Epinephrine Group Research Articles

A pilot randomized controlled trial comparing noradrenaline and adrenaline as a first-line vasopressor for fluid-refractory septic shock in neonates.

Limited data exists on noradrenaline therapy in neonatal septic shock. We compared the efficacy of noradrenaline with adrenaline in neonatal septic shock. This single center, open label, pilot randomized controlled trial included neonates with clinical evidence of sepsis and shock. Primary outcomes were: 1) resolution of shock one hour after treatment, and 2) mortality during hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included: need for additional vasopressors; hemodynamic stability without further administration of vasopressors for ≥2 h; changes in blood pressure and heart rate after 1 h of vasopressor treatment; and morbidities during the hospital stay. Of 65 eligible neonates, 42 were randomized (21 each in adrenaline and noradrenaline treatment arms) between August 2020 and January 2022, at level III neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Medical College and Hospital (BVDUMCH). The mean (SD) gestational age and mean (SD) birth weight were 36.1(4.2) weeks and 1.8 (0.2) kilograms birth weight for noradrenaline and 36.9 (4.1) weeks and 1.7 (0.7) kilograms for adrenaline. Shock resolved within 1 h of vasopressor therapy in 76.2% neonates in the noradrenaline arm and 61.9% in adrenaline arm (p value-0.53). Mortality during hospital stay was 28.6% (6/21) in noradrenaline group and 33.3% (7/21) in adrenaline group (p value- 0.58). Additional vasopressors were required in 23.8% neonates of the noradrenaline group compared to 38.1% neonates in adrenaline arm (p value-0.53). Median (SD) duration of intensive care stay was 6 (SD) days in the noradrenaline group and 10 (SD) days in the adrenaline group (p value-0.045). Among neonates with septic shock, the efficacy of noradrenaline was comparable to adrenaline in resolving septic shock after one hour of infusion and on the mortality during hospital stay. https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?EncHid=NDI2NTc=&Enc=&userName=noradrenaline, Clinical Trials Registry - India with identifier CTRI/2020/08/027185 (17/08/2020).

Effect of a Preoperative Subacromial Epinephrine Injection on Visualization During Shoulder Arthroscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

The addition of epinephrine to arthroscopic irrigation fluid has been shown to improve surgeon-rated visual clarity during shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Subacromial injections of epinephrine are also used for this purpose. To assess the influence of a preoperative subacromial epinephrine injection on surgeon visualization during subacromial shoulder arthroscopic surgery. It was hypothesized that the epinephrine injection would improve surgeon-rated visual clarity. Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. A double-blind randomized controlled trial including adult patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopic surgery in the beach-chair position requiring visualization of the subacromial space was performed. Patients in the epinephrine group (n = 30) received a preoperative subacromial injection of bupivacaine and epinephrine, and those in the control group (n = 30) received a preoperative subacromial injection of bupivacaine. Epinephrine was added to the first 10 L of arthroscopic irrigation fluid in all patients. The primary outcome was surgeon-rated visual clarity throughout the procedure that was recorded at the end of the procedure using a visual analog scale (VAS) scored from 0 (worst) to 10 (best). Secondary outcomes included an increase in pump pressure during the procedure, total operative time, and the intraoperative use of blood pressure-modulating medications. Rotator cuff repair was performed in 88.3% of patients (25/30 epinephrine; 28/30 control), with multiple procedures performed in 85.0% of patients (23/30 epinephrine; 27/30 control). The VAS score for visual clarity was slightly better in the epinephrine group compared with the control group, although the difference was neither statistically nor clinically significant (8.3 ± 1.4 vs 7.5 ± 1.8, respectively; P = .09). There was no difference between the epinephrine and control groups in the need for an increase in pump pressure to improve visualization (8/30 [26.7%] vs 7/30 [23.3%], respectively; P > .99), total operative time (62.0 ± 19.4 vs 64.0 ± 30.1 minutes, respectively; P = .90), or the intraoperative use of blood pressure-modulating medications (20/30 [66.7%] vs 17/30 [56.7%], respectively; P = .60). There were no perioperative adverse events in either group. The addition of a subacromial epinephrine injection before shoulder arthroscopic surgery resulted in a small improvement in visual clarity that was neither statistically nor clinically significant, with no adverse effects reported in this study. NCT05244525 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The Effect of Adrenaline and Trypan Blue Used During Cataract Surgery on Anatomical and Functional Outcomes in Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome Patients

