Dexmedetomidine vs. haloperidol in delirious, agitated, intubated patients: a randomised open-label trial

Pharmacologic prevention and treatment of delirium in intensive care patients: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to determine if pharmacologic approaches are effective in prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search to identify publications (from January 1980 to September 2014) that evaluated the pharmacologic interventions to treat or prevent delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

RESULTS

From 2646 citations, 15 studies on prevention (6729 patients) and 7 studies on treatment (1784 patients) were selected and analyzed. Among studies that evaluated surgical patients, the pharmacologic interventions were associated with a reduction in delirium prevalence, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation, but with high heterogeneity (respectively, I(2) = 81%, P = .0013; I(2) = 97%, P < .001; and I(2) = 97%). Considering treatment studies, only 1 demonstrated a significant decrease in ICU length of stay using dexmedetomidine compared to haloperidol (Relative Risk, 0.62 [1.29-0.06]; I(2) = 97%), and only 1 found a shorter time to resolution of delirium using quetiapine (1.0 [confidence interval, 0.5-3.0] vs 4.5 [confidence interval, 2.0-7.0] days; P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The use of antipsychotics for surgical ICU patients and dexmedetomidine for mechanically ventilated patients as a preventive strategy may reduce the prevalence of delirium in the ICU. None of the studied agents that were used for delirium treatment improved major clinical outcome, including mortality.

Neurocognitive dysfunction risk alleviation with the use of dexmedetomidine in perioperative conditions or as ICU sedation: a meta-analysis

Many studies have reported the beneficial effects of dexmedetomidine on postoperative neurocognitive function but overall evidence is not as clear. We examined this conundrum by meta-analyzing studies that used dexmedetomidine in perioperative conditions or as intensive care unit (ICU) sedation and utilized reliable neurocognitive assessment tests. The literature search was undertaken across several electronic databases including EBSCO, Embase, Google Scholar, Ovid SP, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Literature search was carried out across several electronic databases and relevant studies were selected after following précised inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of risk differences (RDs) was carried out and subgroup analyses were performed. Twenty studies were selected from which data of 2612 individuals were used. Initial dexmedetomidine dose was 0.68 ± 0.27 and maintenance dose was 0.54 ± 0.32 in the trials. Dexmedetomidine treatment was associated with significantly lower risk of postoperative/postanesthesia neurocognitive dysfunction both in comparison with saline-treated controls (RD [95% confidence interval, CI]: -0.17 (-0.30, -0.04); P = 0.008) and comparators (-0.16 [-0.28, -0.04]; P = 0.009). In the subgroups analyses, however, there was no significant differences between dexmedetomidine and controls/comparators when studies with confusion assessment method for ICU only (RD: -0.10 (-0.22, 0.02); P = 0.1) or midazolam as comparator only (RD: -0.26 (-0.60, 0.07); P = 0.12) were meta-analyzed. Dexmedetomidine use in the perioperative conditions or as ICU sedation is associated with lower risk of neurocognitive dysfunction. There can be some impact of neurocognitive assessment method, drug interactions, and clinical heterogeneity on the overall outcomes of this meta-analysis.

Dexmedetomidine in the Treatment of Serotonin Syndrome

Objective: Patients suffering from moderate to severe serotonin syndrome frequently present with autonomic instability and altered mental status. Management of serotonin syndrome can be complex and may be refractory to treatment with benzodiazepines alone. The objective of this series is to present 3 cases of serotonin syndrome that demonstrated clinical improvement with initiation of dexmedetomidine. Case Series: We present 3 cases of severe serotonin syndrome in adolescents requiring intubation that were refractory to midazolam and/or propofol. Dexmedetomidine, an α-2 receptor agonist, was used in all 3 cases with temporal stabilization of the autonomic nervous system and improvement of agitation, and aided in successful extubation. Discussion: Although no human studies exist, rat and mouse models offer evidence that dexmedetomidine can reduce serotonin excess and stabilize signs of serotonin neurotoxicity. Conclusion: Accordingly, health care providers may consider using dexmedetomidine as adjunctive therapy for cases of severe serotonin syndrome that are refractory to standard treatment.

Treating an established episode of delirium in palliative care: expert opinion and review of the current evidence base with recommendations for future development

CONTEXT

Delirium is a highly prevalent complication in patients in palliative care settings, especially in the end-of-life context.

OBJECTIVES

To review the current evidence base for treating episodes of delirium in palliative care settings and propose a framework for future development.

METHODS

We combined multidisciplinary input from delirium researchers and other purposely selected stakeholders at an international delirium study planning meeting. This was supplemented by a literature search of multiple databases and relevant reference lists to identify studies regarding therapeutic interventions for delirium.

