Literature DB >> 23912755

Safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for long-term sedation in critically ill patients.

Makoto Ozaki1, Junzo Takeda, Keiji Tanaka, Yasuhiro Shiokawa, Shinichi Nishi, Kenichi Matsuda, Matsuyuki Doi, Yasuyuki Kakihana, Yuji Fujino, Masanori Takinami, Misa Kawai.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of long-term administration of dexmedetomidine in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Primary endpoint was the incidence of hypotension, hypertension, and bradycardia. Secondary endpoints were withdrawal symptoms, rebound effects, the duration of sedation with Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) ≤ 0 relative to the total infusion time of dexmedetomidine, and the dose of additional sedatives or analgesics.
METHODS: Dexmedetomidine 0.2-0.7 μg/kg/h was continuously infused for maintaining RASS ≤ 0 in patients requiring sedation in the ICU. Safety and efficacy of short-term (≤ 24 h) and long-term (>24 h) dexmedetomidine administration were compared.
RESULTS: Seventy-five surgical and medical ICU patients were administered dexmedetomidine. The incidence of hypotension, hypertension, and bradycardia that occurred after 24 h (long-term) was not significantly different from that occurring within 24 h (short-term) (P = 0.546, 0.513, and 0.486, respectively). Regarding withdrawal symptoms, one event each of hypertension and headache occurred after the end of infusion, but both were mild in severity. Increases of mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate after terminating the infusion of dexmedetomidine were not associated with the increasing duration of its infusion. The ratio of duration with RASS ≤ 0 was ≥ 85 % until day 20, except day 9 (70 %) and day 10 (75 %). There was no increase in the dose of additional sedatives or analgesics after the first 24-h treatment period.
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term safety of dexmedetomidine compared to its use for 24 h was confirmed. Dexmedetomidine was useful to maintain an adequate sedation level (RASS ≤ 0) during long-term infusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23912755      PMCID: PMC3921449          DOI: 10.1007/s00540-013-1678-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anesth        ISSN: 0913-8668            Impact factor:   2.078


Introduction

The importance of optimizing the levels of sedation in critical care has been increasingly recognized [1]. Many intensive care experts are focusing on maintaining a targeted “ideal” sedation level according to the individual patient’s condition to avoid adverse events such as prolonged mechanical ventilation, respiratory depression, pneumonia, delirium, psychological problems, and increased treatment costs resulting from oversedation [1-5]. However, optimizing the levels of sedation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients has been challenging, particularly in those requiring long-term sedation, frequently accompanied with severe conditions, and difficult to manage [6]. Although propofol and midazolam have been commonly used for long-time sedation, oversedation and respiratory depression have been regarded as unavoidable complications [4, 5, 7]. Dexmedetomidine is a selective alpha-2-adrenoceptor agonist. It exerts both sedative and analgesic effects via mechanisms different from other sedatives such as midazolam and propofol, and provides sedation characterized by prompt response to stimuli with no respiratory depression [8-11]. Although there have been several reports showing the effects of dexmedetomidine on long-term sedation [12-14], no prospective study has compared the safety and efficacy of short-term (within 24 h) and long-term (longer than 24 h) administration of dexmedetomidine for sedation in the ICU. We performed a prospective, multicenter trial to investigate the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for long-term sedation in surgical and medical ICU patients.

Materials and methods

Study design

This was a prospective, single-arm, open-label, multicenter, phase III clinical study conducted at ten investigational sites in Japan between October 2007 and June 2008, aimed to obtain an approval for the long-term use (>24 h) of dexmedetomidine in Japan. It was approved by the Institutional Review Board at each site, and all the patients or legally acceptable representatives provided their written informed consent before enrollment. The study was conducted according to the Japanese Pharmaceutical Affairs Law, Japanese Good Clinical Practice, and relevant regulatory standards, and has been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00526760) before recruitment of the first subject.

Subjects

Inclusion criteria were patients admitted in either surgical or medical ICU aged ≥20 years, requiring mechanical ventilation and estimated duration of sedation >24 h, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to III (only those in surgical ICU). Exclusion criteria were patients with serious trauma in the central nervous system, terminal illness with life expectancy ≤30 days, with bleeding probably requiring surgical hemostasis, drug overdose within the last 30 days before study entry, pregnancy/lactation, contraindication to alpha-2-adrenoceptor agonists or antagonists, or difficulty in data collection or completing the study protocol. Patients required neuromuscular blocking agents except for tracheal intubation, received alpha-2-adrenoceptor agonists or antagonists within the last 30 days before participation in the study, patients who had participated in a trial with any experimental drug within 30 days before their admission into the ICU, or patients who had any symptom or factor that might increase the risk to the patients by participating in the study were also excluded.

