-
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk... 2015Vasopressor agents are often prescribed in septic shock. However, their effects remain controversial. We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis...
OBJECTIVE
Vasopressor agents are often prescribed in septic shock. However, their effects remain controversial. We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare the effects among different types of vasopressor agents.
DATA SOURCES
We searched for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from database inception until December 2014.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials in adults with septic shock that evaluated different vasopressor agents were selected.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data on study characteristics, methods, and outcomes.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Twenty-one trials (n=3,819) met inclusion criteria, which compared eleven vasopressor agents or vasopressor combinations (norepinephrine [NE], dopamine [DA], vasopressin [VP], epinephrine [EN], terlipressin [TP], phenylephrine [PE], TP+NE, TP + dobutamine [DB], NE+DB, NE+EN, and NE + dopexamine [DX]). Except for the superiority of NE over DA, the mortality of patients treated with any vasopressor agent or vasopressor combination was not significantly different. Compared to DA, NE was found to be associated with decreased cardiac adverse events, heart rate (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.95, -0.25; P=0.03), and cardiac index (SMD: -0.73; 95% CI: -1.14, -0.03; P=0.004) and increased systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI) (SMD: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.61, 1.45; P<0.0001). This Bayesian meta-analysis revealed a possible rank of probability of mortality among the eleven vasopressor agents or vasopressor combinations; from lowest to highest, they are NE+DB, EN, TP, NE+EN, TP+NE, VP, TP+DB, NE, PE, NE+DX, and DA.
CONCLUSION
In terms of survival, NE may be superior to DA. Otherwise, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that any other vasopressor agent or vasopressor combination is superior to another. When compared to DA, NE is associated with decreased heart rate, cardiac index, and cardiovascular adverse events, as well as increased SVRI. The effects of vasopressor agents or vasopressor combinations on mortality in patients with septic shock require further investigation.
PubMed: 26203253
DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S80060 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Mar 2005To compare the efficacy of infiltrated local anesthesia with topical anesthesia for repair of dermal laceration, to analyze the efficacy of single or multicomponent... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
STUDY OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy of infiltrated local anesthesia with topical anesthesia for repair of dermal laceration, to analyze the efficacy of single or multicomponent topical anesthetics, and to identify topical formulations that are potentially less costly and equally efficacious as cocaine-containing topical anesthetics.
DESIGN
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
SETTING
University-affiliated hospital.
PATIENTS
Pediatric and adult subjects.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-two trials that randomized more than 3000 patients were identified. The majority of studies demonstrated equivalent or superior analgesic efficacy for topical formulations compared with conventional intradermal infiltration. We found that cocaine is not a mandatory component of topical anesthesia. The literature discloses no significant difference in anesthetic efficacy between topical tetracaine-epinephrine-cocaine and each of the following 6 cocaine-free formulations: lidocaine-epinephrine-tetracaine, lidocaine-epinephrine, tetracaine-phenylephrine, tetracaine-lidocaine-phenylephrine, bupivicaine-norepinephrine, or prilocaine-phenylephrine.
CONCLUSION
Topical anesthetics are an efficacious, noninvasive means of providing analgesia before suturing of dermal lacerations. The use of cocaine-containing topical anesthetics can no longer be justified in light of its high cost and potential adverse effects. We have summarized the evidence, mostly favorable, supporting the use of various non-cocaine-containing topical anesthetics.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Costs and Cost Analysis; Dermatologic Surgical Procedures; Epinephrine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin; Suture Techniques; Tetracaine
PubMed: 15809126
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2004.05.006 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2008It is unclear whether blood pressure should be altered actively during the acute phase of stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1997, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
It is unclear whether blood pressure should be altered actively during the acute phase of stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1997, and previously updated in 2001.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of altering blood pressure in people with acute stroke, and the effect of different vasoactive drugs on blood pressure in acute stroke.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched July 2007), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2 2008), MEDLINE, EMBASE and other databases, reference lists of relevant publications and contacted researchers in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of interventions that aimed to alter blood pressure in patients within one week of acute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve trials involving 1153 participants were included (603 participants were assigned active therapy and 550 participants received placebo/control). The trials tested angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARA), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), clonidine, glyceryl trinitrate (GTN), thiazide diuretic and mixed antihypertensive therapy. One trial tested phenylephrine. At 24 hours after randomisation ACEIs reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP, mean difference, MD -6 mmHg, 95% confidence interval, CI -22 to 10) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP, MD -5 mmHg, 95% CI -18 to 7), ARA reduced SBP (MD -3, 95% CI -7 to 2) and DBP (MD -3, 95% CI -6 to 0.4), iv CCBs reduced SBP (MD -32 mmHg, 95% CI -65 to 1) and DBP (MD -13 mmHg, 95% CI -31 to 6), oral CCBs reduced SBP (MD -13 mmHg, 95% , CI -43 to 17) and DBP (MD -6 mmHg, 95% CI -14 to 2), GTN reduced SBP (MD -10 mmHg, 95% CI -18 to -3) and DBP (MD -1 mmHg, 95% CI -5 to 3) while phenylephrine, non-significantly increased SBP (MD 21 mmHg, 95% CI -13 to 55) and DBP (MD 1 mmHg, 95% CI -15 to 16). Functional outcome and death were not altered by any of the drugs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effect of altering blood pressure on outcome during the acute phase of stroke. In patients with acute stroke, CCBs, ACEI, ARA and GTN each lower blood pressure while phenylephrine probably increases blood pressure.
