Marc R Wong1, Matt J Reggio1, Freddy R Morocho1, Monica M Holloway1, Jose C Garcia-Blanco2, Constance Jenkins1, Arthur D Johnson3. 1. US Army Medical Department Center and School, Health Readiness Center of Excellence, Graduate school-US Army Graduate Program in Nursing Anesthesia, JBSA-FSH, San Antonio, Texas. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Science Center at El Paso, El Paso, Texas. 3. US Army Medical Department Center and School, Health Readiness Center of Excellence, Graduate school-US Army Graduate Program in Nursing Anesthesia, JBSA-FSH, San Antonio, Texas. Electronic address: arthurjohnso@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interruptions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to obtain vascular access reduces blood flow to vital organs. Tibial intraosseous (TIO) access may be a faster alternative to intravenous (IV) access for delivery of vasoactive medications. The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TIO- and IV-delivered epinephrine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, between subjects, experimental design comparing Cmax, Tmax, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and time to ROSC. Adult male swine were divided into three equal groups (n = 7) all received CPR and defibrillation: the second group received IV epinephrine and the third group received tibial intraosseous epinephrine. Swine were placed in cardiac arrest for 2 min before CPR was initiated. After 2 min of CPR, epinephrine was delivered by IV or TIO, and serial blood samples were collected over 4 min. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between IV versus TIO epinephrine in achieving ROSC, time to ROSC, and Cmax. A one-way analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference between the IV and TIO groups in Tmax (P = 0.025). A Fisher exact test demonstrated a significant difference between IV epinephrine versus CPR/Defib only (P = 0.035) and TIO epinephrine versus CPR/Defib only (P = 0.010) in achieving ROSC. A multivariate analysis of variance showed significant differences in IV versus intraosseous epinephrine concentration at specific time intervals: 60 (P = 0.023), 90 (P = 0.001), and 120 (P < 0.000) sec. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of ROSC, epinephrine delivered via TIO route is a clinically relevant alternative to IV administration. When IV access cannot be immediately obtained in cardiac arrest patients, TIO access should be considered. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Interruptions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to obtain vascular access reduces blood flow to vital organs. Tibial intraosseous (TIO) access may be a faster alternative to intravenous (IV) access for delivery of vasoactive medications. The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TIO- and IV-delivered epinephrine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, between subjects, experimental design comparing Cmax, Tmax, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and time to ROSC. Adult male swine were divided into three equal groups (n = 7) all received CPR and defibrillation: the second group received IV epinephrine and the third group received tibial intraosseous epinephrine. Swine were placed in cardiac arrest for 2 min before CPR was initiated. After 2 min of CPR, epinephrine was delivered by IV or TIO, and serial blood samples were collected over 4 min. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between IV versus TIO epinephrine in achieving ROSC, time to ROSC, and Cmax. A one-way analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference between the IV and TIO groups in Tmax (P = 0.025). A Fisher exact test demonstrated a significant difference between IV epinephrine versus CPR/Defib only (P = 0.035) and TIO epinephrine versus CPR/Defib only (P = 0.010) in achieving ROSC. A multivariate analysis of variance showed significant differences in IV versus intraosseous epinephrine concentration at specific time intervals: 60 (P = 0.023), 90 (P = 0.001), and 120 (P < 0.000) sec. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of ROSC, epinephrine delivered via TIO route is a clinically relevant alternative to IV administration. When IV access cannot be immediately obtained in cardiac arrestpatients, TIO access should be considered. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Guodong Liang; Rugang Zheng; Hongjian Jian; Minhai Zhang; Huiqiong Yuan; Jiemin Hong; Gang Wu Journal: Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao Date: 2019-11-30
Authors: Mohamud R Daya; Brian G Leroux; Paul Dorian; Thomas D Rea; Craig D Newgard; Laurie J Morrison; Joshua R Lupton; James J Menegazzi; Joseph P Ornato; George Sopko; Jim Christenson; Ahamed Idris; Purav Mody; Gary M Vilke; Caroline Herdeman; David Barbic; Peter J Kudenchuk Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-01-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ben E Biesterveld; Rachel O'Connell; Michael T Kemp; Glenn K Wakam; Aaron M Williams; Manjunath P Pai; Hasan B Alam Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2021-03-17
Authors: Michael James Neill; James M Burgert; Dawn Blouin; Benjamin Tigges; Kari Rodden; Rachel Roberts; Phillip Anderson; Travis Hallquist; John Navarro; Joseph O'Sullivan; Don Johnson Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2020-02-18