RESULTS

The context of delirium management in palliative care is highly variable. The standard management of a delirium episode includes the investigation of precipitating and aggravating factors followed by symptomatic treatment with drug therapy. However, the intensity of this management depends on illness trajectory and goals of care in addition to the local availability of both investigative modalities and therapeutic interventions. Pharmacologically, haloperidol remains the practice standard by consensus for symptomatic control. Dosing schedules are derived from expert opinion and various clinical practice guidelines as evidence-based data from palliative care settings are limited. The commonly used pharmacologic interventions for delirium in this population warrant evaluation in clinical trials to examine dosing and titration regimens, different routes of administration, and safety and efficacy compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Delirium treatment is multidimensional and includes the identification of precipitating and aggravating factors. For symptomatic management, haloperidol remains the practice standard. Further high-quality collaborative research investigating the appropriate treatment of this complex syndrome is needed.

Randomized ICU trials do not demonstrate an association between interventions that reduce delirium duration and short-term mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We reviewed randomized trials of adult ICU patients of interventions hypothesized to reduce delirium burden to determine whether interventions that are more effective at reducing delirium duration are associated with a reduction in short-term mortality.

DATA SOURCES

We searched CINHAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane databases from 2001 to 2012.

STUDY SELECTION

Citations were screened for randomized trials that enrolled critically ill adults, evaluated delirium at least daily, compared a drug or nondrug intervention hypothesized to reduce delirium burden with standard care (or control), and reported delirium duration and/or short-term mortality (≤ 45 d).

DATA EXTRACTION

In duplicate, we abstracted trial characteristics and results and evaluated quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We performed random effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 17 trials enrolling 2,849 patients which evaluated a pharmacologic intervention (n = 13) (dexmedetomidine [n = 6], an antipsychotic [n = 4], rivastigmine [n = 2], and clonidine [n = 1]), a multimodal intervention (n = 2) (spontaneous awakening [n = 2]), or a nonpharmacologic intervention (n = 2) (early mobilization [n = 1] and increased perfusion [n = 1]). Overall, average delirium duration was lower in the intervention groups (difference = -0.64 d; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.13; p = 0.01) being reduced by more than or equal to 3 days in three studies, 0.1 to less than 3 days in six studies, 0 day in seven studies, and less than 0 day in one study. Across interventions, for 13 studies where short-term mortality was reported, short-term mortality was not reduced (risk ratio = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.06; p = 0.19). Across 13 studies that reported mortality, meta-regression revealed that delirium duration was not associated with reduced short-term mortality (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

A review of current evidence fails to support that ICU interventions that reduce delirium duration reduce short-term mortality. Larger controlled studies are needed to establish this relationship.

Underrepresentation of patients with pre-existing cognitive impairment in pharmaceutical trials on prophylactic or therapeutic treatments for delirium: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Representation of hospitalized patients with pre-existing cognitive impairment in pharmaceutical delirium trials is important because these patients are at high risk for developing delirium. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate whether patients with cognitive impairment were included in studies on pharmacological prophylaxis or treatment of delirium and to explore the motivations for their exclusion (if they were excluded).

STUDY DESIGN

This study was a systematic review. A MEDLINE search was performed for publications dated from 1 January 1985 to 15 November 2012. Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that investigated medication to prevent or treat delirium were included. The number of patients with cognitive impairment was counted, and if they were excluded, motivations were noted.

RESULTS

The search yielded 4293 hits, ultimately resulting in 31 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, five studies explicitly mentioned the percentage of patients with cognitive impairment that were included. These patients comprised a total of 8% (n = 279 patients) of the 3476 patients included in all 31 studies. Ten studies might have included cognitively impaired patients but did not mention the exact percentage, and sixteen studies excluded all patients with cognitive impairment. The motivations for exclusion varied, but most were related to the influence of dementia on delirium.

CONCLUSION

The exclusion of patients with pre-existing cognitive impairment hampers the generalizability of the results of these trials and leaves clinicians with limited evidence about the pharmacological treatment of this group of vulnerable patients who have an increased risk of side effects.

Role of dexmedetomidine in adults in the intensive care unit: an update

PURPOSE

The role of dexmedetomidine for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is reviewed and updated.

SUMMARY

Searches of MEDLINE (July 2006-March 2012) and an extensive manual review of journals were performed. Relevant literature with a focus on data published since our last review in 2007 was evaluated for topic relevance and clinical applicability. Optimal management of pain, agitation, and delirium in ICUs requires a systematic and multimodal approach aimed at providing comfort while maximizing outcomes. Dexmedetomidine is among multiple agents, including opioids, propofol, benzodiazepines, and antipsychotics, used to facilitate and increase patients' tolerability of mechanical ventilation. This article reviews the newest evidence available for dexmedetomidine use for sedation and analgesia in medical-surgical ICUs. Adverse effects associated with dexmedetomidine were similar among the studies examined herein. The most common adverse effects with dexmedetomidine were bradycardia and hypotension, in some cases severe enough to warrant the use of vasoactive support. Due to the adverse events associated with rapid dosage adjustment and bolus therapy, dexmedetomidine may not be the best agent for treating acute agitation.

CONCLUSION

In medical-surgical ICUs, dexmedetomidine may be a viable non-benzodiazepine option for patients with a need for light sedation. In cardiac surgery patients, dexmedetomidine appears to offer no advantage over propofol as the initial sedative. The role of dexmedetomidine in unique patient populations such as neurosurgical, trauma, and obstetrics is yet to be established.