Topics: Acute Disease; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Humans; Hypertension; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk; Stroke; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 18843604
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000039.pub2 -
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Nov 2016Adult critically ill patients often suffer from acute circulatory failure, necessitating use of vasopressor therapy. The aim of the Scandinavian Society of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Adult critically ill patients often suffer from acute circulatory failure, necessitating use of vasopressor therapy. The aim of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) task force for Acute Circulatory Failure was to present clinically relevant, evidence-based treatment recommendations on this topic.
METHODS
This guideline was developed according to standards for trustworthy guidelines, including a systematic review of the literature and use of the GRADE methodology for assessment of the quality of evidence and for moving from evidence to recommendations. We assessed the following subpopulations of patients with acute circulatory failure: 1) shock in general, 2) septic shock, 3) cardiogenic shock, 4) hypovolemic shock and 5) other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock. We assessed patient-important outcome measures, including mortality, serious adverse reactions and quality-of-life.
RESULTS
For patients with shock in general and those with septic shock, we recommend using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, and we suggest using norepinephrine rather than epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine. For patients with cardiogenic shock and those with hypovolemic shock, we suggest using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, and we provide no recommendations/suggestions of norepinephrine vs. epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine. For patients with other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock, we suggest using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine.
CONCLUSIONS
We recommend using norepinephrine rather than other vasopressors as first-line treatment for the majority of adult critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure.
Topics: Acute Disease; Humans; Norepinephrine; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Shock; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 27576362
DOI: 10.1111/aas.12780 -
European Urology Feb 2014Priapism is defined as a penile erection that persists beyond or is unrelated to sexual interest or stimulation. It can be classified into ischaemic (low flow), arterial... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Priapism is defined as a penile erection that persists beyond or is unrelated to sexual interest or stimulation. It can be classified into ischaemic (low flow), arterial (high flow), or stuttering (recurrent or intermittent).
OBJECTIVE
To provide guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of priapism.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Systematic literature search on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of priapism. Articles with highest evidence available were selected to form the basis of these recommendations.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Ischaemic priapism is usually idiopathic and the most common form. Arterial priapism usually occurs after blunt perineal trauma. History is the mainstay of diagnosis and helps determine the pathogenesis. Laboratory testing is used to support clinical findings. Ischaemic priapism is an emergency condition. Intervention should start within 4-6h, including decompression of the corpora cavernosa by aspiration and intracavernous injection of sympathomimetic drugs (e.g. phenylephrine). Surgical treatment is recommended for failed conservative management, although the best procedure is unclear. Immediate implantation of a prosthesis should be considered for long-lasting priapism. Arterial priapism is not an emergency. Selective embolization is the suggested treatment modality and has high success rates. Stuttering priapism is poorly understood and the main therapeutic goal is the prevention of future episodes. This may be achieved pharmacologically, but data on efficacy are limited.
CONCLUSIONS
These guidelines summarise current information on priapism. The extended version are available on the European Association of Urology Website (www.uroweb.org/guidelines/).
PATIENT SUMMARY
Priapism is a persistent, often painful, penile erection lasting more than 4h unrelated to sexual stimulation. It is more common in patients with sickle cell disease. This article represents the shortened EAU priapism guidelines, based on a systematic literature review. Cases of priapism are classified into ischaemic (low flow), arterial (high flow), or stuttering (recurrent). Treatment for ischaemic priapism must be prompt in order to avoid the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction. This is not the case for arterial priapism.
Topics: Humans; Male; Penile Erection; Priapism; Risk Factors; Sympathomimetics; Treatment Outcome; Urologic Surgical Procedures, Male; Urology
PubMed: 24314827
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.008 -
The Laryngoscope Feb 2011The objective of this study is to systematically review the literature and examine the safety for the use of topical vasoconstrictors in endoscopic sinus surgery. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study is to systematically review the literature and examine the safety for the use of topical vasoconstrictors in endoscopic sinus surgery.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review clinical trials.
METHOD
A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and National Guideline Clearinghouse, and references in the selected articles.