Treatment

Decision to start and terminate the infusion of dexmedetomidine was made by the investigators or sub-investigators. It was administered at 0.2–0.7 μg/kg/h for maintaining the sedation levels with Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) ≤ 0 [15]. Maximum duration of infusion was 28 days, and restarting infusion after termination was allowed within this limit. It was not necessary to discontinue the administration of the other sedatives or analgesics before starting infusion of dexmedetomidine. If necessary, additional sedatives and analgesics were given after assessing RASS or pain, respectively. Pain was assessed by direct communication with the patients or by an observation of clinical symptoms such as sweating, tachycardia, or hypertension. A 24-h observation period followed the dose administration. The patients were also followed for serious adverse events for 30 days after the end of the infusion.

Efficacy and safety evaluation

The primary endpoint was the incidence rates of treatment-related hypotension, hypertension, and bradycardia, defined in the protocol as (1) hypotension: systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 60 mmHg, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) < 40 mmHg or decrease of SBP by ≥ 50 % from the baseline, requiring infusion or increase of the dose of vasopressors or fluid infusion ≥ 500 ml within 1 h; (2) hypertension: SBP > 180 mmHg, DBP > 100 mmHg, or increase of SBP by ≥ 50 % from the baseline, requiring infusion or increasing the dose of antihypertensive agents; and (3) bradycardia: heart rate (HR) < 40 bpm or decrease by ≥ 50 % from the baseline, requiring infusion or increase the dose of positive chronotropic medications or the use of a pacemaker. Treatment-related adverse events were defined as all the adverse events except those that were deemed “not related” to dexmedetomidine. Secondary safety assessments included adverse events, withdrawal assessments of the incidence rates of withdrawal symptom-related adverse events (including increased blood pressure, tachycardia, nausea/vomiting, headache, tremor, anxiety, sweating, or agitation), and rebound assessments of the post-infusion changes in mean arterial blood pressure (MBP), HR, and rate-pressure product (RPP). If clinically important abnormal values were observed in hematology and blood chemistry, they were to be reported as adverse events. As with the primary endpoint, treatment-related adverse events were defined as all of the adverse events except that were deemed “not related” to dexmedetomidine. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the ratio of duration with RASS ≤ 0 to the total duration of infusion of dexmedetomidine, and the dosage of additional sedatives and analgesics. Dexmedetomidine characteristic sedation level corresponds to a RASS of 0 to −2. However, this was a long-term study in ICU patients with a critical condition who would sometimes require deep sedation (RASS < −2), and the target sedation level during the infusion was set as RASS < 0.

Statistical methods

Sample size was determined to detect at least one incidence of treatment-related hypotension, hypertension, or bradycardia. Assuming the incidence of bradycardia to be 5 %, the lowest among those events, 59 patients would be required to detect at least one incidence of 5 % treatment-related adverse events with a 95 % probability. Taking into account 20 % of the dropout cases, 80 patients were estimated as the sample size. It was also planned that approximately 15 % of the medical ICU patients would be enrolled. For the primary safety analysis, the incidence rates per person per day of treatment-related adverse events including protocol-defined hypotension, hypertension, and bradycardia were calculated by dividing the number of those events by the sum of days of treatment for all patients including the 24-h observation period. The incidence rate during the first 24 h was compared with that after 24 h using the Sumi and Tango method of the score test [16]. In the secondary analysis, the incidence rates of the other treatment-related adverse events were analyzed as described for primary analysis. Descriptive statistics were used in the other assessments. The analysis was on the basis of the full analysis set of patients, which was defined as all the patients who received dexmedetomidine treatment. The level of significance in all statistical analysis was set at α = 0.05 (two-tailed).

Results

Patient demographics

A full analysis set consisted of 75 patients who received dexmedetomidine. Totally, 5 patients dropped out before dexmedetomidine treatment because of change in surgery date, persistent hemorrhage after surgery, or withdrawal of consent, and were excluded from the full analysis set. Of 75 patients, 52 (69.3 %) were surgical ICU and 23 (30.7 %) were medical ICU patients, respectively (Table 1). The medical ICU patients required a longer period of sedation compared to the surgical ICU patients. Maximum duration of dexmedetomidine treatment in the surgical ICU patients and the medical ICU patients was 5.6 and 19.9 days, respectively. Sixty-one of the 75 patients (81.3 %) received dexmedetomidine treatment both before and after extubation. Two of the 52 surgical ICU patients discontinued dexmedetomidine infusion during the first 24 h because of bradycardia or postoperative bleeding (Table 2).
Table 1