Dexmedetomidine as a sedative agent in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The effect of dexmedetomidine on length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and time to extubation is still unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pertinent studies were independently searched in BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials (updated February first 2013). Randomized studies (dexmedetomidine versus any comparator) were included if including patients mechanically ventilated in an intensive care unit (ICU). Co-primary endpoints were the length of ICU stay (days) and time to extubation (hours). Secondary endpoint was mortality rate at the longest follow-up available.

RESULTS

The 27 included manuscripts (28 trials) randomized 3,648 patients (1,870 to dexmedetomidine and 1,778 to control). Overall analysis showed that the use of dexmedetomidine was associated with a significant reduction in length of ICU stay (weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.79 [-1.17 to -0.40] days, p for effect <0.001) and of time to extubation (WMD = -2.74 [-3.80 to -1.65] hours, p for effect <0.001). Mortality was not different between dexmedetomidine and controls (risk ratio = 1.00 [0.84 to 1.21], p for effect = 0.9). High heterogeneity between included studies was found.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies suggests that dexmedetomidine could help to reduce ICU stay and time to extubation, in critically ill patients even if high heterogeneity between studies might confound the interpretation of these results.

Intensive care unit delirium: a review of the literature

PURPOSE

The recent literature regarding intensive care unit (ICU) delirium and updated clinical practice guidelines are reviewed.

SUMMARY

Recent studies show that ICU delirium in critically ill patients is an independent predictor of higher mortality, longer ICU and hospital stay, and is associated with multiple clinical complications. Delirium has been reported to occur in greater than 80% of hospitalized critically ill patients, yet it remains an underdiagnosed condition. Several subtypes of delirium have been identified including hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed presentation. Although the exact mechanism is unknown, several factors are thought to interact to cause delirium. Multiple risk factors related to medications, acute illness, the environment, and patient characteristics may contribute to the development of delirium. Practical bedside screening tools have been validated and are recommended to identify ICU patients with delirium. Nonpharmacologic interventions such as early mobilization have resulted in better functional outcomes, decreased incidence and duration of delirium, and more ventilator-free days. Data supporting pharmacologic treatments are limited.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians should become familiar with tools to identify delirium in order to initiate treatment and remove mitigating factors early in hospitalization to prevent delirium. Pharmacists are in a unique position to reduce delirium through minimization of medication-related risk factors and development of protocols.

Dexmedetomidine for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome: rationale and current status of research

Dexmedetomidine is currently used in the US in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting, although data to support this practice are limited. Dexmedetomidine targets the noradrenergic system, an important but frequently overlooked secondary mechanism in the development of AWS, and, in doing so, may reduce the need for excessive benzodiazepine use which can increase the risk of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-mediated deliriogenesis and respiratory depression. The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate available literature reporting on the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for AWS in the ICU setting. An English-language MEDLINE search (1966 to July 2013) was performed to identify articles evaluating the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine for AWS. Case series, case reports and controlled trials were evaluated for topic relevance and clinical applicability. Reference lists of articles retrieved through this search were reviewed to identify any relevant publications. Studies focusing on the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for AWS in humans were selected. Studies were included if they were published as full articles; abstracts alone were not included in this review. Eight published case studies and case series were identified. Based on a limited body of evidence, dexmedetomidine shows promise as a potentially safe and possibly effective adjuvant treatment for AWS in the ICU. Prospective, well-controlled studies are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of the use of dexmedetomidine in AWS.

Perioperative dexmedetomidine improves mortality in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

OBJECTIVE

This study retrospectively investigated the effect of dexmedetomidine on outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective investigation.

SETTING

Patients from a single tertiary medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 724 patients undergoing CABG surgery met the inclusion criteria and were categorized into 2 groups: 345 in the dexmedetomidine group (DEX) and 379 in the nondexmedetomidine group (Non-DEX).

INTERVENTIONS

Perioperative dexmedetomidine was used as an intravenous infusion (0.24 to 0.6 µg/kg/hour) initiated after cardiopulmonary bypass and continued for less than 24 hours postoperatively in the intensive care unit.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Major outcome measures of this study were in-hospital, 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality, delirium and major adverse cardiocerebral events. Perioperative dexmedetomidine infusion was associated with significant reductions in in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortalities, compared with the patients who did not received dexmedetomidine. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortalities were 1.5% and 4.0% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.332; 95% CI, 0.155 to 0.708; p = 0.0044), 2.0% and 4.5% (adjusted OR, 0.487; 95% CI, 0.253 to 0.985; p = 0.0305), and 3.2% and 6.9% (adjusted OR 0.421; 95% CI, 0.247 to 0.718, p = 0.0015), respectively. Perioperative dexmedetomidine infusion was associated with a reduced risk of delirium from 7.9% to 4.6% (adjusted OR, 0.431; 95% CI, 0.265-0.701; p = 0.0007).