Purpose To evaluate the effect of the intracameral adrenaline and trypan blue used during cataract surgery on corneal endothelial parameters in pseudoexfoliation syndrome (PEX) patients. Methods The patients were divided into four groups according to intraoperative use of agents during cataract surgery: intracameral adrenaline (1/10,000, 0.1 ml) (group 1), trypan blue (0.6 mg/ml, 0.1 ml) (group 2), combination of adrenaline and trypan blue (group 3) and none (group 4). Results Preoperative ECD, CV, HEX and CCT parameters were similar between the groups. A mean loss of 12.7% in ECD was observed at the postoperative third months compared to the preoperative. In group 3, ECD was found to be lower in the postoperative third months compared to the preoperative (p = 0.014). In the other groups, no statistically significant difference was found in preoperative and postoperative comparisons. Conclusion In conclusion, the utilization of intracameral adrenaline or trypan blue did not cause a significant difference in corneal endothelium in PEX patients. However, their combined use may have a negative effect on endothelial cell density. In a cataract surgery performed in the presence of PEX, the increased likelihood of endothelial damage should be taken into consideration, and appropriate precautions should be taken preoperatively and intraoperatively.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine and clonidine as an adjuvant to lignocaine with adrenaline in infiltration anesthesia in tympanoplasty: A randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background: Recent trends in surgical practice involve using local anesthesia for procedures like middle ear tympanoplasty due to its benefits, but patients often experience discomfort. Researchers are investigating alpha-2 agonists like clonidine and dexmedetomidine to enhance pain relief. We conducted a double-blind study comparing dexmedetomidine and clonidine’s effectiveness in extending pain relief after tympanoplasty using local infiltration. Aim and Objective: In light of this context, we undertook a randomized, double-blind investigation to compare the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and clonidine in extending the duration of pain relief via local infiltration for tympanoplasty. Materials and Methods This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted on total of 60 patients belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I and II scheduled for tympanoplasty under local anesthesia. All patients were divided into two groups Group LC, received local infiltration with 12 mL of lignocaine (2%) with adrenaline (1:200,000) plus clonidine (1 μg/kg) and Group LD, received local infiltration with 12 mL of lignocaine (2%) with adrenaline (1:200,000) plus dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg). Results: Both the groups were comparable regarding demographic profile, perioperative hemodynamics, and total duration of surgery. Time of onset of analgesia was faster in Group LD (89.53 ± 5.54 vs. 94.17 ± 6.19 s) (P = 0.0034) and total duration of analgesia was also prolonged in Group LD (562.40 ± 24.82 vs. 332.30 ± 12.39 min) (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: We concluded that in comparison to clonidine, dexmedetomidine is more effective in terms of faster onset and prolongation of total duration of analgesia when used with local infiltration anesthesia.

Outcomes associated with prehospital epinephrine in adult and pediatric patients with anaphylaxis

BackgroundPrompt epinephrine administration is important to improve outcomes in anaphylaxis. ObjectiveTo assess the impact of prehospital epinephrine on clinical outcomes of hospital admission, biphasic reactions, and emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) in a cohort of ED patients who had anaphylaxis including both children and adults. MethodsWe conducted a single-center prospective and retrospective cohort study of patients who had anaphylaxis from April 2008 to December 2022. Associations between prehospital epinephrine administration with biphasic reactions and ED LOS were assessed with univariable models and the association with ED disposition was assessed with both univariable and multivariable logistic regression. ResultsA total of 1107 patient visits were included for analysis. The median patient age was 29 (IQR: 14-50), 593 (53.6%) patients were of female sex, and 366 (33.1%) were younger than 18 years of age. Patients in the prehospital epinephrine group were also less likely to experience a biphasic reaction (5.4% vs 9.3%; odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% CI: 0.34-0.92) and had a decreased ED LOS (median 4.0 hours vs 4.7 hours). There was no difference in hospital admission between patients with and without prehospital epinephrine in both the univariable (19.5% vs 15.7%; OR 1.30, 95% CI: 0.94-1.79) and multivariable (adjusted OR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.71-1.64) models. ConclusionPrehospital epinephrine administration reduced the odds of a biphasic reaction and decreased ED LOS but did not reduce hospitalization in this cohort of ED patients who had anaphylaxis. Our findings suggest that timely administration of prehospital epinephrine is associated with improved patient outcomes.

