Literature DB >> 11476743

Employing vasopressin during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and vasodilatory shock as a lifesaving vasopressor.

V Wenzel1, K H Lindner.   

Abstract

Epinephrine during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is being discussed controversially due to its beta-receptor mediated adverse effects such as increased myocardial oxygen consumption, ventricular arrhythmias, ventilation-perfusion defect, postresuscitation myocardial dysfunction, ventricular arrhythmias and cardiac failure. In the CPR laboratory simulating adult pigs with ventricular fibrillation or postcountershock pulseless electrical activity, vasopressin improved vital organ blood flow, cerebral oxygen delivery, resuscitability, and neurological recovery better than did epinephrine. In paediatric preparations with asphyxia, epinephrine was superior to vasopressin, whereas in both paediatric pigs with ventricular fibrillation, and adult porcine models with asphyxia, combinations of vasopressin and epinephrine proved to be highly effective. This may suggest that a different efficiency of vasopressors in paediatric vs. adult preparations; and different effects of dysrhythmic vs. asphyxial cardiac arrest on vasopressor efficiency may be of significant importance. Whether these theories can be extrapolated to humans is unknown at this point in time. In patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation, a larger proportion of patients treated with vasopressin survived 24 h compared with patients treated with epinephrine; during in-hospital CPR, comparable short-term survival was found in groups treated with either vasopressin or epinephrine. Currently, a large trial of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients being treated with vasopressin vs. epinephrine is ongoing in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The new CPR guidelines of both the American Heart Association, and European Resuscitation Council recommend 40 U vasopressin intravenously, and 1 mg epinephrine intravenously as equally effective for the treatment of adult patients in ventricular fibrillation; however, no recommendation for vasopressin was made to date for adult patients with asystole and pulseless electrical activity, and paediatrics due to lack of clinical data. When adrenergic vasopressors were unable to maintain arterial blood pressure in patients with vasodilatory shock, continuous infusions of vasopressin ( approximately 0.04 to approximately 0.1 U/min) stabilised cardiocirculatory parameters, and even ensured weaning from catecholamines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11476743     DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6363(01)00262-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Res        ISSN: 0008-6363            Impact factor:   10.787


  5 in total

1.  Perioperative infusion of low- dose of vasopressin for prevention and management of vasodilatory vasoplegic syndrome in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting-A double-blind randomized study.

Authors:  Georgios Papadopoulos; Eleni Sintou; Stavros Siminelakis; Efstratios Koletsis; Nikolaos G Baikoussis; Efstratios Apostolakis
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2010-03-28       Impact factor: 1.637

Review 2.  Management of vasodilatory shock: defining the role of arginine vasopressin.

Authors:  Martin W Dunser; Volker Wenzel; Andreas J Mayr; Walter R Hasibeder
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 3.  Vasopressin vs. terlipressin in the treatment of cardiovascular failure in sepsis.

Authors:  Matthias Lange; Christian Ertmer; Martin Westphal
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-12-08       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 4.  [New therapeutic approaches in the treatment of shock: hypertonic hyperoncotic solutions and vasopressin].

Authors:  A Meier-Hellman; G Burgard
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 0.743

Review 5.  Vasopressin in hemorrhagic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized animal trials.

Authors:  Andrea Pasquale Cossu; Paolo Mura; Lorenzo Matteo De Giudici; Daniela Puddu; Laura Pasin; Maurizio Evangelista; Theodoros Xanthos; Mario Musu; Gabriele Finco
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 3.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.