CONCLUSION

Dexmedetomidine infusion during CABG surgery was more likely to achieve improved in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year survival rates, and a significantly lower incidence of delirium.

A case-based approach to the practical application of dexmedetomidine in critically ill adults

Dexmedetomidine is a selective α(2) -adrenoceptor agonist that offers unique sedation because patients are readily awakened while administration continues and the drug does not suppress the respiratory center. Limitations of use include higher acquisition cost, inability to produce deep sedation, and bradycardia and hypotension. Using a case-based approach, the purpose of this review was to qualitatively assess the role of dexmedetomidine in the care of the critically ill and in the management of alcohol withdrawal, and to formulate recommendations regarding its clinical application. Sixty-six studies were identified that investigated dexmedetomidine for the provision of sedation. These studies were heterogeneous in design and patient populations; most investigated patients did not require heavy sedation, and few used propofol as the comparator. In general, though, the aggregate results of all studies demonstrate that dexmedetomidine provides comfort, possibly shortens the duration of mechanical ventilation to facilitate extubation, reduces the occurrence of acute brain dysfunction, and facilitates communication, but the drug is associated with hemodynamic instability and requires the supplemental use of traditional sedative and analgesic agents. These outcomes need to be substantiated in additional studies that include assessments of cost-effectiveness. Dexmedetomidine should be considered when patients require mild to moderate levels of sedation of short to intermediate time frames, and they qualify for daily awakenings with traditional sedative therapies. The data for dexmedetomidine in relation to alcohol withdrawal are limited to 12 retrospective reports representing a total of 127 patients. Its role for this indication requires further study, but it may be considered as adjunctive therapy when clinicians are concerned about respiratory suppression associated with escalating doses of γ-aminobutyric acid agonists. Regardless of the indication for dexmedetomidine, the practitioner must closely monitor patient comfort and the occurrence of hemodynamic deviations with the realization that as-needed administration of traditional sedatives and analgesics will be required and some degree of bradycardia and hypotension expected but intervention rarely required.

Pain management in neurocritical care

The core challenge of pain management in neurocritical care is to keep the patient comfortable without masking or overlooking any neurological deterioration. Clearly in patients with a neurological problem there is a conflict of clinical judgement and adequate pain relief. Here we review the presentation, assessment, and development of pain in the clinical spectrum of patients with associated neurological problems seen in a general intensive care setting. Many conditions predispose to the development of chronic pain. There is evidence that swift and targeted pain management may improve the outcome. Importantly pain management is multidisciplinary. The available non-invasive, pharmacological, and invasive treatment strategies are discussed.

Postoperative delirium in the intensive care unit predicts worse outcomes in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common in intensive care unit patients and is associated with worse outcome.

OBJECTIVE

To identify early risk factors for delirium in patients admitted to the intensive care unit following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT).

METHODS

An observational study of patients admitted to the intensive care unit from January 2000 to May 2010 for elective or semi-elective OLT was conducted. The primary end point was delirium in the intensive care unit. Pre- and post-transplantation and intraoperative factors potentially associated with this outcome were examined.

RESULTS

Of the 281 patients included in the study, 28 (10.03%) developed delirium in the intensive care unit at a median of two days (interquartile range one to seven days) after OLT. According to multivariate analysis, independent risk factors for delirium were intraoperative transfusion of packed red blood cells (OR 1.15 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.18]), renal replacement therapy during the pretransplantation period (OR 13.12 [95% CI 2.82 to 72.12]) and Acute Physiologic and Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score (OR per unit increase 1.10 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.29]). Using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline covariates, delirium was associated with an almost twofold risk of remaining in hospital, a fourfold increased risk of dying in hospital and an almost threefold increased rate of death by one year.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative transfusion of packed red blood cells, pretransplantation renal replacement therapy and APACHE II score are predictors for the development of delirium in intensive care unit patients post-OLT and are associated with increased hospital lengths of stay and mortality.

Role of Dexmedetomidine for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium in Intensive Care Unit Patients

OBJECTIVE:

To review recent clinical studies regarding the role of dexmedetomidine for prevention and treatment of delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

DATA SOURCES:

MEDLINE and PubMed searches (1988-Feburary 2013) were conducted, using the key words delirium, dexmedetomidine, Precedex, agitation, α-2 agonists, critical care, and intensive care. References from relevant articles were reviewed for additional information.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION:

Clinical trials comparing dexmedetomidine with other sedatives/analgesics or with antipsychotics for delirium were selected. Studies that evaluated the use of dexmedetomidine for sedation for more than 6 hours were included in this review.

DATA SYNTHESIS:

Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α-2 receptor agonist that provides sedation, anxiolysis, and modest analgesia with minimal respiratory depression. Its mechanism of action is unique compared with that of traditional sedatives because it does not act on γ-aminobutyric acid receptors. In addition, dexmedetomidine lacks anticholinergic activity and promotes a natural sleep pattern. These pharmacologic characteristics may explain the possible antidelirium effects of dexmedetomidine. Eight clinical trials, including 5 double-blind randomized trials, were reviewed to evaluate the impact of dexmedetomidine on ICU delirium.

