0.4 ng/mL on day 2. Changes in QTcF intervals and her vital signs correlated with serum guanfacine concentrations. CONCLUSION: Supratherapeutic serum guanfacine concentrations may induce QT prolongation.

Genetic differences associated with dopamine and serotonin release mediate fear-induced bradycardia in the human brain.

Fear-induced bradycardia, a transient heartbeat deceleration following exposure to threat, is a physiological index observable in humans, especially in fear conditioning experiments. While gaining interest in recent years, it is still currently underemployed in neuroscientific research compared to more popular physiological indices. Besides its use in research, it could also constitute a valuable resource in a clinical psychiatry setting, as many disorders are also characterized by altered heart rate responses. However, differences in fear-induced bradycardia may also be subtended by genetic interindividual differences, thus suggesting precaution when recommending its use in the clinical setting. Here, we discussed the first endeavors that aimed at clarifying the genetic underpinnings of heart rate variations, which suggest that individual genetic differences have a role in defining the characteristics of heart rate responses. Given this, translating heart rate measurements in the clinical setting must be implemented with caution. Future endeavors in this field will aim at identifying these differences even further, thus allowing for more precise clinical interventions.

Tizanidine Induced Hypotension: Report of a Case and Review of the Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Spasticity is a common sequelae of stroke, and often these patients receive anti-spastic drugs such as baclofen or tizanidine. Stroke patients have multiple co-morbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, and seizure. Tizanidine is an α2 and imidazole receptor agonist at a spinal and supraspinal level resulting in reduced central sympathetic outflow and causing hypotension rarely, especially in those receiving beta-blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a 56-year-old hypertensive male presenting with altered sensorium who had recurrent intracerebral hemorrhage with left spastic hemiplegia and focal seizures. He was on amlodipine, atenolol, telmisartan and oxcarbazepine. After 3 doses of tizanidine 2mg, his blood pressure dropped from 140/90 to 80/40 mmHg and pulse from 82 bpm to 44 bpm. His blood counts, serum chemistry, procalcitonin, and Trop I were normal. ECG revealed sinus bradycardia. After 8 hours of withdrawing tizanidine, his blood pressure became 110/70 mmHg, and on the next day, it became 140/82 mmHg. His attendants were taught physiotherapy to minimize spasticity. CONCLUSION: This patient highlights the need for close monitoring of patients receiving tizanidine co-medication with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers. These drugs have a synergistic effect on reducing the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, thereby hypotension and bradycardia.

Utility of nicardipine in the management of hypertensive crises in adults with reduced ejection fractions.

BACKGROUND: Nicardipine is commonly used in the management of hypertensive crises, except those involving cardiac contractility defects despite its ability to reduce afterload and pulmonary congestion. Consequently, there is limited literature evaluating nicardipine's role for this indication. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nicardipine in adults with reduced ejection fractions presenting with acute heart failure with hypertension (AHF-H). METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted at an academic Level 1 trauma center with an annual Emergency Department (ED) volume surpassing 100,000. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of nicardipine in adults with reduced ejection fractions presenting to the ED with AHF-H. Efficacy was determined by achievement of the physician prescribed blood pressure target range. The primary safety endpoints included the number of individuals who experienced bradycardia (< 60 beats per minute, bpm) or hypotension (systolic blood pressure, SBP, < 90 mmHg) while receiving nicardipine and for up to 15 min after its discontinuation. Patients were included if they were ≥ 18 years of age, received a continuous intravenous nicardipine infusion within six hours of presenting to the ED, and had an ejection fraction ≤ 40% per an echocardiogram obtained within three months of the study visit. Pregnant and incarcerated patients were excluded. RESULTS: Of the 500 patient charts reviewed, 38 met inclusion criteria. The median (interquartile, IQR) ejection fraction and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) were 35% (25-40) and 731 pg/nL (418-3277), respectively. The median baseline heart rate and SBP were 90 bpm and 193 mmHg, respectively. The median physician specified SBP goal was 160 mmHg and all patients met this endpoint in a median time of 18 min. One (2.6%) patient in the total population developed both hypotension and bradycardia. This patient had an ejection fraction of 20%, was intubated, and received nicardipine in addition to esmolol for an aortic dissection without experiencing an adverse event until 30 min after dexmedetomidine was initiated. CONCLUSION: In this non-interventional study evaluating the use of nicardipine in patients with reduced ejection fractions presenting to the ED with AHF-H, nicardipine was found to be safe and effective. To our knowledge this is the largest study to date evaluating nicardipine in this patient population and positively contributes to the existing literature.