Split-mouth Comparison of Anesthetic Efficacy of Articaine and Lidocaine for Extractions of Deciduous Maxillary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

To clinically evaluate whether 4% articaine administered alone as a single buccal infiltration in deciduous maxillary tooth extraction can provide favorable palatal anesthesia compared to buccal and palatal infiltrations using 2% lidocaine. A prospective, double-blind, split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical study was carried out on 60 children comprising 36 females and 24 males in the age group of 5-10 years. During two separate appointments, children randomly received either 4% articaine with 1:1,00,000 epinephrine (group I-experimental) as buccal infiltration alone, or 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine (group II-control) as buccal plus palatal infiltration. Second local anesthetic agent was administered at least 1 week apart from first administration. Efficacy of anesthesia was assessed using subjective [Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale (WBFPS)] and objective [sound, eye, motor (SEM)] scales along with occurrence of any adverse effects. For infiltration procedure, 4% articaine (group I) had statistically highly significant (p < 0.001) pain scores on WBFPS as well as on SEM scale compared to 2% lidocaine (group II). According to WBFPS (p = 0.43) and SEM (p = 0.32) scores, the pain on extraction between 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine was statistically insignificant. About 4% articaine buccal infiltration showed better clinical anesthetic efficacy, thus providing effective palatal anesthesia due to its enhanced vestibule-palatal diffusion with no significant postanesthetic complications. Hence, articaine can be used as an alternative to lidocaine in children for extractions of deciduous maxillary teeth. Jankar JL, Pustake BJ. Split-mouth Comparison of Anesthetic Efficacy of Articaine and Lidocaine for Extractions of Deciduous Maxillary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024;17(S-1):S6-S10.

Efficiency and Safety of Intracoronary Epinephrine Administration in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Refractory Coronary No-Reflow

Studies assessing the treatment of refractory no-reflow in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients are limited to clinical cases and pilot studies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intracoronary epinephrine administration in such patients. Ninety consecutive patients with refractory coronary no-reflow during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were prospectively included after initial failure of conventional treatment. They were randomized into 2 groups: 45 patients in group 1 received epinephrine, and 45 patients in group 2 (control) received conventional treatments alone. Following intracoronary drug administration, the epinephrine group demonstrated significantly higher rates of coronary flow restoration in the infarct-related artery to the level of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade 3 (56% versus 29% (p=0.01)) and resolution of ST-segment elevation >50% post PCI (78% versus 36% (p<0.001)). Additionally, the epinephrine group showed a lower indexed microvascular obstruction (MVO) volume compared to the control group (0.9 (0.3; 3.1)% versus 1.9 (0.6; 7.9)% (p=0.048)). A significant improvement in ejection fraction (EF) was observed in the epinephrine group (p=0.025). Intracoronary epinephrine administration during PCI in STEMI patients with refractory no-reflow is more effective compared to conventional treatments. This approach improves coronary flow in the infarct-related artery, facilitates a faster resolution of ST segment elevation, enhances EF, and reduces MVO volume. Intracoronary epinephrine administration demonstrates a comparable safety profile to conventional treatment strategies in terms of life-threatening arrhythmias occurrence. The study suggests that intracoronary epinephrine administration during PCI could be an effective treatment strategy for STEMI patients with refractory no-reflow.

Early bolus epinephrine administration during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation for bradycardia with poor perfusion: an ICU-resuscitation study