CONCLUSIONS:

Currently available evidence suggests that dexmedetomidine is a promising agent, not only for prevention but also for treatment of ICU-associated delirium. However, larger, well-designed trials are warranted to define the role of dexmedetomidine in preventing and treating delirium in the ICU.

[Indications of dexmedetomidine in the current sedoanalgesia tendencies in critical patients]

Recently, dexmedetomidine has been marketed in Spain and other European countries. The published experience regarding its use has placed dexmedetomidine on current trends in sedo-analgesic strategies in the adult critically ill patient. Dexmedetomidine has sedative and analgesic properties, without respiratory depressant effects, inducing a degree of depth of sedation in which the patient can open its eyes to verbal stimulation, obey simple commands and cooperate in nursing care. It is therefore a very useful drug in patients who can be maintained on mechanical ventilation with these levels of sedation avoiding the deleterious effects of over or infrasedation. Because of its effects on α2-receptors, it's very useful for the control and prevention of tolerance and withdrawal to other sedatives and psychotropic drugs. The use of dexmedetomidine has been associated with lower incidence of delirium when compared with other sedatives. Moreover, it's a potentially useful drug for sedation of patients in non-invasive ventilation.

Pharmacologic prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill and non-critically ill hospitalised patients: a review of data from prospective, randomised studies

Delirium occurs commonly in acutely ill hospitalised patients, particularly in the elderly or in cardiac or orthopaedic surgery patients, or those in intensive care units (ICUs). Delirium worsens outcome. Pharmaceutical agents such as antipsychotics and, in the critically ill, dexmedetomidine, are considered therapeutic despite uncertainty regarding their efficacy and safety. Using MEDLINE, we reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1977 and April 2012 evaluating a pharmacologic intervention to prevent or treat delirium in critically ill and non-critically ill hospitalised patients. The number of prospective RCTs remains limited. Any conclusions about pharmacologic efficacy are limited by the small size of many studies, the inconsistency by which non-pharmacologic delirium prevention strategies were incorporated, the lack of a true placebo arm and a failure to incorporate ICU and non-ICU clinical outcomes. A research framework for future evaluation of the use of medications in both ICU and non-ICU is proposed.

Haloperidol prophylaxis in critically ill patients with a high risk for delirium

Introduction

Delirium is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We implemented a delirium prevention policy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with a high risk of developing delirium, and evaluated if our policy resulted in quality improvement of relevant delirium outcome measures.

Methods

This study was a before/after evaluation of a delirium prevention project using prophylactic treatment with haloperidol. Patients with a predicted risk for delirium of ≥ 50%, or with a history of alcohol abuse or dementia, were identified. According to the prevention protocol these patients received haloperidol 1 mg/8 h. Evaluation was primarily focused on delirium incidence, delirium free days without coma and 28-day mortality. Results of prophylactic treatment were compared with a historical control group and a contemporary group that did not receive haloperidol prophylaxis mainly due to non-compliance to the protocol mostly during the implementation phase.

Results

In 12 months, 177 patients received haloperidol prophylaxis. Except for sepsis, patient characteristics were comparable between the prevention and the historical (n = 299) groups. Predicted chance to develop delirium was 75 ± 19% and 73 ± 22%, respectively. Haloperidol prophylaxis resulted in a lower delirium incidence (65% vs. 75%, P = 0.01), and more delirium-free-days (median 20 days (IQR 8 to 27) vs. median 13 days (3 to 27), P = 0.003) in the intervention group compared to the control group. Cox-regression analysis adjusted for sepsis showed a hazard rate of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.98) for 28-day mortality. Beneficial effects of haloperidol appeared most pronounced in the patients with the highest risk for delirium. Furthermore, haloperidol prophylaxis resulted in less ICU re-admissions (11% vs. 18%, P = 0.03) and unplanned removal of tubes/lines (12% vs. 19%, P = 0.02). Haloperidol was stopped in 12 patients because of QTc-time prolongation (n = 9), renal failure (n = 1) or suspected neurological side-effects (n = 2). No other side-effects were reported. Patients who were not treated during the intervention period (n = 59) showed similar results compared to the untreated historical control group.

Conclusions

Our evaluation study suggests that prophylactic treatment with low dose haloperidol in critically ill patients with a high risk for delirium probably has beneficial effects. These results warrant confirmation in a randomized controlled trial.

Trial registration

clinicaltrial.gov Identifier: NCT01187667.

