Pressor with promise: using vasopressin in cardiopulmonary arrest

Update on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care guidelines

PURPOSE

The key changes included in the 2005 cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency cardiac care (ECC) guidelines are reviewed. Advances since publication of the current guidelines are also discussed.

SUMMARY

The 2005 CPR and ECC guidelines include several key changes from the previous version published in 2000. The new guidelines place an increased emphasis on chest compressions and recommend a compression:ventilation (C:V) ratio of 30:2. Current knowledge on defibrillation has also been incorporated by recommending that Emergency Medical Service (EMS) rescuers give two minutes of CPR before defibrillation when the response interval is greater than four to five minutes and EMS responders did not witness the arrest. Another major change is the recommendation for a single shock to be administered followed immediately by CPR with no check of the cardiac rhythm until two minutes of CPR has been performed postdefibrillation. The 2005 guidelines recommend that an automated external defibrillator should be implemented in public locations where there is a relatively high likelihood of witnessed cardiac arrest. In addition, the most recent guidelines highlight the shift from primary-rhythm-based therapies and resuscitation to a focus on neurologic outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Several evidence-based changes were included in the 2005 CPR and ECC guidelines, including a C:V ratio of 30:2 and mitigation of hands-off time, early defibrillation, administration of a single shock versus a three-shock sequence, use of public-access defibrillators, and a shift from primary-rhythm-based therapies to a focus on neurologic outcomes.

Vasopressin in Cardiac Arrest

Objective:

To review the efficacy and safety of vasopressin in cardiac arrest.

Data Sources:

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched (all to June 2005) for full-text English-language publications describing trials in humans. Search terms were vasopressin, epinephrine, adrenaline, heart arrest, cardiac arrest, and clinical trial.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Prospective, randomized, controlled trials that evaluated efficacy or safety endpoints of vasopressin in the management of cardiac arrest were included. Efficacy outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation, successful resuscitation, survival to hospital admission, 2hour survival, and survival to hospital discharge. Safety outcomes were as defined by each trial.

Data Synthesis:

Three prospective trials were identified and included in this review. Vasopressin does not appear to offer any therapeutic advantage compared with epinephrine in the treatment of both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, regardless of the presenting arrest rhythm. Although there is a suggestion that vasopressin may be effective in treatment of asystole, the evidence for this arises from a subgroup analysis that should be viewed as hypothesis generating. There are limited data describing the safety of vasopressin in cardiac arrest.

CONCLUSIONS:

The current evidence for the use of vasopressin in cardiac arrest is indeterminate. Given the similarly equivocal evidence of efficacy for epinephrine, either drug could be considered the first-line agent in cardiac arrest. Placebo-controlled studies with appropriate statistical power are warranted to evaluate meaningful clinical outcomes, such as survival to hospital discharge. Further evaluation of the role of vasopressin in asystolic cardiac arrest and its use in combination with epinephrine is also justified.

Advanced cardiac life support for the new millennium

The American Heart Association has been the recognized source for Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) education for the past three decades. Since the first ACLS course, numerous revisions have been made to the management algorithms based on evolving scientific evidence. The last revisions made in August 2000 were the first international guidelines published. These guidelines reflect the intense review and analysis of scientific work and emphasize the importance of evidence-based therapies. This article outlines the major changes to ACLS guidelines for dysrhythmias, acute coronary syndromes, and acute stroke management.

Update in pediatric resuscitation

This article updates research concerning the resuscitation of a pediatric patient. The topics discussed include the state of pediatric life support, the current guidelines, the management of those guidelines, and coping with death.

Pharmacotherapeutic Advances in Cardiac Resuscitation: A Review of the Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) 2000 Guidelines and Their Impact on Pharmacy Practice

The treatment of sudden cardiac death is a challenging area of pharmacotherapy. Despite decades of medication use, outcomes from the treatment of cardiac arrest remain poor. Recent advances in the treatment of cardiac arrest have been incorporated into the American Heart Association’s Advanced Cardiac Life Support 2000 guidelines. A summary and review of these guidelines are presented. Included in the changes to the cardiac arrest treatment guidelines are new medications (amiodarone and vasopressin), new approaches to using medications and the evidence to support these changes. The implications of instituting these new guidelines and strategies for the implementation of the new paradigm are discussed.

Vasopressin pressor effects in critically ill children during evaluation for brain death and organ recovery

BACKGROUND

Vasopressin (VP) shows promise as a pressor agent in animals and adult human cardiac arrest and resuscitation, but has not been studied for pressor effect in critically ill or arrested children. VP infusion is routine treatment for diabetes insipidus during brain death evaluation and organ recovery. We hypothesized that low dose VP infusion during organ recovery in critically ill children exerts a pressor effect, without major organ toxicity.

METHODS

34 VP-treated and 29 age-matched critically ill controls (C) < or =18 years were retrospectively reviewed during brain death evaluation and organ recovery. VP infusion protocol titrated VP dose clinically to urine output, with high variability. Pressor and inotrope management was titrated clinically to BP, cerebral perfusion and central venous pressures (when available) and peripheral perfusion with similar protocol targets for pre-load in VP and C groups. Outcome measures include dose, type and number of pressors and inotropes. Organ function was assessed at recovery and 48 h post-transplant by independent surgeon and transplant program organ function criteria. Analysis by Odds Ratio (OR), and chi-square.