Dexmedetomidine During Therapeutic Hypothermia: A Multicenter Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: Sedation is typically used during neonatal therapeutic hypothermia (TH). This report describes a quality improvement (QI) initiative with the aim of decreasing opioid exposure during TH by implementing dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative agent. METHODS: This dual-center QI initiative used a multidisciplinary team to create a sedation algorithm for safe implementation of dexmedetomidine as first-line therapy during TH. The primary measure in this initiative was cumulative opioid exposure during TH; balancing measures included safety parameters, primarily the rate of dexmedetomidine discontinuation because of bradycardia. Baseline demographic and clinical data were collected retrospectively for the period before implementation and prospectively during the QI period. Data were analyzed using statistical process control charts to identify change over time. RESULTS: One-hundred and fifty-four neonates in the 2-year pre-QI period were compared with 135 neonates in the 2 years after guideline implementation. Guideline compliance with dexmedetomidine initiation was 99% and compliance with initial dosing increased from 70% to 91% during the QI period. The cumulative dose of opioid during TH decreased by >90% by the end of the QI period. Dexmedetomidine was discontinued for transient bradycardia in 9.6% of the study population. No other adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine may be used as the primary sedative during neonatal TH with a low incidence of adverse effects. Clinical trials evaluating the impact of sedation during TH on neurologic outcomes are needed.

Nebulized dexmedetomidine for attenuating hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation in adult patients undergoing surgeries under general anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Sympathetic stimulation associated with laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation (ETI) may lead to adverse cardio-/cerebro-vascular events in susceptible patients. Nebulization is a novel route for dexmedetomidine administration providing a large surface area for absorption while avoiding bradycardia and hypotension associated with intravenous route. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine nebulization for attenuating hemodynamic response to ETI in adult patients undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia. METHODS: This systematic review was registered prospectively in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023403624). PubMed, Embase (OvidSP), Cochrane library, Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate) and Google Scholar were systematically searched from database inception until March 31, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and then full text against pre-specified eligibility criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing effect of dexmedetomidine nebulization on hemodynamic response to ETI in adult patients undergoing surgeries under general anaesthesia were included. All studies reporting heart rate and systolic blood pressure at baseline and various time points after ETI were included. A pre-piloted data extraction form, Cochrane revised risk-of-bias tool (ROB 2) tool, GRADE approach and RevMan 5.4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) were used for data extraction, risk of bias assessment, rating certainty of evidence and data synthesis respectively. Mean difference and relative risk with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were used for continuous and dichotomous variables respectively. RESULTS: Six RCTs randomized 480 patients with ASA I/II patients aged < 60 years of age and undergoing elective surgeries to receive either dexmedetomidine (n = 240) or saline nebulization (n = 240). Except for one RCT which used 2 µg/kg, all other RCTs used dexmedetomidine dose of 1 µg /kg. Heart rate, systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group at all the measured time points after laryngoscopy and ETI with the only exception being systolic blood pressure at 3 min [mean difference -13.86 (95% CI -30.01 to 2.99), p = 0.09]. Bradycardia and hypotension as adverse effects were absent across the included studies. However, only one-third of the included studies had a low risk of bias and strength of evidence was very low according to the GRADE assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo, premedication with dexmedetomidine nebulization was associated with lower HR and BP following ETI without any risk of bradycardia and hypotension. However, the strength of evidence was very poor and came from just one country. Future well designed and conducted studies in different populations are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023403624.

Pulse Methylprednisolone-Induced Sinus Bradycardia: A Case Report.

Corticosteroids have a wide range of uses. The most commonadverse side effectsofhigh-dosepulse steroids are hyperglycemia, gastrointestinal intolerance, and psychiatric symptoms. Cardiac arrhythmias have been reported in patients who receive high-dose steroid therapy. Bradycardia is a rare adverse side effect of pulse steroid therapy. We present the case of a 57-year-old male patient who developed symptomatic sinus bradycardia after he received pulse methylprednisolone therapy as treatment for graft-versushost disease. The patient's pulse steroid therapy was discontinued, and the dose of methylprednisolone was reduced to 100 mg/day. He was treated conservatively and with close observation; the patient's heart rate increased to 68 beats/min after 1 day, and then to 78 beats/min. The diagnosis of methylprednisolone-induced bradycardia was made after exclusion of other common etiologies of sinus bradycardia. This case report demonstrates the importance of careful cardiovascular monitoring in patients who receive high-dose methylprednisolone because of dose-related cardiovascular risks.