Tag Archives: Epinephrine

Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Dopamine and Epinephrine in Pediatric Fluid-Refractory Hypotensive Septic Shock. (Carroll)

Posted on by
Reply

Ramaswamy KN, et al. Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Dopamine and Epinephrine in Pediatric Fluid-Refractory Hypotensive Septic Shock. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Nov;17(11):e502-e512.

OBJECTIVE: We compared efficacy of dopamine and epinephrine as first-line vasoactive therapy in achieving resolution of shock in fluid-refractory hypotensive cold septic shock.

DESIGN: Double-blind, pilot, randomized controlled study.

SETTING: Pediatric emergency and ICU of a tertiary care teaching hospital.

PATIENTS: Consecutive children 3 months to 12 years old, with fluid-refractory hypotensive septic shock, were enrolled between July 2013 and December 2014.

INTERVENTION: Enrolled children were randomized to receive either dopamine (in incremental doses, 10 to 15 to 20 μg/kg/min) or epinephrine (0.1 to 0.2 to 0.3 μg/kg/min) till end points of resolution of shock were achieved. After reaching maximum doses of test drugs, open-label vasoactive was started as per discretion of treating team. Primary outcome was resolution of shock within first hour of resuscitation. The study was registered (CTRI/2014/02/004393) and was approved by institute ethics committee.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We enrolled 29 children in epinephrine group and 31 in dopamine group. Resolution of shock within first hour was achieved in greater proportion of children receiving epinephrine (n = 12; 41%) than dopamine (n = 4; 13%) (odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.3-17.2; p = 0.019); the trend persisted even at 6 hours (48.3% vs 29%; p = 0.184). Children in epinephrine group had lower Sequential Organ Function Assessment score on day 3 (8 vs 12; p = 0.05) and more organ failure-free days (24 vs 20 d; p = 0.022). No significant difference in adverse events (16.1% vs 13.8%; p = 0.80) and mortality (58.1% vs 48.3%; p = 0.605) was observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: Epinephrine is more effective than dopamine in achieving resolution of fluid-refractory hypotensive cold shock within the first hour of resuscitation and improving organ functions.

Double-Blind Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Dopamine Versus Epinephrine as First-Line Vasoactive Drugs in Pediatric Septic Shock. (Patel)

Posted on by
Reply

Ventura AM, Shieh HH, Bousso A, et al. Double-Blind Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Dopamine Versus Epinephrine as First-Line Vasoactive Drugs in Pediatric Septic Shock. Crit Care Med. 2015 Nov;43(11):2292-302.

OBJECTIVES: The primary outcome was to compare the effects of dopamine or epinephrine in severe sepsis on 28-day mortality; secondary outcomes were the rate of healthcare-associated infection, the need for other vasoactive drugs, and the multiple organ dysfunction score.

DESIGN: Double-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial from February 1, 2009, to July 31, 2013.

SETTING: PICU, Hospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.

PATIENTS: Consecutive children who are 1 month to 15 years old and met the clinical criteria for fluid-refractory septic shock. Exclusions were receiving vasoactive drug(s) prior to hospital admission, having known cardiac disease, having already participated in the trial during the same hospital stay, refusing to participate, or having do-not-resuscitate orders.

INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either dopamine (5-10 μg/kg/min) or epinephrine (0.1-0.3 μg/kg/min) through a peripheral or intraosseous line. Patients not reaching predefined stabilization criteria after the maximum dose were classified as treatment failure, at which point the attending physician gradually stopped the study drug and started another catecholamine.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physiologic and laboratory data were recorded. Baseline characteristics were described as proportions and mean (± SD) and compared using appropriate statistical tests. Multiple regression analysis was performed, and statistical significance was defined as a p value of less than 0.05. Baseline characteristics and therapeutic interventions for the 120 children enrolled (63, dopamine; 57, epinephrine) were similar. There were 17 deaths (14.2%): 13 (20.6%) in the dopamine group and four (7%) in the epinephrine group (p = 0.033). Dopamine was associated with death (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.1-37.8; p = 0.037) and healthcare-associated infection (odds ratio, 67.7; 95% CI, 5.0-910.8; p = 0.001). The use of epinephrine was associated with a survival odds ratio of 6.49.

CONCLUSIONS: Dopamine was associated with an increased risk of death and healthcare-associated infection. Early administration of peripheral or intraosseous epinephrine was associated with increased survival in this population. Limitations should be observed while interpreting these results.

Racemic adrenaline and inhalation strategies in acute bronchiolitis. (Kamat)

Posted on by
Reply

N Engl J Med. 2013 Jun 13;368(24):2286-93. PMID: 23758233

BACKGROUND: Acute bronchiolitis in infants frequently results in hospitalization, but there is no established consensus on inhalation therapy–either the type of medication or the frequency of administration–that may be of value. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of inhaled racemic adrenaline as compared with inhaled saline and the strategy for frequency of inhalation (on demand vs. fixed schedule) in infants hospitalized with acute bronchiolitis.

METHODS: In this eight-center, randomized, double-blind trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we compared inhaled racemic adrenaline with inhaled saline and on-demand inhalation with fixed-schedule inhalation (up to every 2 hours) in infants (<12 months of age) with moderate-to-severe acute bronchiolitis. An overall clinical score of 4 or higher (on a scale of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating more severe illness) was required for study inclusion. Any use of oxygen therapy, nasogastric-tube feeding, or ventilatory support was recorded. The primary outcome was the length of the hospital stay, with analyses conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS: The mean age of the 404 infants included in the study was 4.2 months, and 59.4% were boys. Length of stay, use of oxygen supplementation, nasogastric-tube feeding, ventilatory support, and relative improvement in the clinical score from baseline (preinhalation) were similar in the infants treated with inhaled racemic adrenaline and those treated with inhaled saline (P>0.1 for all comparisons). On-demand inhalation, as compared with fixed-schedule inhalation, was associated with a significantly shorter estimated mean length of stay–47.6 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.6 to 64.6) versus 61.3 hours (95% CI, 45.4 to 77.2; P=0.01) – as well as less use of oxygen supplementation (in 38.3% of infants vs. 48.7%, P=0.04), less use of ventilatory support (in 4.0% vs. 10.8%, P=0.01), and fewer inhalation treatments (12.0 vs. 17.0, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of acute bronchiolitis in infants, inhaled racemic adrenaline is not more effective than inhaled saline. However, the strategy of inhalation on demand appears to be superior to that of inhalation on a fixed schedule. (Funded by Medicines for Children; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00817466; EudraCT number, 2009-012667-34.).

Full-text for Children’s and Emory users.