Baseline characteristics

ParameterSurgical ICU, n (%)Medical ICU, n (%)Total, n (%)
52 (69.3)23 (30.7)75 (100)
Age (years)
 Mean ± SD66.4 ± 11.368.9 ± 12.967.1 ± 11.8
 <6517 (32.7)7 (30.4)24 (32.0)
 ≥6535 (67.3)16 (69.6)51 (68.0)
Sex
 Male37 (71.2)18 (78.3)55 (73.3)
 Female15 (28.8)5 (21.7)20 (26.7)
Body weight (kg)
 n 522072
 Mean ± SD60.73 ± 11.5757.20 ± 9.9759.75 ± 11.19
Main surgical procedure
 Stent grafting2 (3.8)2 (3.8)
 Patch closure1 (1.9)1 (1.9)
 Bentall procedure3 (5.8)3 (5.8)
 Coronary artery bypass graft14 (26.9)14 (26.9)
 Subtotal esophagectomy1 (1.9)1 (1.9)
 Blood vessel prosthesis implantation13 (25.0)13 (25.0)
 Oropharynx tumor resection with neck dissection1 (1.9)1 (1.9)
 Aneurysmectomy2 (3.8)2 (3.8)
 Myxomectomy1 (1.9)1 (1.9)
 Valve replacement/valvuloplasty14 (26.9)14 (26.9)
Specific medical disease
 Respiratory disease8 (34.8)8 (34.8)
 Cardiac disease8 (34.8)8 (34.8)
 Vascular disease2 (8.7)2 (8.7)
 Other5 (21.7)5 (21.7)
Duration of surgery (h)
 <31 (1.9)1 (1.9)
 ≥3, <517 (32.7)17 (32.7)
 ≥534 (65.4)34 (65.4)
ASA physical status
 I0 (0.0)0 (0.0)
 II25 (48.1)25 (48.1)
 III27 (51.9)27 (51.9)
History of smoking
 Non-smokers24 (46.2)8 (34.8)32 (42.7)
 Current smokers6 (11.5)6 (26.1)12 (16.0)
 Ex-smokers22 (42.3)9 (39.1)31 (41.3)
History of alcohol use
 Non-alcohol users23 (44.2)8 (34.8)31 (41.3)
 Alcohol users19 (36.5)12 (52.2)31 (41.3)
 Ex-alcohol users10 (19.2)3 (13.0)13 (17.3)

ASA American Society of Anesthesiologists, ICU intensive care unit

Table 2

Duration of treatment

Parameter (days)Surgical ICU n (%)Medical ICU n (%)Total n (%)
TotalBefore extubationAfter extubationTotalBefore extubationAfter extubationTotalBefore extubationAfter extubation
52 (69.3)52 (69.3)50 (66.7)23 (30.7)23 (30.7)11 (14.7)75 (100)75 (100)61 (81.3)
Mean ± SD2.1 ± 1.20.9 ± 0.81.2 ± 0.97.4 ± 5.76.2 ± 5.8 2.4 ± 3.6 3.7 ± 4.12.5 ± 4.1 1.5 ± 1.8 
Median1.60.70.96.03.91.92.00.80.9
Q1–Q31.1–2.70.3–0.80.7–1.82.5–11.81.9–11.40.1–2.11.4–3.90.5–2.70.7–1.9
Min to max0.1–5.60.1–3.20.01–3.81.0–19.90.6–19.90.1–12.80.1–19.90.1–19.90.01–12.8

Q1 quartile 1, Q3 quartile 3

Baseline characteristics ASA American Society of Anesthesiologists, ICU intensive care unit Duration of treatment Q1 quartile 1, Q3 quartile 3

Safety

There were no differences in the incidence rates of treatment-related hypotension, hypertension, or bradycardia defined in the protocol, expressed as per person per day between the first 24 h and after 24 h (Table 3). There were also no differences in those values between the surgical and medical ICU patients.
Table 3

Incidence of treatment-related adverse events defined in the protocol within and after 24 h

Number of events (incidence ratea) within 24 hNumber of events (incidence rateb) after 24 h P value in Score test
Protocol-defined hypotension
 Total3 (0.0400)6 (0.0217)0.546
 Surgical ICU2 (0.0385)4 (0.0375)0.951
 Medical ICU1 (0.0435)2 (0.0118)0.193
Protocol-defined hypertension
 Total3 (0.0400)6 (0.0217)0.513
 Surgical ICU3 (0.0577)3 (0.0281)0.303
 Medical ICU0 (0.0000)3 (0.0177)0.530
Protocol-defined bradycardia
 Total1 (0.0133)0 (0.0000)0.486
 Surgical ICU1 (0.0192)0 (0.0000)0.486
 Medical ICU0 (0.0000)0 (0.0000)
Total
 Total7 (0.0933)12 (0.0435)0.299
 Surgical ICU6 (0.1154)7 (0.0656)0.352
 Medical ICU1 (0.0435)5 (0.0295)0.644

Decreased and increased blood pressure according to Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities/Japanese version 11.0 was classified as hypotension and hypertension, respectively: n = 75 (Total), n = 52 (Surgical ICU), n = 23 (Medical ICU) within 24 h; n = 73 (Total), n = 50 (Surgical ICU), n = 23 (Medical ICU) after 24 h

aIncidence rate = number of events/person-days (person-days: 75 in total, 52 in surgical ICU, 23 in medical ICU)

bIncidence rate = number of events/person-days (person-days: 276 in total, 107 in surgical ICU, 169 in medical ICU)