RESULTS

VP dose averaged 0.041+/-0.069 U/kg/h. Average baseline mean arterial pressure (MAP) before VP infusion was 79+/-17 mmHg VP and 76+/-14 mm Hg C (P=0.6). Subsequent average MAP were: 82+/-21 mmHgVP after VP infusion versus 71+/-16 mmHg C (P=0.01) and 80+/-14 mmHg VP versus 68+/-22 mmHg C (P=0.01). Ability to wean/stop pressors and inotropes was: dopamine (14/23) 42% VP versus (10/26) 38% C (P=0.75), dobutamine (4/7) 57% VP versus (0/6) 0% C (P=0.026), epinephrine (4/5) 80% VP versus (0/6) 0% C (P=0.006), norepinephrine/phenylephrine (4/4) 100% VP versus (2/5) 40% C (P=0. 057). Alpha agonist pressor dependence was successfully weaned from 7/9 (78%) VP versus 0/9 (0%) C: odds ratio=7.3, (P<0.01). There was no VP induced dysrhythmia, hypertension, anuria or toxicity reported. Good organ recovery function was not significantly different at recovery or 48 h post-transplant for kidney (79% VP versus 69% C, P=0.068), liver (87% VP versus 95% C, P=0.533), or heart (90% VP versus 71% C, P=0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

Low dose vasopressin infusion exerts a pressor effect in critically ill children treated for diabetes insipidus during brain death and organ recovery. VP treated patients were 7.3 times more likely to wean from alpha agonists than comparably managed age matched controls, without adverse affect on transplant organ function. We speculate that further prospective assessment of VP safety and efficacy as a pressor adjunct for resuscitation of critically ill children is warranted.

The role of vasopressin in the treatment of vasodilation in shock states

OBJECTIVE

To review the role of vasopressin in the treatment of vasodilatory shock.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search on published reports (1966-April 1999) was conducted.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies and case reports were selected and evaluated based on quality of review of vasopressin in the treatment of vasodilatory shock.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In patients with end-stage vasodilatory shock, baroreceptor reflex is impaired and vasopressin stores are depleted. Persistent elevation of catecholamines may lead to down-regulation of beta-adrenergic receptors and reduces smooth-muscle response to catecholamines, leading to inability of maintaining organ perfusion. Small-scale studies and case reports have demonstrated vasopressin's efficacy in maintaining blood pressure in patients with septic shock, cardiac arrest, and end-stage heart failure, refractory to other vasopressor therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Vasopressin may be a reasonable alternative for patients in vasodilatory shock. However, larger-scale controlled dinical trials are warranted before its routine use can be recommended.

The hemodynamic effects of anesthetic induction in vascular surgical patients chronically treated with angiotensin II receptor antagonists

The use of angiotensin II receptor subtype-1 antagonists (ARA), recently introduced as antihypertensive drugs, is becoming more prevalent. We studied the prevalence and severity of hypotension after the induction of general anesthesia in 12 patients treated with ARA until the morning of surgery. The hemodynamic response to induction was compared with that of patients treated with beta-adrenergic blockers (BB) and/or calcium channel blockers (CB) (BB/CB group, n = 45) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) (ACEI group, n = 27). A standardized anesthesia induction protocol was followed for all patients. Hypotension occurred significantly (p < or = 0.05) more often in ARA-treated patients (12 of 12) compared with BB/CB-treated patients (27 of 45) or with ACEI-treated patients (18 of 27). There was a significantly (P < or = 0.001) increased ephedrine requirement in the ARA group (21+/-3 mg) compared with the BB/CB group (10+/-6 mg) or the ACEI group (7+/-4 mg). Hypotension refractory to repeated ephedrine or phenylephrine administration occurred significantly (P < or = 0.05) more in the ARA group (4 of 12) compared with the BB/CB group (0 of 45) or the ACEI group (1 of 27), but it was treated successfully by using a vasopressin system agonist. Treatment with angiotensin II antagonism until the day of surgery is associated with severe hypotension after the induction of anesthesia, which, in some cases, can only be treated with an agonist of the vasopressin system.

IMPLICATIONS

Hypotensive episodes occur more frequently after anesthetic induction in patients receiving Angiotensin II receptor subtype-1 antagonists under anesthesia than with other hypotensive drugs. They are less responsive to the vasopressors ephedrine and phenylephrine. The use of a vasopressin system agonist was effective in restoring blood pressure when hypotension was refractory to conventional therapy.

A comparison of repeated high doses and repeated standard doses of epinephrine for cardiac arrest outside the hospital. European Epinephrine Study Group

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have not shown a benefit of high doses of epinephrine in the management of cardiac arrest. We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized study comparing repeated high doses of epinephrine with repeated standard doses in cases of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

METHODS

Adult patients who had cardiac arrest outside the hospital were enrolled if the cardiac rhythm continued to be ventricular fibrillation despite the administration of external electrical shocks, or if they had asystole or pulseless electrical activity at the time epinephrine was administered. We randomly assigned 3327 patients to receive up to 15 high doses (5 mg each) or standard doses (1 mg each) of epinephrine according to the current protocol for advanced cardiac life support.

RESULTS

In the high-dose group, 40.4 percent of 1677 patients had a return of spontaneous circulation, as compared with 36.4 percent of 1650 patients in the standard-dose group (P=0.02); 26.5 percent of the patients in the high-dose group and 23.6 percent of those in the standard-dose group survived to be admitted to the hospital (P=0.05); 2.3 percent of the patients in the high-dose group and 2.8 percent in the standard-dose group survived to be discharged from the hospital (P=0.34). There was no significant difference in neurologic status according to treatment among those discharged. High-dose epinephrine improved the rate of successful resuscitation in patients with asystole, but not in those with ventricular fibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, long-term survival after cardiac arrest outside the hospital was no better with repeated high doses of epinephrine than with repeated standard doses.