Delirium in the ICU: an overview

Delirium is characterized by a disturbance of consciousness with accompanying change in cognition. Delirium typically manifests as a constellation of symptoms with an acute onset and a fluctuating course. Delirium is extremely common in the intensive care unit (ICU) especially amongst mechanically ventilated patients. Three subtypes have been recognized: hyperactive, hypoactive, and mixed. Delirium is frequently undiagnosed unless specific diagnostic instruments are used. The CAM-ICU is the most widely studied and validated diagnostic instrument. However, the accuracy of this tool may be less than ideal without adequate training of the providers applying it. The presence of delirium has important prognostic implications; in mechanically ventilated patients it is associated with a 2.5-fold increase in short-term mortality and a 3.2-fold increase in 6-month mortality. Nonpharmacological approaches, such as physical and occupational therapy, decrease the duration of delirium and should be encouraged. Pharmacological treatment for delirium traditionally includes haloperidol; however, more data for haloperidol are needed given the paucity of placebo-controlled trials testing its efficacy to treat delirium in the ICU. Second-generation antipsychotics have emerged as an alternative for the treatment of delirium, and they may have a better safety profile. Dexmedetomidine may prove to be a valuable adjunctive agent for patients with delirium in the ICU.

Delirium in critically ill patients: epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management

Delirium is commonly observed in critically ill patients and is associated with negative outcomes. The pathophysiology of delirium is not completely understood. However, alterations to neurotransmitters, especially acetylcholine and dopamine, inflammatory pathways and an aberrant stress response are proposed mechanisms leading to intensive care unit (ICU) delirium. Detection of delirium using a validated delirium assessment tool makes early treatment possible, which may improve prognosis. Patients at high risk of delirium, especially those with cognitive decline and advanced age, should be identified in the first 24 hours of admission to the ICU. Whether these high-risk patients benefit from haloperidol prophylaxis deserves further study. The effectiveness of a multicomponent, non-pharmacological approach is shown in non-ICU patients, which provides proof of concept for use in the ICU. The few studies on this approach in ICU patients suggest that the burden of ICU delirium may be reduced by early mobility, increased daylight exposure and the use of earplugs. In addition, the combined use of sedation, ventilation, delirium and physical therapy protocols can reduce the frequency and severity of adverse outcomes and should become part of routine practice in the ICU, as should avoidance of deliriogenic medication such as anticholinergic drugs and benzodiazepines. Once delirium develops, symptomatic treatment with antipsychotics is recommended, with haloperidol being the drug of first choice. However, there is limited evidence on the safety and effectiveness of antipsychotics in ICU delirium.

Treatment of four psychiatric emergencies in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVES

To review the diagnosis and management of four selected psychiatric emergencies in the intensive care unit: agitated delirium, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, serotonin syndrome, and psychiatric medication overdose.

DATA SOURCES

Review of relevant medical literature.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Standardized screening for delirium should be routine. Agitated delirium should be managed with an antipsychotic and, possibly, dexmedetomidine in treatment-refractory cases. Delirium management should also include ensuring a calming environment and adequate pain control, minimizing benzodiazepines and anticholinergics, normalizing the sleep-wake cycle, providing sensory aids as required, and providing early physical and occupational therapy. Neuroleptic malignant syndrome should be treated by discontinuing dopamine blockers, providing supportive therapy, and possibly administering medications (benzodiazepines, dopamine agonists, and/or dantrolene) or electroconvulsive therapy, if indicated. Serotonin syndrome should be treated by discontinuing all serotonergic agents, providing supportive therapy, controlling agitation with benzodiazepines, and possibly administering serotonin2A antagonists. It is often unnecessary to restart psychiatric medications upon which a patient has overdosed in the intensive care unit, though withdrawal syndromes should be prevented, and communication with outpatient prescribers is vital.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the diagnosis and appropriate management of these four psychiatric emergencies is important to provide safe and effective care in the intensive care unit.

Prevention and treatment options for postoperative delirium in the elderly

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recent findings and developments in strategies for prevention and treatment of postoperative delirium.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current advances in the field include improved knowledge about predisposing and precipitating factors, evidence for efficacy of multicomponent prevention programmes, refinement of perioperative procedures, and promising pharmacological approaches for prophylaxis and management of postoperative delirium.

SUMMARY

Postoperative delirium is a common and serious complication in elderly patients. Preoperative assessment of risk profiles and tailored multimodal prevention approaches proved effective and should be integrated into clinical practice. Despite promising recent findings, at present, the routine use of pharmacological prophylaxis cannot be recommended. Validated and easy-to-use bedside diagnostic tools are available and should be regularly applied for delirium screening in the first days after surgery. In patients developing delirium, causal conditions and contributing factors need to be identified and addressed. Whereas administration of antipsychotics may represent an option for symptomatic treatment, further studies are needed to evaluate the effects of pharmacological approaches on long-term outcomes in elderly patients with delirium.