BackgroundHalf of pediatric in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) events have an initial rhythm of non-pulseless bradycardia with poor perfusion. Our study objectives were to leverage granular data from the ICU-RESUScitation (ICU-RESUS) trial to: (1) determine the association of early epinephrine administration with survival outcomes in children receiving CPR for bradycardia with poor perfusion; and (2) describe the incidence and time course of the development of pulselessness.MethodsPrespecified secondary analysis of ICU-RESUS, a multicenter cluster randomized trial of children (< 19 years) receiving CPR in 18 intensive care units in the United States. Index events (October 2016–March 2021) lasting ≥ 2 min with a documented initial rhythm of bradycardia with poor perfusion were included. Associations between early epinephrine (first 2 min of CPR) and outcomes were evaluated with Poisson multivariable regression controlling for a priori pre-arrest characteristics. Among patients with arterial lines, intra-arrest blood pressure waveforms were reviewed to determine presence of a pulse during CPR interruptions. The temporal nature of progression to pulselessness was described and outcomes were compared between patients according to subsequent pulselessness status.ResultsOf 452 eligible subjects, 322 (71%) received early epinephrine. The early epinephrine group had higher pre-arrest severity of illness and vasoactive-inotrope scores. Early epinephrine was not associated with survival to discharge (aRR 0.97, 95%CI 0.82, 1.14) or survival with favorable neurologic outcome (aRR 0.99, 95%CI 0.82, 1.18). Among 186 patients with invasive blood pressure waveforms, 118 (63%) had at least 1 period of pulselessness during the first 10 min of CPR; 86 (46%) by 2 min and 100 (54%) by 3 min. Sustained return of spontaneous circulation was highest after bradycardia with poor perfusion (84%) compared to bradycardia with poor perfusion progressing to pulselessness (43%) and bradycardia with poor perfusion progressing to pulselessness followed by return to bradycardia with poor perfusion (62%) (p < 0.001).ConclusionsIn this cohort of pediatric CPR events with an initial rhythm of bradycardia with poor perfusion, we failed to identify an association between early bolus epinephrine and outcomes when controlling for illness severity. Most children receiving CPR for bradycardia with poor perfusion developed subsequent pulselessness, 46% within 2 min of CPR onset.

Early intramuscular adrenaline administration is associated with improved survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

BackgroundEarly administration of adrenaline is associated with improved survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Delays in vascular access may impact the timely delivery of adrenaline. Novel methods for administering adrenaline before vascular access may enhance survival. The objective of this study was to determine whether an initial intramuscular (IM) adrenaline dose followed by standard IV/IO adrenaline is associated with improved survival after OHCA. Methods Study DesignWe conducted a before-and-after study of the implementation of an early, first-dose IM adrenaline EMS protocol for adult OHCAs. The pre-intervention period took place between January 2010 and October 2019. The post-intervention period was between November 2019 and May 2024. SettingSingle-center urban, two-tiered EMS agency. ParticipantsAdult, nontraumatic OHCA meeting criteria for adrenaline use. InterventionSingle dose (5 mg) IM adrenaline. All other care, including subsequent IV or IO adrenaline, followed international guidelines. Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were time from EMS arrival to the first dose of adrenaline, survival to hospital admission, and favorable neurologic function at discharge. ResultsAmong 1405 OHCAs, 420 (29.9%) received IM adrenaline and 985 (70.1%) received usual care. Fifty-two patients received the first dose of adrenaline through the IV or IO route within the post-intervention period and were included in the standard care group analysis. Age was younger and bystander CPR was higher in the IM adrenaline group. All other characteristics were similar between IM and standard care cohorts. Time to adrenaline administration was faster for the IM cohort [(median 4.3 min (IQR 3.0–6.0) vs. 7.8 min (IQR 5.8–10.4)]. Compared with standard care, IM adrenaline was associated with improved survival to hospital admission (37.1% vs. 31.6%; aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06–1.77), hospital survival (11.0% vs 7.0%; aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10–2.71) and favorable neurologic status at hospital discharge (9.8% vs 6.2%; aOR 1.72, 95% CI 1.07–2.76). ConclusionIn this single-center before-and-after implementation study, an initial IM dose of adrenaline as an adjunct to standard care was associated with improved survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, and functional survival. A randomized controlled trial is needed to fully assess the potential benefit of IM adrenaline delivery in OHCA.

Epinephrine vs. phenylephrine infusion for prophylaxis against maternal hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial.

The hemodynamic effects of relatively low-dose epinephrine and phenylephrine infusions during cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were compared. This randomized controlled trial included full-term pregnant women who underwent elective cesarean delivery. After spinal anesthesia, participants received either epinephrine (0.03mcg/kg/min) or phenylephrine (0.4mcg/kg/min) infusion that continued until 5min after delivery. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of the occurrence of any of hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, and/or tachycardia. Neonatal outcomes, including umbilical artery blood gas and Apgar scores, were assessed. In total, 98 patients in each group were analyzed, and the number of patients with the composite outcome was comparable between the epinephrine and phenylephrine groups (30/98 [31%] vs. 31/98 [32%], respectively; P = 0.877). However, the incidence of hypotension was likely lower in the epinephrine group than in the phenylephrine group (P = 0.066), and the number of hypotensive episodes per patient was lower in the epinephrine group than in the phenylephrine group. On the other hand, the incidence of tachycardia was higher in the epinephrine group than that in the phenylephrine group. The incidence of hypertension was comparable between the two groups and none of the participants developed bradycardia. Neonatal outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Epinephrine and phenylephrine infusion produced comparable maternal hemodynamics and neonatal outcomes. Epinephrine was associated with a higher incidence of maternal tachycardia and likely lower incidence of maternal hypotension than phenylephrine. IRB number: MD-245-2022. This study was registered on May 31, 2023 at clinicaltrials.gov registry, NCT05881915, URL: https://classic. gov/ct2/show/NCT05881915term=NCT05881915&draw=2&rank=1.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Timing of Vasopressor Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock: Assessing Clinical Outcomes and Implication