Incidence of treatment-related adverse events defined in the protocol within and after 24 h Decreased and increased blood pressure according to Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities/Japanese version 11.0 was classified as hypotension and hypertension, respectively: n = 75 (Total), n = 52 (Surgical ICU), n = 23 (Medical ICU) within 24 h; n = 73 (Total), n = 50 (Surgical ICU), n = 23 (Medical ICU) after 24 h aIncidence rate = number of events/person-days (person-days: 75 in total, 52 in surgical ICU, 23 in medical ICU) bIncidence rate = number of events/person-days (person-days: 276 in total, 107 in surgical ICU, 169 in medical ICU) The total incidence rate of treatment-related adverse events expressed as per person per day that occurred within 24 h was significantly higher than that after 24 h (Table 4). There were no differences in the incidence of each treatment-related adverse event within and after 24 h, with the exception that the incidence of increased blood pressure was higher within 24 h compared with that after 24 h. No treatment-related respiratory depression occurred. Three of 75 patients (4.0 %) developed delirium. One of three events was deemed as probably not related to dexmedetomidine, and the patient recovered 6 days after the onset of symptoms. Another two events were deemed as not related to dexmedetomidine, and the patients recovered about 5 h and 9 days after the onset of symptoms, respectively. Seven patients had died after the end of the dexmedetomidine infusion of respiratory failure, cardiac failure, pneumonia aspiration, multiorgan failure, or sepsis. These events were not considered related to dexmedetomidine infusion, and no other serious adverse events related to dexmedetomidine infusion were observed.
Table 4

Incidence of treatment-related adverse events within and after 24 h

Treatment-related adverse eventsNumber of events (incidence rate) within 24 h (n = 75)Number of events (incidence rate) after 24 h (n = 73) P value in score test
Total18 (0.2400)27 (0.0978)0.014
Decreased blood pressure5 (0.0667)13 (0.0471)0.442
Increased blood pressure9 (0.1200)7 (0.0254)0.019
Bradycardia2 (0.0267)1 (0.0036)0.558
Platelet count decreased1 (0.0133)0 (0.0000)0.061
Hepatic function abnormal1 (0.0133)0 (0.0000)0.061
Hypotension0 (0.0000)3 (0.0109)0.681
Eosinophilia0 (0.0000)1 (0.0036)0.767
Delirium0 (0.0000)1 (0.0036)0.625
Headache0 (0.0000)1 (0.0036)0.540

Decreased blood pressure and hypotension were separately counted following Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities/Japanese version 11.0: incidence rate = number of events/person-days (person-days: 75 within 24 h, 276 after 24 h)

Incidence of treatment-related adverse events within and after 24 h Decreased blood pressure and hypotension were separately counted following Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities/Japanese version 11.0: incidence rate = number of events/person-days (person-days: 75 within 24 h, 276 after 24 h) A total of 13 adverse events related to withdrawal symptoms were observed in 9 of 75 patients, and all the adverse events were mild with the exception of 1 moderate headache event (Table 5). One event each of increased blood pressure and headache were considered treatment related, and each event was mild in severity. MBP, HR, and RPP modestly increased after the termination of long-term infusion of dexmedetomidine. Changes were not associated with the increasing duration of dexmedetomidine infusion (Figs. 1, 2, 3).
Table 5

Adverse events related to withdrawal symptoms

Adverse eventsTotalNot related to treatmentRelated to treatment
No. of eventsNo. of patients with events (%)No. of eventsNo. of patients with events (%)No. of eventsNo. of patients with events (%)
Total139 (12.0)118 (10.7)22 (2.7)
Increased blood pressure76 (8.0)66 (8.0)11 (1.3)
Tachycardia22 (2.7)22 (2.7)00 (0.0)
Nausea/vomiting22 (2.7)22 (2.7)00 (0.0)
Headache22 (2.7)11 (1.3)11 (1.3)
Tremor00 (0.0)00 (0.0)00 (0.0)
Anxiety00 (0.0)00 (0.0)00 (0.0)
Sweating00 (0.0)00 (0.0)00 (0.0)
Agitation00 (0.0)00 (0.0)00 (0.0)

n = 75

Fig. 1

Mean arterial blood pressure after terminating infusion of dexmedetomidine in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for ≤2 days (n = 38) (a), 3–5 days (n = 24) (b), or >5 days (n = 13) (c). Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 37 or 38 (a), 24 (b), and 12 or 13 (c) individuals

Fig. 2

Heart rate after terminating infusion of dexmedetomidine in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for ≤2 days (n = 38) (a), 3–5 days (n = 24) (b), or >5 days (n = 13) (c). Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 37 or 38 (a), 24 (b), and 12 or 13 (c) individuals

Fig. 3

Rate–pressure product after terminating infusion of dexmedetomidine in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for ≤2 days (n = 38) (a), 3–5 days (n = 24) (b), or >5 days (n = 13) (c). Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 37 or 38 (a), 24 (b), and 12 or 13 (c) individuals