Dexmedetomidine sedation in ICU

Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a highly selective α₂-adrenergic receptor agonist, is the newest agent introduced for sedation in intensive care unit (ICU). The sedation strategy for critically ill patients has stressed light sedation with daily awakening and assessment for neurologic, cognitive, and respiratory functions, since Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) guidelines were presented in 2002. The traditional GABAergic agents, including benzodiazepines and propofol, have some limitations for safe sedatives in this setting, due to an unfavorable pharmacokinetic profile and to detrimental adverse effects (such as lorazepam associated propylene glycol intoxication and propofol infusion syndrome). DEX produces it's sedative, analgesic and cardiovascular effects through α₂ receptors on the locus ceruleus (LC). Activities of LC, the tuberomammillary nucleus (TMN) are depressed and activity of the ventrolateral preoptic nucleus (VLPO) is increased during DEX sedation, which is similar in features to normal non-REM (NREM) sleep. At the same time, perifornical orexinergic activity is maintained, which might be associated with attention. This mechanism of action produces a normal sleep-like, cooperative sedation. The characteristic feature of sedation, together with a concomitant opioid sparing effect, may decrease the length of time spent on a ventilator, length of stay in ICU, and prevalence and duration of delirium, as the evidence shown from several comparative studies. In addition, DEX has an excellent safety profile. In conclusion, DEX is considered as a promising agent optimized for sedation in ICU.

Dexmedetomidine as adjunct treatment for severe alcohol withdrawal in the ICU

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing alcohol withdrawal in the intensive care unit (ICU) often require escalating doses of benzodiazepines and not uncommonly require intubation and mechanical ventilation for airway protection. This may lead to complications and prolonged ICU stays. Experimental studies and single case reports suggest the α2-agonist dexmedetomidine is effective in managing the autonomic symptoms seen with alcohol withdrawal. We report a retrospective analysis of 20 ICU patients treated with dexmedetomidine for benzodiazepine-refractory alcohol withdrawal.

METHODS

Records from a 23-bed mixed medical-surgical ICU were abstracted from November 2008 to November 2010 for patients who received dexmedetomidine for alcohol withdrawal. The main analysis compared alcohol withdrawal severity scores and medication doses for 24 h before dexmedetomidine therapy with values during the first 24 h of dexmedetomidine therapy.

RESULTS

There was a 61.5% reduction in benzodiazepine dosing after initiation of dexmedetomidine (n = 17; p < 0.001) and a 21.1% reduction in alcohol withdrawal severity score (n = 11; p = .015). Patients experienced less tachycardia and systolic hypertension following dexmedetomidine initiation. One patient out of 20 required intubation. A serious adverse effect occurred in one patient, in whom dexmedetomidine was discontinued for two 9-second asystolic pauses noted on telemetry.

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study suggests that dexmedetomidine therapy for severe alcohol withdrawal is associated with substantially reduced benzodiazepine dosing, a decrease in alcohol withdrawal scoring and blunted hyperadrenergic cardiovascular response to ethanol abstinence. In this series, there was a low rate of mechanical ventilation associated with the above strategy. One of 20 patients suffered two 9-second asystolic pauses, which did not recur after dexmedetomidine discontinuation. Prospective trials are warranted to compare adjunct treatment with dexmedetomidine versus standard benzodiazepine therapy.

A review of pharmacologic management and prevention strategies for delirium in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of delirium has been estimated at anywhere between 10% and 30% in general medical patients and in upwards of 80% in patients who are admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Given the high prevalence of delirium in the ICU population, it should not be surprising that a large percentage of psychiatric consults arise from this setting. While the mainstay of pharmacologic management of delirium centers on neuroleptic medications, such as haloperidol, recent studies using alternate agents have shown varying levels of promise.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose is to outline the major prospective studies looking at the efficacy of pharmacologic management and prevention strategies for delirium exclusively in adult ICU patients. Both conventional and novel pharmacotherapeutic interventions are discussed.

METHOD

Articles were obtained using the MEDLINE/PUBMED database looking specifically at pharmacologic interventions for delirium in the intensive care unit. A search was performed using the key words"delirium," "intensive care unit," "treatment," and "prophylaxis." The authors limited their search to prospective studies, specifically randomized trials (both placebo-controlled and non-controlled) in the adult ICU population, and eliminated retrospective and observational studies. Relevant citations from the previously mentioned articles were also included in the review.

CONCLUSION

There is a plethora of studies on pharmacologic management strategies in general medical patients with delirium. Findings from these studies are often extrapolated to the ICU population; however, when looking at studies limited to ICU patients with delirium, there are far fewer credible prospective studies.

A questionnaire survey of critical care nurses' attitudes to delirium assessment before and after introduction of the CAM-ICU

BACKGROUND

Nurses are usually the first to identify delirium in ICU patients. We aimed to assess the attitudes of Australian critical care nurses when we introduced the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU).

METHODS

We surveyed all 174 nurses in our ICU using two questionnaires: first after a one-month period of mandated but unstructured delirium assessments, and then following one month of CAM-ICU assessments. We also quantified antipsychotic medication usage by inspecting pharmacy records.

FINDINGS

The first survey response rate was 65/174 (37%). Most nurses (73%) thought active delirium assessment was important, and 93% thought their assessments were worth the time required. These assessments were largely unstructured, as only 20% knew a formal delirium test, and only 7% sometimes used one. The second survey response rate was 45/174 (26%). Most (89%) still thought delirium assessment was important, but only 75% thought the CAM-ICU worth the time required (p=0.01 compared to unstructured assessments). Similar proportions (75% and 73%) were confident in the accuracy of their assessments. Many (33%) found the CAM-ICU 'quite' or 'very' hard to perform, but despite this, 82% wanted to continue to use it. Free-text answers suggested this was because medical staff paid more attention to the CAM-ICU. Supporting this, prescriptions of antipsychotic medications increased significantly in the CAM-ICU period.