RESULTS
The search criteria captured 42 manuscripts with relevant titles. A systematic review on the topical use of phenylephrine was found; however, no other systematic review, meta-analyses, or clinical guidelines were identified. Six randomized clinical trials or comparative studies, as well as multiple case reports and review articles were also identified. The literature supports the safety of oxymetazoline and epinephrine when used judiciously in carefully selected patients undergoing endoscopic sinonasal surgery; however, topical phenylephrine is not recommended because of its risk profile.
CONCLUSION
In sinus or nasal surgery, topical vasoconstrictors should be used in a manner that minimizes the risk of cardiovascular morbidity.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Clinical Trials as Topic; Endoscopy; Humans; Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures; Paranasal Sinuses; Phenylephrine; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 21271600
DOI: 10.1002/lary.21286 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014It is unclear whether blood pressure should be altered actively during the acute phase of stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1997, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
It is unclear whether blood pressure should be altered actively during the acute phase of stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1997, and previously updated in 2001 and 2008.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical effectiveness of altering blood pressure in people with acute stroke, and the effect of different vasoactive drugs on blood pressure in acute stroke.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched in February 2014), the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews (CDSR) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 2), MEDLINE (Ovid) (1966 to May 2014), EMBASE (Ovid) (1974 to May 2014), Science Citation Index (ISI, Web of Science, 1981 to May 2014) and the Stroke Trials Registry (searched May 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of interventions that aimed to alter blood pressure compared with control in participants within one week of acute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The review authors cross-checked data and resolved discrepancies by discussion to reach consensus. We obtained published and unpublished data where available.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 26 trials involving 17,011 participants (8497 participants were assigned active therapy and 8514 participants received placebo/control). Not all trials contributed to each outcome. Most data came from trials that had a wide time window for recruitment; four trials gave treatment within six hours and one trial within eight hours. The trials tested alpha-2 adrenergic agonists (A2AA), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARA), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), nitric oxide (NO) donors, thiazide-like diuretics, and target-driven blood pressure lowering. One trial tested phenylephrine.At 24 hours after randomisation oral ACEIs reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP, mean difference (MD) -8 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -17 to 1) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP, MD -3 mmHg, 95% CI -9 to 2), sublingual ACEIs reduced SBP (MD -12.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -26 to 2) and DBP (MD -2, 95%CI -10 to 6), oral ARA reduced SBP (MD -1 mm Hg, 95% CI -3 to 2) and DBP (MD -1 mm Hg, 95% CI -3 to 1), oral beta blockers reduced SBP (MD -14 mm Hg; 95% CI -27 to -1) and DBP (MD -1 mm Hg, 95% CI -9 to 7), intravenous (iv) beta blockers reduced SBP (MD -5 mm Hg, 95% CI -18 to 8) and DBP (-5 mm Hg, 95% CI -13 to 3), oral CCBs reduced SBP (MD -13 mmHg, 95% CI -43 to 17) and DBP (MD -6 mmHg, 95% CI -14 to 2), iv CCBs reduced SBP (MD -32 mmHg, 95% CI -65 to 1) and DBP (MD -13, 95% CI -31 to 6), NO donors reduced SBP (MD -12 mmHg, 95% CI -19 to -5) and DBP (MD -3, 95% CI -4 to -2) while phenylephrine, non-significantly increased SBP (MD 21 mmHg, 95% CI -13 to 55) and DBP (MD 1 mmHg, 95% CI -15 to 16).Blood pressure lowering did not reduce death or dependency either by drug class (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05), stroke type (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05) or time to treatment (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05). Treatment within six hours of stroke appeared effective in reducing death or dependency (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.99) but not death (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.26) at the end of the trial. Although death or dependency did not differ between people who continued pre-stroke antihypertensive treatment versus those who stopped it temporarily (worse outcome with continuing treatment, OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.24), disability scores at the end of the trial were worse in participants randomised to continue treatment (Barthel Index, MD -3.2, 95% CI -5.8, -0.6).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence that lowering blood pressure during the acute phase of stroke improves functional outcome. It is reasonable to withhold blood pressure-lowering drugs until patients are medically and neurologically stable, and have suitable oral or enteral access, after which drugs can than be reintroduced. In people with acute stroke, CCBs, ACEI, ARA, beta blockers and NO donors each lower blood pressure while phenylephrine probably increases blood pressure. Further trials are needed to identify which people are most likely to benefit from early treatment, in particular whether treatment started very early is beneficial.
Topics: Acute Disease; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Humans; Hypertension; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk; Stroke; Time-to-Treatment; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 25353321
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000039.pub3 -
Anesthesia and Analgesia Apr 2002This quantitative systematic review compared the efficacy and safety of ephedrine with phenylephrine for the prevention and treatment of hypotension during spinal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A quantitative, systematic review of randomized controlled trials of ephedrine versus phenylephrine for the management of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.