Adverse events related to withdrawal symptoms n = 75 Mean arterial blood pressure after terminating infusion of dexmedetomidine in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for ≤2 days (n = 38) (a), 3–5 days (n = 24) (b), or >5 days (n = 13) (c). Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 37 or 38 (a), 24 (b), and 12 or 13 (c) individuals Heart rate after terminating infusion of dexmedetomidine in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for ≤2 days (n = 38) (a), 3–5 days (n = 24) (b), or >5 days (n = 13) (c). Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 37 or 38 (a), 24 (b), and 12 or 13 (c) individuals Rate–pressure product after terminating infusion of dexmedetomidine in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for ≤2 days (n = 38) (a), 3–5 days (n = 24) (b), or >5 days (n = 13) (c). Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 37 or 38 (a), 24 (b), and 12 or 13 (c) individuals

Efficacy

During administration of the study drug, the patients were within the target sedation range (RASS ≤ 0) 85 % of the time, except on days 9–10. On days 9–10, a medical ICU patient with agitation (including tube pulling and aggressive behavior) and another patient with daytime arousal (RASS > 0) were observed, and the ratio of duration in the target sedation range decreased to approximately 70–75 % (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4

The ratio of duration with the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale ≤ 0 during dexmedetomidine treatment was calculated for each patient and mean ± SD values were analyzed. There were 75 patients on day 1, 73 on day 2, 37 on day 3, 26 on day 4, 18 on day 5, 13 on day 6, 11 on day 7, 9 on day 8, 8 on days 9–12, 5 on day 13, 4 on days 14–15, 2 on days 16–18, and 1 on days 19–20

The ratio of duration with the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale ≤ 0 during dexmedetomidine treatment was calculated for each patient and mean ± SD values were analyzed. There were 75 patients on day 1, 73 on day 2, 37 on day 3, 26 on day 4, 18 on day 5, 13 on day 6, 11 on day 7, 9 on day 8, 8 on days 9–12, 5 on day 13, 4 on days 14–15, 2 on days 16–18, and 1 on days 19–20 The number of patients who required additional sedatives or analgesics did not increase after 24 h compared to the first 24 h (Table 6). Forty of 75 patients (53.3 %) and 24 of 73 patients (32.9 %) required additional sedatives during the first 24 h and after 24 h, respectively, and 21 of 75 patients (28.0 %) and 19 of 73 patients (26.0 %) required additional analgesics during the first 24 h and after 24 h, respectively.
Table 6

Number of patients who required additional sedatives or analgesics

Agent n (%) within 24 h (n = 75) n (%) after 24 h (n = 73)
Additional sedatives40 (53.3)24 (32.9)
 Propofol
  IVB13 (17.3)13 (17.8)
  IVC29 (38.7)21 (28.8)
 Midazolam
  IVB7 (9.3)4 (5.5)
  IVC3 (4.0)4 (5.5)
 Fentanyl (administered as a sedative)
  IVB3 (4.0)4 (5.5)
  IVC3 (4.0)4 (5.5)
 Haloperidol
  IVB01 (1.4)
  IVC1 (1.3)1 (1.4)
Additional analgesics21 (28.0)19 (26.0)
 Fentanyl
  IVB5 (6.7)7 (9.6)
  IVC8 (10.7)8 (11.0)
 Buprenorphine
  IVB5 (6.7)2 (2.7)
  IVC2 (2.7)1 (1.4)
  REC1 (1.3)1 (1.4)
 Pentazocine
  IVB4 (5.3)0
  IM01 (1.4)
 Diclofenac
  REC1 (1.3)2 (2.7)
 Droperidol
  ED1 (1.3)1 (1.4)
 Flurbiprofen
  IVB1 (1.3)1 (1.4)
  IVC1 (1.3)0
 Loxoprofen
  PO2 (2.7)1 (1.4)
 Morphine
  IVB01 (1.4)
  IVC03 (4.1)
  ED1 (1.3)1 (1.4)
 Remifentanil
  IVC1 (1.3)0
 Ropivacaine
  SC1 (1.3)0
  ED1 (1.3)1 (1.4)

ED epidural administration, IVB intravenous bolus injection, IVC continuous intravenous infusion, IM intramuscular administration, PO oral administration, REC rectal administration, SC subcutaneous administration

Number of patients who required additional sedatives or analgesics ED epidural administration, IVB intravenous bolus injection, IVC continuous intravenous infusion, IM intramuscular administration, PO oral administration, REC rectal administration, SC subcutaneous administration There was no increase in the dose of additional sedatives or analgesics after 24 h administration (Tables 7, 8). Propofol and midazolam were administered to many patients as additional sedatives. Although neither fentanyl nor haloperidol is a sedative, some patients were administered these drugs for sedation. Fentanyl, buprenorphine, pentazocine, or other analgesics were administered for analgesia.
Table 7

