This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
1-4 The PDPs, phenylephrine and epinephrine, result in vasoconstriction and increased cardiac contractility. They can be associated with side effects such as reflex bradycardia, decreased stroke volume in phenylephrine, tachycardia and hypertension associated with epinephrine.
Author: Natalie Bertrand, MD Editor: Naillid Felipe, MD Background: Definition: adverse reaction to blood product administration Incidence: more common in children than adults, except for delayed hemolytic transfusion reactions Allergic (non-anaphylaxis) – Platelets 1-3%; RBCs 0.1-0.3% mg IF requiring IM Epi >3x, switch to IV Epi, 0.05-0.1
While not specifically reviewed in this post, check out the methemoglobinemia tox card for more information about one of the other known events that can occur with local anesthetic administration. 1,2] Consider using a physiological marker to help identify inadvertent vascular injection, such as epinephrine. [3]
Author: Natalie Bertrand, MD Editor: Naillid Felipe, MD Background: Definition: adverse reaction to blood product administration Incidence: more common in children than adults, except for delayed hemolytic transfusion reactions Allergic (non-anaphylaxis) – Platelets 1-3%; RBCs 0.1-0.3% mg IF requiring IM Epi >3x, switch to IV Epi, 0.05-0.1
HIET improves contractility without increasing SVR, while vasopressin and epinephrine transiently increase SVR/MAP but worsen cardiac output in anesthetized dogs given propranolol (Holger 2007). Disposition to ICU. Insulin versus vasopressin and epinephrine to treat β-blocker toxicity. J Med Toxicol. 2020;16(2):212-221.
What They Did: Single-center, parallel, double blind, randomized controlled trial performed in a medical-surgical ICU (Mexico) Both groups received: Adjunctive vasopressin initiated at a dose of 0.03 It also reduced length of stay in ICU and hospital without adverse effects. NaCl over 6hrs once daily x3 doses Placebo: 500mL of 0.9%
1 The rationale for the shift away from normal saline in 2021 derived from multiple trials, including the Isotonic Solutions and Major Adverse Renal Events Trial (SMART) and Saline Against Lactated Ringer’s or Plasma-Lyte in the Emergency Department (SALT ED). Restriction of Intravenous Fluid in ICU Patients with Septic Shock.
The TEG group had a shorter ICU length of stay in the first admission. Patients exclusively managed in the ICU which decreases applicability for patients in other locations Very small sample size of 96 patients No definition was provided for exclusion criteria of significant cardiopulmonary disease.
They stated that the patient was coded for 20 minutes, including multiple doses of epinephrine, and they also gave glucose, calcium, and bicarb. As stated above, resuscitation included epinephrine, calcium, and bicarb. Dr. Meyers skillfully walks us through the events in this case, with important lessons to be learned.
The authors also investigated harms in both groups and determined no significant difference in adverse events between both groups. Secondary outcomes included mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), infections, and hematologic adverse events. This trial carried several limitations.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content