Tag Archives: Lidocaine

Does Tracheal Lidocaine Instillation Reduce Intracranial Pressure Changes After Tracheal Suctioning in Severe Head Trauma? A Prospective, Randomized Crossover Study. (Land)

Posted on by
Reply

da Silva PSL, et al. Does Tracheal Lidocaine Instillation Reduce Intracranial Pressure Changes After Tracheal Suctioning in Severe Head Trauma? A Prospective, Randomized Crossover Study. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2019 Apr; 20(4):365-371.

OBJECTIVES: Tracheal suctioning is a routine procedure in mechanically ventilated children, however, in severe head-injured patients it can result in potential deleterious increase in intracranial pressure. We aimed to assess the effect of tracheal lidocaine administration on intracranial pressure during tracheal suctioning.

Continue reading →

Amiodarone Versus Lidocaine for Pediatric Cardiac Arrest Due to Ventricular Arrhythmias: A Systematic Review. (Colman)

Posted on by
Reply

McBride ME, Marino BS, Webster G, et al. Amiodarone Versus Lidocaine for Pediatric Cardiac Arrest Due to Ventricular Arrhythmias: A Systematic Review. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Dec 23.

OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review as part of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation process to create a consensus on science statement regarding amiodarone or lidocaine during pediatric cardiac arrest for the 2015 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation’s Consensus on Science and Treatment Recommendations.

DATA SOURCES: Studies were identified from comprehensive searches in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library.

STUDY SELECTION: Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled and observational studies on the relative clinical effect of amiodarone or lidocaine in cardiac arrest.

DATA EXTRACTION: Studies addressing the clinical effect of amiodarone versus lidocaine were extracted and reviewed for inclusion and exclusion criteria by the reviewers. Studies were rigorously analyzed thereafter.

DATA SYNTHESIS: We identified three articles addressing lidocaine versus amiodarone in cardiac arrest: 1) a prospective study assessing lidocaine versus amiodarone for refractory ventricular fibrillation in out-of-hospital adults; 2) an observational retrospective cohort study of inpatient pediatric patients with ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia who received lidocaine, amiodarone, neither or both; and 3) a prospective study of ventricular tachycardia with a pulse in adults. The first study showed a statistically significant improvement in survival to hospital admission with amiodarone (22.8% vs 12.0%; p = 0.009) and a lack of statistical difference for survival at discharge (p = 0.34). The second article demonstrated 44% return of spontaneous circulation for amiodarone and 64% for lidocaine (odds ratio, 2.02; 1.36-3.03) with no statistical difference for survival at hospital discharge. The third article demonstrated 48.3% arrhythmia termination for amiodarone versus 10.3% for lidocaine (p < 0.05). All were classified as lower quality studies without preference for one agent.

CONCLUSIONS: The confidence in effect estimates is so low that International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation felt that a recommendation to use of amiodarone over lidocaine is too speculative; we suggest that amiodarone or lidocaine can be used in the setting of pulseless ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in infants and children.