Literature DB >> 11463411

Vasopressin versus epinephrine for inhospital cardiac arrest: a randomised controlled trial.

I G Stiell1, P C Hébert, G A Wells, K L Vandemheen, A S Tang, L A Higginson, J F Dreyer, C Clement, E Battram, I Watpool, S Mason, T Klassen, B N Weitzman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Survival rates for cardiac arrest patients, both in and out of hospital, are poor. Results of a previous study suggest better outcomes for patients treated with vasopressin than for those given epinephrine, in the out-of-hospital setting. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness and safety of these drugs for the treatment of in-patient cardiac arrest.
METHODS: We did a triple-blind randomised trial in the emergency departments, critical care units, and wards of three Canadian teaching hospitals. We assigned adults who had cardiac arrest and required drug therapy to receive one dose of vasopressin 40 U or epinephrine 1 mg intravenously, as the initial vasopressor. Patients who failed to respond to the study intervention were given epinephrine as a rescue medication. The primary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge, survival to 1 h, and neurological function. Preplanned subgroup assessments included patients with myocardial ischaemia or infarction, initial cardiac rhythm, and age.
FINDINGS: We assigned 104 patients to vasopressin and 96 to epinephrine. For patients receiving vasopressin or epinephrine survival did not differ for hospital discharge (12 [12%] vs 13 [14%], respectively; p50.67; 95% CI for absolute increase in survival 211.8% to 7.8%) or for 1 h survival (40 [39%] vs 34 [35%]; p50.66; 210.9% to 17.0%); survivors had closely similar median mini-mental state examination scores (36 [range 19-38] vs 35 [20-40]; p50.75) and median cerebral performance category scores (1 vs 1).
INTERPRETATION: We failed to detect any survival advantage for vasopressin over epinephrine. We cannot recommend the routine use of vasopressin for inhospital cardiac arrest patients, and disagree with American Heart Association guidelines, which recommend vasopressin as alternative therapy for cardiac arrest.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11463411     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05328-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  38 in total

1.  Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. Revised guidelines are more evidence based.

Authors:  A S Lockey; J P Nolan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-10-13

Review 2.  Emergency medicine.

Authors:  Daniel M Fatovich
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-04-20

Review 3.  Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and management of cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Jerry P Nolan; Jasmeet Soar; Volker Wenzel; Peter Paal
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 32.419

4.  Emergency medicine. Whole system is responsible for solving overcrowding of departments.

Authors:  Matthew Cooke
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-08-17

Review 5.  Resuscitation.

Authors:  Richard Vincent
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.994

6.  Part 10: Pediatric basic and advanced life support: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

Authors:  Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-10-19       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Impact of low-dose vasopressin on trauma outcome: prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Stephen M Cohn; Janet McCarthy; Ronald M Stewart; Rachelle B Jonas; Daniel L Dent; Joel E Michalek
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Pediatric basic and advanced life support: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.

Authors:  Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2010-10-18       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 9.  Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis.

Authors:  Dean Fergusson; Shawn D Aaron; Gordon Guyatt; Paul Hébert
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-09-21

Review 10. 

Authors:  J P Nolan; C D Deakin; J Soar; B W Böttiger; G Smith; M Baubin; B Dirks; V Wenzel
Journal:  Notf Rett Med       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 0.826

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.