Background Septic shock, is associated with a high mortality rate and increased expenses. Currently, the first-line therapy for septic shock entails administering resuscitation fluids followed by infusing vasopressors when the blood pressure goal is not achieved. The recommended first-line vasopressor is norepinephrine, followed by vasopressin, epinephrine, angiotensin II, and dopamine. There is still a controversy on when each vasopressor should be administered. Therefore, we conducted this review to determine the impact and implications of vasopressor timing in septic shock patients. Methods PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were comprehensively searched for potential studies until October 2023. The methodological quality and bias assessment of valid records was examined with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Cochrane’s risk of bias tool. Additionally, all the meta-analyses were performed with Review Manager software. Results Twelve articles were eligible for review and analysis. Pooled analyses of data from 7 of these studies demonstrated lower incidence of mortality and shorter duration to achieve target mean arterial pressure in the early vs. late epinephrine groups (OR:0.44; 95%CI: 0.35–0.55; p&lt;0.00001 and MD:-1.17; 95%CI:-2.00– -0.34; p=0.0006). However, the length of ICU stay didn’t differ between the early and late norepinephrine group (MD:0.55; 95%CI: -0.52–1.62; p=0.31). The subgroup analyses show that early vasopressin is associated with a decreased mortality than late administration (OR:0.60; 95%CI:0.41–0.90; p=0.01). Similarly, the pooled analysis has shown that early concomitant administration of vasopressin and norepinephrine is associated with a shorter duration to achieve target MAP than norepinephrine alone (MD:-3.15; 95%CI:-4.40– -1.90;p&lt;0.00001). Conclusion Early administration of norepinephrine has a mortality benefit and improves the duration taken to attain and sustain the goal MAP. Furthermore, early vasopressin possesses the potential to lower the fatality rate in individuals experiencing septic shock. However, further research is required to validate this finding.

Use of Initial Endotracheal Versus Intravenous Epinephrine During Neonatal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in the Delivery Room: Review of a National Database

To assess whether initial epinephrine administration by endotracheal tube (ET) in newly born infants receiving chest compressions and epinephrine in the delivery room (DR) is associated with lower rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) than newborns receiving initial intravenous (IV) epinephrine. We conducted a retrospective review of neonates receiving chest compressions and epinephrine in the DR from the AHA Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry from October 2013 through July 2020. Neonates were classified according to initial route of epinephrine (ET vs IV). The primary outcome of interest was ROSC in the DR. In total, 408 infants met inclusion criteria; of these, 281 (68.9%) received initial ET epinephrine and 127 (31.1%) received initial IV epinephrine. The initial ET epinephrine group included those infants who also received subsequent IV epinephrine when ET epinephrine failed to achieve ROSC. Comparing initial ET with initial IV epinephrine, ROSC was achieved in 70.1% vs 58.3% (adjusted risk difference 10.02; 95% CI 0.05-19.99). ROSC was achieved in 58.3% with IV epinephrine alone, and 47.0% with ET epinephrine alone, with 40.0% receiving subsequent IV epinephrine. This study suggests that initial use of ET epinephrine is reasonable during DR resuscitation, as there were greater rates of ROSC compared with initial IV epinephrine administration. However, administration of IV epinephrine should not be delayed in those infants not responding to initial ET epinephrine, as almost one-half of infants who received initial ET epinephrine subsequently received IV epinephrine before achieving ROSC.