Dose of additional sedatives

RouteDay 1Day 2Day 3Day 4Day 5Day 6Day 7Day 8
(n = 75)(n = 73)(n = 37)(n = 26)(n = 18)(n = 13)(n = 11)(n = 9)
PropofolIVB n = 13 n = 8 n = 4 n = 4 n = 3 n = 3 n = 1 n = 4
60.4 ± 52.460.0 ± 30.736.3 ± 32.532.5 ± 15.043.3 ± 15.346.7 ± 15.340.070.0 ± 74.4
IVC n = 29 n = 16 n = 10 n = 8 n = 5 n = 4 n = 2 n = 3
777.1 ± 1,038.01,338.3 ± 1,535.4874.8 ± 540.4951.3 ± 854.1858.8 ± 904.2753.9 ± 1,040.92,233.8 ± 913.9838.9 ± 390.5
MidazolamIVB n = 7 n = 3 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 2 n = 1 n = 1
7.1 ± 4.82.2 ± 2.415.010.00.65.3 ± 6.65.03.0
IVC n = 3 n = 3 n = 2 n = 3 n = 2 n = 1 n = 2 n = 3
133.7 ± 183.677.5 ± 115.3129.8 ± 155.9107.3 ± 154.5181.8 ± 252.1140.077.0 ± 53.722.9 ± 22.3
FentanylIVB n = 3 n = 4 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1
0.15 ± 0.220.45 ± 0.770.250.200.400.1250.03
IVC n = 3 n = 3 n = 2 n = 3 n = 1 n = 2
0.42 ± 0.281.39 ± 2.222.34 ± 3.041.84 ± 2.960.650.46 ± 0.65
HaloperidolIVC n = 1 n = 1
5.05.0

Values are expressed as mean ± SD (mg)

IVB intravenous bolus injection, IVC continuous intravenous infusion

Table 8

Dose of additional analgesics

RouteDay1Day2Day3Day4Day5Day6Day7Day8
(n = 75)(n = 73)(n = 37)(n = 26)(n = 18)(n = 13)(n = 11)(n = 9)
FentanylIVB n = 5 n = 4 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1
0.13 ± 0.100.06 ± 0.030.030.010.030.01
IVC n = 8 n = 7 n = 2 n = 3 n = 2 n = 2 n = 1
0.40 ± 0.300.28 ± 0.230.41 ± 0.020.34 ± 0.290.49 ± 0.030.57 ± 0.560.35
BuprenorphineIVB n = 5 n = 1 n = 1
0.17 ± 0.110.200.02
IVC n = 2 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1 n = 1
0.23 ± 0.050.400.400.400.400.400.400.28
REC n = 1 n = 1
0.200.20
PentazocineIVB n = 4
15.0 ± 0.0
IM n = 1
15.0
DiclofenacREC n = 1 n = 2
25.018.8 ± 8.8
DroperidolED n = 1 n = 1
0.421.99
FlurbiprofenIVB n = 1 n = 1
50.050.0
IVC n = 1
50.0
LoxoprofenPO n = 2 n = 1
60.0 ± 0.0120.0
MorphineIVB n = 1
1.0
IVC n = 2 n = 1
5.6 ± 1.67.0
ED n = 1 n = 1
0.73.2
RemifentanilIVC n = 1
1.10
RopivacaineSC n = 1
7.5
ED n = 1 n = 1
50.0238.3

Values are expressed as mean ± SD (mg)

ED epidural administration, IVB intravenous bolus injection, IVC continuous intravenous infusion, IM intramuscular administration, REC rectal administration, PO oral administration, SC subcutaneous administration

Dose of additional sedatives Values are expressed as mean ± SD (mg) IVB intravenous bolus injection, IVC continuous intravenous infusion Dose of additional analgesics Values are expressed as mean ± SD (mg) ED epidural administration, IVB intravenous bolus injection, IVC continuous intravenous infusion, IM intramuscular administration, REC rectal administration, PO oral administration, SC subcutaneous administration