CONCLUSION

Critical care nurses in our Australian ICU who responded to our survey think delirium assessment is important. Although they find unstructured assessments easier to perform, they wanted to persist with the CAM-ICU, in part because it facilitated more appropriate pharmacological treatment of delirium for their patients. We recommend the CAM-ICU as a tool to improve communication between nurses and physicians in the management of delirium.

Haloperidol dosing strategies in the treatment of delirium in the critically ill

Delirium is the most common mental disturbance in critically-ill patients and results in significant morbidity and mortality. Haloperidol is a preferred agent for the treatment of delirium in this population because of its rapid onset of action and lack of hemodynamic effects. Despite its widespread use in the critical care setting, most of the relevant data are obtained from case series or extrapolated from non-critically-ill populations. This review provides an overview of haloperidol pharmacokinetics and a comprehensive summary of the evidence for various haloperidol dosing regimens in the treatment of delirium in critically-ill patients. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts with "haloperidol", "delirium", "agitation", "critically-ill", and "intensive care" as keywords. Studies involving haloperidol for delirium prophylaxis, non-critical care settings, and terminally-ill subjects were excluded. Eleven studies were identified: four with intermittent IV haloperidol, four with continuous IV infusion haloperidol, two with oral/enteral haloperidol, and one with IM haloperidol. All of the case reports, case series, and descriptive studies have shown a benefit with haloperidol, but publication bias is likely present. Only three studies were controlled studies, but all had small sample sizes and methodological flaws. Randomized, double-blind, active-comparator trials of haloperidol with allocation concealment are needed. Subsequent research should focus on using validated delirium screening and assessment scales for more objective identification and measurement of delirium outcomes.

Pharmacological and nonpharmacological management of delirium in critically ill patients

Delirium is a common yet under-diagnosed syndrome of acute brain dysfunction, which is characterized by inattention, fluctuating mental status, altered level of consciousness, or disorganized thinking. Although our recognition of risk factors for delirium has progressed, our understanding of the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms remains limited. Improvements in monitoring and assessment for delirium (particularly in the intensive care setting) have resulted in validated and reliable tools such as arousal scales and bedside delirium monitoring instruments. Once delirium is recognized and the modifiable risk factors are addressed, the next step in management (if delirium persists) is often pharmacological intervention. The sedatives, analgesics, and hypnotics most often used in the intensive care unit (ICU) to achieve patient comfort are all too frequently deliriogenic, resulting in a longer duration of ICU and hospital stay, and increased costs. Therefore, identification of safe and efficacious agents to reduce the incidence, duration, and severity of ICU delirium is a hot topic in critical care. Recognizing that there are no medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention or treatment of delirium, we chose anti-psychotics and alpha-2 agonists as the general pharmacological focus of this article because both were subjects of relatively recent data and ongoing clinical trials. Emerging pharmacological strategies for addressing delirium must be combined with nonpharmacological approaches (such as daily spontaneous awakening trials and spontaneous breathing trials) and early mobility (combined with the increasingly popular approach called: Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium Monitoring, Early Mobility, and Exercise [ABCDE] of critical care) to develop evidence-based approaches that will ensure safer and faster recovery of the sickest patients in our healthcare system.

Sedation with dexmedetomidine in the intensive care setting

Dexmedetomidine is an α-2 agonist that produces sedation and analgesia without compromising the respiratory drive. Use of dexmedetomidine as a sedative in the critically ill is associated with fewer opioid requirements compared with propofol and a similar time at goal sedation compared with benzodiazepines. Dexmedetomidine may produce negative hemodynamic effects including lower mean heart rates and potentially more bradycardia than other sedatives used in the critically ill. Recent studies have demonstrated that dexmedetomidine is safe at higher dosages, but more studies are needed to determine whether the efficacy of dexmedetomidine is dose dependent. In addition, further research is required to define dexmedetomidine’s role in the care of delirious critically ill patients, as many, but not all, studies have indicated favorable outcomes.

Sedation and analgesia in the mechanically ventilated patient

Sedation and analgesia are important components of care for the mechanically ventilated patient in the intensive care unit (ICU). An understanding of commonly used medications is essential to formulate a sedation plan for individual patients. The specific physiological changes that a critically ill patient undergoes can have direct effects on the pharmacology of drugs, potentially leading to interpatient differences in response. Objective assessments of pain, sedation, and agitation have been validated for use in the ICU for assessment and titration of medications. An evidence-based strategy for administering these drugs can lead to improvements in short- and long-term outcomes for patients. In this article, we review advances in the field of ICU sedation to provide an up-to-date perspective on management of the mechanically ventilated ICU patient.