The cerebral and cardiac effects of Norepinephrine in an experimental cardiac arrest model

IntroductionEpinephrine has been the main drug recommended for decades during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). But epinephrine’s ß-adrenergic effects might increase myocardial oxygen consumption and may cause arrythmias after ROSC. Norepinephrine has a weaker ß-adrenergic effect and could be useful during CPR. Studies on norepinephrine’s effect on hemodynamic parameters and cerebral perfusion are scarce. This study aimed to assess norepinephrine's hemodynamic impact in an experimental model of cardiac arrest. MethodsAfter an initial dose study to determine the optimal dose, we conducted a prospective randomized study with 19 pigs. After 3 minutes of untreated ventricular fibrillation, animals received boluses of 0.5 mg Epinephrine (EPI) or 1 mg Norepinephrine (NE) every 5 minutes during CPR. Coronary perfusion pressure (CPP), carotid blood flow (CBF) and cerebral perfusion pressure (CePP) were evaluated. ResultsAt baseline, hemodynamic parameters did not differ between the two groups. During CPR, CPP and CBF were similar: 17.3 (12.8; 31.8) in the EPI group vs 16.0 (11.1; 37.7) in the NE group, p = 0.9 and 28.4 (22.0; 54.8) vs 30.8 (12.2; 56.3) respectively, p = 0.9. CePP was not significantly lower during resuscitation in the NE group compared to the EPI group: 12.2 (−8.2; 42.2) vs 7.8 (−2.0; 32.0) p = 0.4. Survival rate was low with only one animal in the EPI group and 2 in the NE group. ConclusionCerebral perfusion pressure, coronary perfusion pressure and carotid blood flow during CPR did not significantly differ between the norepinephrine group and the epinephrine group. Further investigations should evaluate different options such as a continuous NE infusion.

Endotracheal epinephrine at standard versus high dose for resuscitation of asystolic newborn lambs

IntroductionEndotracheal (ET) epinephrine administration is an option during neonatal resuscitation, if the preferred intravenous (IV) route is unavailable. ObjectivesWe assessed whether endotracheal epinephrine achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and maintained physiological stability after ROSC, at standard and higher dose, in severely asphyxiated newborn lambs. MethodsNear-term fetal lambs were asphyxiated until asystole. Resuscitation was commenced with ventilation and chest compressions. Lambs were randomly allocated to: IV Saline placebo (5 ml/kg), IV Epinephrine (20 micrograms/kg), Standard-dose ET Epinephrine (100 micrograms/kg), and High-dose ET Epinephrine (1 mg/kg). After three allocated treatment doses, rescue IV Epinephrine was administered if ROSC had not occurred. Lambs achieving ROSC were monitored for 60 minutes. Brain histology was assessed for microbleeds. ResultsROSC in response to allocated treatment (without rescue IV Epinephrine) occurred in 1/6 Saline, 9/9 IV Epinephrine, 0/9 Standard-dose ET Epinephrine, and 7/9 High-dose ET Epinephrine lambs respectively. Blood pressure during CPR increased after treatment with IV Epinephrine and High-dose ET Epinephrine, but not Saline or Standard-dose ET Epinephrine.After ROSC, both ET Epinephrine groups had lower pH, higher lactate, and higher blood pressure than the IV Epinephrine group. Cortex microbleeds were more frequent in High-dose ET Epinephrine lambs (8/8 lambs examined, versus 3/8 in IV Epinephrine lambs). ConclusionsThe currently recommended dose of ET Epinephrine was ineffective in achieving ROSC. Without convincing clinical or preclinical evidence of efficacy, use of ET Epinephrine at this dose may not be appropriate. High-dose ET Epinephrine requires further evaluation before clinical translation.

Methanolic extract of Cleome droserifolia mitigates epinephrine-induced cardiac injury