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for long-term use. We compared the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine during the initial period of ≤24 h and the subsequent period. This design and the approach in this prospective study were unique. In contrast to other sedatives, dexmedetomidine is not associated with respiratory depression [10, 11] and can be administered continuously throughout intubation as well as after extubation. Dexmedetomidine provides a light to moderate level of sedation with the unique feature of arousability [9]. Propofol and midazolam are not typically used after extubation because of the effects of respiratory depression and potential to produce deeper sedation [17, 18]. Therefore, it was decided not to use either as a comparator. Using a placebo as a comparator was denied because of ethical considerations. Patients who require long-term sedation are typically in more critical condition compared to patients who require short-term sedation, and they sometimes need deep sedation. When deep sedation is required in the usual ICU setting, other sedatives may be used alone or concomitantly with dexmedetomidine. Therefore, the concomitant use of other sedatives as in the usual ICU setting was allowed in this study. In this study, it was considered more important to conduct a long-term investigation according to its use in the usual ICU setting. Long-term infusion of dexmedetomidine was well tolerated in both surgical and medical ICU patients. The results of this study showed no increase in treatment-related hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, or other adverse events during a long-term administration period compared to the initial 24 h of treatment. Although MBP, HR, and RPP modestly increased after the termination of dexmedetomidine, the changes were not associated with the increasing duration of dexmedetomidine infusion. There was no evidence suggesting a withdrawal syndrome or rebound effect, which was a concern after the termination of long-term administration of an α2-receptor agonist. Tapering of the dexmedetomidine dose was not necessary, consistent with previous studies [13, 14]. The ratio of duration with RASS ≤ 0 to the total duration of infusion of dexmedetomidine did not decrease after 24 h. Furthermore, neither the number of patients who required additional sedatives/analgesics nor the dose of additional sedatives/analgesics increased over time. Infusion of a loading dose is required to rapidly increase the plasma concentration of dexmedetomidine; however, it may be accompanied with adverse effects such as hypertension [8, 10]. Although loading infusion was an option for this study and was available at the investigator’s discretion, no patients had received a loading dose. In surgical ICU patients, study drug administration was initiated when the residual effect of anesthesia during surgery was observed. In medical ICU patients, study drug administration was initiated when the effects of other sedatives were still sufficient. While the patients were sedated, the other sedatives were switched to dexmedetomidine or dexmedetomidine were concomitantly administered with the other sedatives. Thus, no loading dose was necessary. This study included two patients under noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in the medical ICU. Sedation with dexmedetomidine is desirable in these patients as those receiving NPPV should be conscious to minimize the risk of aspiration pneumonia from lack of airway protection [19-21]. On the other hand, these patients experience discomfort and may develop agitation during NPPV from the use of a face mask. In the present study, dexmedetomidine provided adequate sedation in patients receiving NPPV without any evidence of respiratory depression. Although the post-extubation period was not the main focus in this study and there were no separate sub-analysis data for the post-extubation period only, the efficacy and safety evaluations included not only the intubation period but also the post-extubation period. Of the 75 patients, 61 (81.3 %) received dexmedetomidine after extubation. Long-term use of dexmedetomidine after extubation in these patients was effective, and no adverse event indicating respiratory depression was observed. There have been several previous reports that dexmedetomidine reduces the incidence of delirium [13, 22]. In this study, 3 of 75 patients (4.0 %) developed delirium, 1 of which events was deemed as probably not related and the others as not related to dexmedetomidine. However, this study was not a comparative study, and there was no use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU [23] to assess delirium. Therefore, we cannot report on the effects of dexmedetomidine on delirium. Oversedation leads to poor patient prognosis and increased treatment costs [1-5]. Therefore, it is desirable to avoid oversedation and to maintain the patient at an ideal sedation level. Additionally, the ideal level of sedation differs for each patient because the condition of patients managed in ICU settings is highly variable. In this study, investigators used dexmedetomidine as a fundamental sedative to provide a light to moderate level of sedation (in which patients were easily arousable and cooperative). Other sedatives were concomitantly administered, not only when sedation management was difficult with dexmedetomidine alone but also when deep sedation was necessary. As a result, 61.6 % and 38.4 % of patients received additional sedatives and analgesics, respectively. Although the interaction of concomitant sedatives needs to be carefully monitored, the concomitant use of other sedatives with dexmedetomidine provides benefits in long-term use, as it utilizes each of the sedative’s properties as needed. Other sedatives commonly used for long-term ICU sedation include midazolam and propofol. Midazolam has less vasodilatory effect compared to dexmedetomidine or propofol [24]. However, long-term use of midazolam demonstrates significant interindividual variation in pharmacokinetics and produces an active metabolite, which results in a prolonged recovery to consciousness after long-term treatment [25, 26]. In addition, a patient may also develop tolerance after long-term use of midazolam [24, 27]. Long-term use of propofol has a short elimination half-life and rapid offset to consciousness [25]. However, long-term use of propofol includes an increased risk of infection by the same route, a risk of excessive blood lipids associated with the lipid emulsion formulation, development of tolerance, and propofol infusion syndrome [7, 17, 27, 28]. Potential advantages of dexmedetomidine for long-term use include the arousability feature, and that it is not associated with respiratory depression, both of which can facilitate weaning and extubation. Dexmedetomidine also has the potential to reduce the incidence of delirium, which increases with prolonged ICU stay [13, 22]. The concomitant uses of other sedatives or analgesics were not increased over time, and the majority of patients were maintained at the target sedation levels without any increase in dose, suggesting that there was no development in tolerance. A potential disadvantage of dexmedetomidine is that it should be used very cautiously in patients with hypotension and/or bradycardia [14, 28].

Conclusions

The long-term safety of dexmedetomidine compared to its use for 24 h was confirmed. Dexmedetomidine was useful to maintain adequate sedation levels (RASS ≤ 0) in both surgical and medical ICU patients during long-term infusion. No clinically significant withdrawal symptoms or rebound effects were observed after the end of long-term treatment. The ratio of duration with RASS ≤ 0 did not decrease after the first 24 h administration, and there was no increase in dose of additional sedatives or analgesics, suggesting no tolerance occurred. Considering its unique properties, investigators used dexmedetomidine as the fundamental sedative, and additional sedatives and analgesics were added based on each patient’s condition.
  26 in total

Review 1.  Clinical uses of alpha2 -adrenergic agonists.

