Literature DB >> 16717120

Dopamine versus epinephrine for cardiovascular support in low birth weight infants: analysis of systemic effects and neonatal clinical outcomes.

Eva Valverde1, Adelina Pellicer, Rosario Madero, Dolores Elorza, José Quero, Fernando Cabañas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Early postnatal adaptation to transitional circulation in low birth weight infants frequently is associated with low blood pressure and decreased blood flow to organs. Catecholamines have been used widely as treatment, despite remarkably little empirical evidence on the effects of vasopressor/inotropic support on circulation and on clinically important outcomes in sick newborn infants. AIMS: To explore the effectiveness of low/moderate-dose dopamine and epinephrine in the treatment of early systemic hypotension in low birth weight infants, evaluate the frequency of adverse drug effects, and examine neonatal clinical outcomes of patients in relation to treatment. DESIGN/
METHODS: Newborns of <1501-g birth weight or <32 weeks of gestational age, with a mean blood pressure lower than gestational age in the first 24 hours of life, were assigned randomly to receive dopamine (2.5, 5, 7.5, and 10 microg/kg per minute; n = 28) or epinephrine (0.125, 0.250, 0.375, and 0.5 microg/kg per minute; n = 32) at doses that were increased stepwise every 20 minutes until optimal mean blood pressure was attained and maintained (responders). If this treatment was unsuccessful (nonresponders), sequential rescue therapy was started, consisting first of the addition of the second study drug and then hydrocortisone. OUTCOME MEASURES: These included: (1) short-term changes (first 96 hours, only responders) in heart rate, mean blood pressure, acid-base status, lactate, glycemia, urine output, and fluid-carbohydrate debit; and (2) medium-term morbidity, enteral nutrition tolerance, gastrointestinal complications, severity of lung disease, patent ductus arteriosus, cerebral ultrasound diagnoses, retinopathy of prematurity, and mortality.
RESULTS: Patients enrolled in this trial did not differ in birth weight or gestational age (1008 +/- 286 g and 28.3 +/- 2.3 weeks in the dopamine group; 944 +/- 281 g and 27.7 +/- 2.4 weeks in the epinephrine group). Other main antenatal variables were also comparable. However, responders and nonresponders differed significantly with respect to the need for cardiorespiratory resuscitation at birth (3% vs 23%), Critical Risk Index for Babies score (3.8 +/- 3 vs 7 +/- 5), and premature rupture of membranes >24 hours (39.5% vs 13.6%), respectively. No differences were found in the rate of treatment failure (dopamine: 36%; epinephrine: 37%) or need for rescue therapy according to treatment allocation. Groups did not differ in age at initiation of therapy (dopamine: 5.3 +/- 3.9 hours; epinephrine: 5.2 +/- 3.3 hours), but withdrawal was significantly later in the dopamine group. For short-term changes, mean blood pressure showed a significant increase from baseline throughout the first 96 hours with no differences between groups. However, epinephrine produced a greater increase in heart rate than dopamine. After treatment began, epinephrine patients showed higher plasma lactate (first 36 hours) and lower bicarbonate and base excess (first 6 hours) and received more bicarbonate. Patients in the epinephrine group also had higher glycemia (first 24 hours) and needed insulin therapy more often. Groups did not differ in urine output or fluid-carbohydrate supply during the first 96 hours. For medium-term morbidity, there were no differences in neonatal clinical outcomes in responders. However, significant differences were found in the incidence of patent ductus arteriosus, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, need for high-frequency ventilation, occurrence of necrotizing enterocolitis, and death between responders and nonresponders.
CONCLUSIONS: Low/moderate-dose epinephrine is as effective as low/moderate-dose dopamine for the treatment of hypotension in low birth weight infants, although it is associated with more transitory adverse effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16717120     DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-2108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  24 in total

Review 1.  Early volume expansion versus inotrope for prevention of morbidity and mortality in very preterm infants.

Authors:  D A Osborn; N Evans
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2001

Review 2.  Current Challenges in Neonatal Resuscitation: What is the Role of Adrenaline?

Authors:  Roberto Antonucci; Luca Antonucci; Cristian Locci; Annalisa Porcella; Laura Cuzzolin
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.022

3.  Vasopressin improves systemic hemodynamics without compromising mesenteric perfusion in the resuscitation of asphyxiated newborn piglets: a dose-response study.

Authors:  Douglas C Cheung; Richdeep S Gill; Jiang-Qin Liu; Namdar Manouchehri; Consolato Sergi; David Bigam; Po-Yin Cheung; Bryan J Dicken
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Should dopamine be the first line inotrope in the treatment of neonatal hypotension? Review of the evidence.

Authors:  Sadaf I Bhayat; Harsha M S Gowda; Michael Eisenhut
Journal:  World J Clin Pediatr       Date:  2016-05-08

5.  Vasopressin versus dopamine for treatment of hypotension in extremely low birth weight infants: a randomized, blinded pilot study.

Authors:  Danielle R Rios; Jeffrey R Kaiser
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 4.406

Review 6.  Early volume expansion for prevention of morbidity and mortality in very preterm infants.

Authors:  D A Osborn; N Evans
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004

7.  Inotropes do not increase cardiac output or cerebral blood flow in preterm piglets.

Authors:  Yvonne A Eiby; Nicole Y Shrimpton; Ian M R Wright; Eugenie R Lumbers; Paul B Colditz; Greg J Duncombe; Barbara E Lingwood
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 3.756

8.  Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine.

Authors:  Joe Brierley; Joseph A Carcillo; Karen Choong; Tim Cornell; Allan Decaen; Andreas Deymann; Allan Doctor; Alan Davis; John Duff; Marc-Andre Dugas; Alan Duncan; Barry Evans; Jonathan Feldman; Kathryn Felmet; Gene Fisher; Lorry Frankel; Howard Jeffries; Bruce Greenwald; Juan Gutierrez; Mark Hall; Yong Y Han; James Hanson; Jan Hazelzet; Lynn Hernan; Jane Kiff; Niranjan Kissoon; Alexander Kon; Jose Irazuzta; Jose Irazusta; John Lin; Angie Lorts; Michelle Mariscalco; Renuka Mehta; Simon Nadel; Trung Nguyen; Carol Nicholson; Mark Peters; Regina Okhuysen-Cawley; Tom Poulton; Monica Relves; Agustin Rodriguez; Ranna Rozenfeld; Eduardo Schnitzler; Tom Shanley; Saraswati Kache; Sara Skache; Peter Skippen; Adalberto Torres; Bettina von Dessauer; Jacki Weingarten; Timothy Yeh; Arno Zaritsky; Bonnie Stojadinovic; Jerry Zimmerman; Aaron Zuckerberg
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 7.598

9.  Epinephrine versus dopamine in neonatal septic shock: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kishore Baske; Shiv Sajan Saini; Sourabh Dutta; Venkataseshan Sundaram
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2018-06-23       Impact factor: 3.183

Review 10.  Splanchnic NIRS monitoring in neonatal care: rationale, current applications and future perspectives.

Authors:  Silvia Martini; Luigi Corvaglia
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 2.521

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.