Ethnopharmacological relevanceCleome droserifolia treatment has potent antioxidant, antimicrobial, and immunomodulatory potentials, which can help recover the general health status. Aim of the studyThis research aims to estimate the potential cardioprotective properties of the methanolic extract of Cleome droserifolia (MEC) against epinephrine-induced cardiac injury (MI) in rats. Materials and methodsThirty-six male Wistar rats were separated equally into 6 groups. The control group (Cont) received oral distilled water for 30 uninterrupted days and was administered subcutaneous saline on the 31st and 32nd days. The MEC 100 group received MEC 100 mg/kg, P.O., for 30 uninterrupted days and administered subcutaneous saline on the 31st and 32nd days. The MEC 200 group received MEC 200 mg/kg, P.O. for 30 uninterrupted days and subcutaneous saline was administered on the 31st and 32nd days. The epinephrine group (EP) received distilled water orally for 30 uninterrupted days and administered subcutaneous epinephrine (2 mg/kg, s.c.) divided into two doses (1 mg/kg, s.c) each on the 31st and 32nd days. MEC 100+Ep group received MEC 100 mg/kg, P.O., for 30 uninterrupted days and administered subcutaneous epinephrine (2 mg/kg, s.c.) divided into two doses (1 mg/kg, s.c) each on the 31st and 32nd days. The MEC 200+EP received MEC 200 mg/kg, P.O. for 30 uninterrupted days and administered subcutaneous epinephrine (2 mg/kg, s.c.) divided into two doses (1 mg/kg, s.c) each on the 31st and 32nd days. Electrocardiography (ECG), biochemical, oxidative stress, inflammatory mediators, histopathological, immunohistochemical analysis and the expression of phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3K) and protein kinase B (AKT) were assessed. ResultsMEC reversed epinephrine-induced lessening of heart rate, prolonged QT interval and ST displacement. Pretreatment with MEC significantly reduced serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) levels in MI rats. The MEC pretreatment promoted total antioxidant capacity (TAC), glutathione (GSH), and total oxidant status (TOS). In addition, it reduced interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interleukin-6 (IL-6), malondialdehyde (MDA), and tumour necrosis factor (TNF-α) in MI rats. Furthermore, MEC statistically reduced immunohistochemical promotion of nuclear factor–κB (NF-κB) and expression of AKT and PI3K in cardiac tissue and perfected histopathological changes. ConclusionThe MEC, rich in phenolic and flavonoid contents, had a cardioprotective effect on rats suffering from epinephrine-induced MI. Such effect was achieved via improving cardiac function, antioxidant status, attenuating ECG pattern and histological picture, as well as reducing IL-6, IL-1β, TNF-α and NF-κB, which its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory potential may partly arbitrate.

Cumulative epinephrine dose during cardiac arrest and neurologic outcome after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation

BackgroundEpinephrine is recommended without an apparent ceiling dosage during cardiac arrest. However, excessive alpha- and beta-adrenergic stimulation may contribute to unnecessarily high aortic afterload, promote post-arrest myocardial dysfunction, and result in cerebral microvascular insufficiency in patients receiving extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of adults (≥ 18 years) who received ECPR at large academic ECMO center from 2018 to 2022. Patients were grouped based on the amount of epinephrine given during cardiac arrest into low (≤ 3 mg) and high (> 3 mg) groups. The primary endpoint was neurologic outcome at hospital discharge, defined by cerebral performance category (CPC). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between cumulative epinephrine dosage during arrest and neurologic outcome. ResultsAmong 51 included ECPR cases, the median age of patients was 60 years, and 55% were male. The mean cumulative epinephrine dose administered during arrest was 6.2 mg but ranged from 0 to 24 mg. There were 18 patients in the low-dose (≤ 3 mg) and 25 patients in the high-dose (> 3 mg) epinephrine groups. Favorable neurologic outcome at discharge was significantly greater in the low-dose (55%) compared to the high-dose (24%) group (p = 0.025). After adjusting for age, those who received higher doses of epinephrine during the arrest were more likely to have unfavorable neurologic outcomes at hospital discharge (odds ratio 4.6, 95% CI 1.3, 18.0, p = 0.017). ConclusionAfter adjusting for age, cumulative epinephrine doses above 3 mg during cardiac arrest may be associated with unfavorable neurologic outcomes after ECPR and require further investigation.

Effects of nasal desmopressin spray versus topical epinephrine on surgical field clarity and hemodynamics in endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: a randomized clinical study

Background A bloodless surgical field coupled with stable hemodynamics is pivotal for successful surgical intervention, especially in endonasal surgeries. This study investigates the effect of intranasal desmopressin spray in reducing surgical bleeding and on hemodynamics compared with topical epinephrine in patients scheduled for endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). Methods Fifty-two patients were randomly allocated into two groups in this double-blind clinical study: Desmopressin group (n=26): patients received two puffs of desmopressin acetate 10 μg/puff in the side of the nasal cavity ipsilateral to the obstructed lacrimal duct (20 µg totally) 60 min before the surgery. Epinephrine group (n=26): patients received topical 1 : 100 000 epinephrine in the nasal cavity ipsilateral to the obstructed lacrimal duct via 3 soaked packs placed in the middle meatus for 5 min after induction of general anesthesia and before the start of surgery. Results The median clarity of the surgical field based on the BOEZAART grading system was significantly clearer in the desmopressin group compared with epinephrine group. The duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the desmopressin group (66.92±5.04 min) compared with epinephrine group (71.73±5.45 min). Mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) and heart rate (HR) were statistically significant higher in epinephrine group compared to the desmopressin group at 2 and 5 min after topical epinephrine compared with desmopressin group. Conclusion Pre-emptive 20 ug single dose of intranasal desmopressin provides a clear surgical field with no hemodynamics effects compared with topical epinephrine in patients undergoing endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Clinicaltrial.gov (ref: NCT05507476, date of registration: 18-8–2022).