Authors:  T Kamibayashi; M Maze
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 2.  Sedation and analgesia in intensive care. Medications attenuate stress response in critical illness.

Authors:  Amy R Blanchard
Journal:  Postgrad Med       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.892

4.  Evaluation of delirium in critically ill patients: validation of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU).

Authors:  E W Ely; R Margolin; J Francis; L May; B Truman; R Dittus; T Speroff; S Gautam; G R Bernard; S K Inouye
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 7.598

5.  Sedative, amnestic, and analgesic properties of small-dose dexmedetomidine infusions.

Authors:  J E Hall; T D Uhrich; J A Barney; S R Arain; T J Ebert
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  Memory, delusions, and the development of acute posttraumatic stress disorder-related symptoms after intensive care.

Authors:  C Jones; R D Griffiths; G Humphris; P M Skirrow
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Curtis N Sessler; Mark S Gosnell; Mary Jo Grap; Gretchen M Brophy; Pam V O'Neal; Kimberly A Keane; Eljim P Tesoro; R K Elswick
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2002-11-15       Impact factor: 21.405

8.  Dexmedetomidine pharmacodynamics: part I: crossover comparison of the respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Yung-Wei Hsu; Luis I Cortinez; Kerri M Robertson; John C Keifer; Sam T Sum-Ping; Eugene W Moretti; Christopher C Young; David R Wright; David B Macleod; Jacques Somma
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 7.892

9.  Failure of critically ill patients to metabolise midazolam.

Authors:  M P Shelly; L Mendel; G R Park
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 6.955

Review 10.  Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Juliana Barr; Gilles L Fraser; Kathleen Puntillo; E Wesley Ely; Céline Gélinas; Joseph F Dasta; Judy E Davidson; John W Devlin; John P Kress; Aaron M Joffe; Douglas B Coursin; Daniel L Herr; Avery Tung; Bryce R H Robinson; Dorrie K Fontaine; Michael A Ramsay; Richard R Riker; Curtis N Sessler; Brenda Pun; Yoanna Skrobik; Roman Jaeschke
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 7.598

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Is it prime time for alpha2-adrenocepter agonists in the treatment of withdrawal syndromes?

Authors:  Timothy E Albertson; James Chenoweth; Jonathan Ford; Kelly Owen; Mark E Sutter
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2014-12

2.  Markedly long pause due to sinus arrest during dexmedetomidine use and nasal continuous positive airway pressure in two infants with respiratory syncytial virus infection.

Authors:  Hideo Kojima; Risa Tanaka; Yoichi Iwamoto; Hirotaka Ishido; Yoshio Sakurai; Satoshi Masutani
Journal:  J Cardiol Cases       Date:  2020-09-09

3.  Effects of a Clonidine Taper on Dexmedetomidine Use and Withdrawal in Adult Critically Ill Patients-A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Krupa Bhatt; Ashley Thompson Quan; Laura Baumgartner; Shawn Jia; Rhiannon Croci; Kathleen Puntillo; James Ramsay; Rima H Bouajram
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2020-11-03

4.  Effects of different doses of dexmedetomidine on heart rate and blood pressure in intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Xiaoyan Zhang; Ruilan Wang; Jian Lu; Wei Jin; Yongbin Qian; Peijie Huang; Rui Tian; Yan Li
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 2.447

5.  Intravenous dexmedetomidine for the treatment of shivering during Cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia: a randomized-controlled trial.

Authors:  Christina Lamontagne; Sandra Lesage; Edith Villeneuve; Elsa Lidzborski; Alex Derstenfeld; Chantal Crochetière
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 5.063

6.  Prolonged dexmedetomidine infusion in critically ill adult patients: a retrospective analysis of a large clinical database Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care III.

Authors:  Yue Zhao; Huaqiang Zhou; Wulin Tan; Yiyan Song; Zeting Qiu; Si Li; Shaowei Gao; Wenqi Huang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-08

7.  The Choice of Anesthetic Agents for Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: Can Sinus Surgeons Be Involved?

Authors:  Yong Gi Jung
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 3.372

8.  Dexmedetomidine to Help Nerve Regeneration in a Rat Sciatic Nerve Injury Model.

Authors:  Wook Jeong; Hsichiang Kung; Chia Chi Cheng; Changwoo Lim; Min Jung Jung; Jaeho Lee; Doo Sik Kim; Yusom Shin
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 3.037

9.  Evaluating the transition from dexmedetomidine to clonidine for agitation management in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Kimberly Terry; Rachel Blum; Paul Szumita
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2015-12-15

10.  Post-operative cardiac arrest induced by co-administration of amiodarone and dexmedetomidine: a case report.

Authors:  Takafumi Ohmori; Nobuhiro Shiota; Akihiro Haramo; Takahiro Masuda; Fumi Maruyama; Kenji Wakabayashi; Yushi U Adachi; Koichi Nakazawa
Journal:  J Intensive Care       Date:  2015-10-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.