UNLABELLED
This quantitative systematic review compared the efficacy and safety of ephedrine with phenylephrine for the prevention and treatment of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Seven randomized controlled trials (n = 292) were identified after a systematic search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry), published articles, and contact with authors. Outcomes assessed were maternal hypotension, hypertension and bradycardia, and neonatal umbilical cord blood pH values and Apgar scores. For the management (prevention and treatment) of maternal hypotension, there was no difference between phenylephrine and ephedrine (relative risk [RR] of 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.06). Maternal bradycardia was more likely to occur with phenylephrine than with ephedrine (RR of 4.79; 95% CI, 1.47-15.60). Women given phenylephrine had neonates with higher umbilical arterial pH values than those given ephedrine (weighted mean difference of 0.03; 95% CI, 0.02-0.04). There was no difference between the two vasopressors in the incidence of true fetal acidosis (umbilical arterial pH value of <7.2; RR of 0.78; 95% CI, 0.16-3.92) or Apgar score of <7 at 1 and 5 min. This systematic review does not support the traditional idea that ephedrine is the preferred choice for the management of maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery in healthy, nonlaboring women.
IMPLICATIONS
Phenylephrine and ephedrine to manage hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery were compared in this systematic review. Women given ephedrine had neonates with lower umbilical cord blood pH values compared with those given phenylephrine. However, no differences in the incidence of fetal acidosis (pH value of <7.2) or neonatal Apgar scores were found.
Topics: Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Spinal; Cesarean Section; Ephedrine; Female; Humans; Hypotension; Phenylephrine; Pregnancy; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 11916798
DOI: 10.1097/00000539-200204000-00028 -
European Stroke Journal Jun 2022Low blood pressure (BP) in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is associated with poor functional outcome, death, or severe disability. Increasing BP might benefit patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Low blood pressure (BP) in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is associated with poor functional outcome, death, or severe disability. Increasing BP might benefit patients with post-stroke hypotension including those with potentially salvageable ischaemic penumbra. This updated systematic review considers the present evidence regarding the use of vasopressors in AIS.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, EMBASE and trial databases using a structured search strategy. We examined reference lists of relevant publications for additional studies examining BP elevation in AIS.
RESULTS
We included 27 studies involving 1886 patients. Nine studies assessed increasing BP during acute reperfusion therapy (intravenous thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy, intra-arterial thrombolysis or combined). Eighteen studies tested BP elevation alone. Phenylephrine was the most commonly used agent to increase BP (n = 16 studies), followed by norepinephrine (n = 6), epinephrine (n = 3) and dopamine (n = 2). Because of small patient numbers and study heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not possible. Overall, BP elevation was feasible in patients with fluctuating or worsening neurological symptoms, large vessel occlusion with labile BP, sustained post-stroke hypotension and ineligible for intravenous thrombolysis or after acute reperfusion therapy. The effects on functional outcomes were largely unknown and close monitoring is advised if such intervention is undertaken.
CONCLUSION
Although theoretical arguments support increasing BP to improve cerebral blood flow and sustain the ischaemic penumbra in selected AIS patients, the data are limited and results largely inconclusive. Large, randomised controlled trials are needed to identify the optimal BP target, agent, duration of treatment and effects on clinical outcomes.
PubMed: 35647316
DOI: 10.1177/23969873221078136 -
Rhinology Dec 2013In the literature various methods are described to reduce bleeding in endoscopic sinus surgery. Scientific evidence and results were gathered and analysed to determine... (Review)
Review
In the literature various methods are described to reduce bleeding in endoscopic sinus surgery. Scientific evidence and results were gathered and analysed to determine the effectiveness of the various methods used. A total of 20 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two retrospective articles studied the differences between local and general anaesthesia. Three articles analysed the use of local methods to control bleeding. The majority of the articles analysed the use of different systemic drugs to control intraoperative bleeding. Certain procedures, such as the reverse Trendelenburg position, the use of high doses of epinephrine, the infiltration of phenylephrine and lidocaine into the pterygopalatine fossa, the preoperative use of prednisone, and the control of the heart rate (with dexmedetomidine or remifentanil), appear to reduce the intraoperative blood loss and/or improve the visualisation of the surgical field. However, the evidence supporting these conclusions is poor. The benefits of other procedures, such as the preoperative use of β-blockers, antihypertensive agents, and surgical pledgets with oxymetazoline, phenylephrine, or cocaine, for bleeding control are not evidenced in the literature. In addition, the literature does not present any evidence on the benefits of local anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia or the use of propofol compared to inhaled analgesics in terms of intraoperative bleeding or complication rates.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Endoscopy; Hemostasis, Surgical; Humans; Paranasal Sinuses
PubMed: 24260761
DOI: 10.4193/Rhino12.048