Bupivacaine subcutaneous infiltration without tourniquet versus lignocaine regional block with tourniquet for hand surgery

Abstract Local anaesthesia is the inhibition of all sensation from an area of the body without loss of consciousness. The search for a non-addictive local anaesthetic led to the discovery of lignocaine in 1943 and later to the longer-acting bupivacaine in 1952. In this study, a prospective, randomised trial was conducted in 72 patients undergoing hand surgery to compare bupivacaine with adrenaline (wide awake local anaesthesia without tourniquet (WALANT) Group A) to a specific nerve block, either using axillary, wrist, or digital block using lignocaine plus tourniquet (Control Group B). Method: These two groups of patients consisted of elective and trauma cases in equal numbers. The parameters assessed included pain relief measured by a numeric pain grading scale, time taken to achieve complete haemostasis from the initial incision and toxic complications. Results: The grade of intraoperative pain was similar in both groups (p=0.86). The time taken from the incision to achieve a bloodless field was longer in Group A. This reflects increased bleeding when using the WALANT method. There were no toxic complications in either group. Conclusion: The use of bupivacaine with adrenaline proved to be safe and effective but is not recommended for patients with a history of bleeding or anticoagulant therapy. Regional anaesthesia with lignocaine and a tourniquet may be preferred for those patients.

Effects of Intramuscular Epinephrine Injection and Systemic Sildenafil Citrate on Rat Transverse Rectus Abdominis Musculocutaneous Flap Survival

Background and Objectives Flaps are commonly employed for reconstruction, and many studies have sought to improve flap survival. In this study, we determined whether sildenafil and epinephrine synergistically improve the survival rate of transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flaps.Materials and Method Twenty-four Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into four groups of six rats each: a control group, an epinephrine group, a sildenafil group, and an epinephrineplus- sildenafil group. TRAM flaps were elevated on the upper abdomen.Results The average flap survival area and number of blood vessels differed significantly between the control and experimental groups; however, the various experimental groups did not differ significantly. The level of vascular epithelial growth factor was higher in the experimental groups than in the control group.Conclusion Both epinephrine and sildenafil citrate significantly improve TRAM flap survival in rats. However, whether effects are better when the drugs are combined rather than when used alone remains unclear. Further research is required.

Single stent versus two stent strategy in primary PCI for unprotected LM occlusion

Abstract Background Acute MI due to left main coronary artery (LMCA) occlusion carry the highest anatomical risk for morbidity and mortality during primary PCI. Although several clinical trials compared different PCI techniques and strategies for LMCA, still special populations and different clinical scenarios have lack of evidence about ideal approaches. Purpose We aim to compare provisional stenting versus two stent upfront technique in acute MI due to LMCA occlusion regarding short term clinical outcomes. Methods This was a prospective observational study from three large centers within the period from February 2019 to Feb 2023. Patients with acute STEMI due to LMCA occlusion who are candidates for primary PCI were included and was assigned to two groups according to operator discretion. Group I (provisional stenting) versus group II (upfront two stent strategy). Our primary outcome was MACE within 30 days and secondary Outcomes were angiographic outcomes after intervention including TIMI flow, CTFC and myocardial blush. Results A total of 62 patients met our inclusion criteria, mean age (62.64±8.61), 24.6% women. Thirty-eight patients in group I undergone provisional stenting and twenty-four patients in group II undergone two stent strategy. MACE was significantly higher in the two-stent strategy group (61.62% vs 40.34%, P&amp;lt;0.001] compared with provisional stenting group. the IV epinephrine group. Angiographic outcomes were significantly better in provisional stenting group by the end of the procedure. There was marked increase in patients who achieved postprocedural TIMI III and TMPG III in group I by 22% and 18% respectively in comparison with two stent strategy group. Conclusion Our observational study concluded that provisional stenting carries better short-term outcomes in acute MI intervention due to unprotected LMCA occlusion. Clinical studies are needy in this specific population.Study flow chartFigure I