Jean M Nappi1,2, Adam Sieg3, Tanna B Hassig1,2, Amy E Wahlquist4. 1. College of Pharmacy, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. 2. Department of Pharmacy Services, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. 3. Department of Pharmacy Services, Memorial Hermann-Texas Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA. 4. Department of Public Health, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: With the previous norepinephrine shortage, alternative agents were required to treat patients with septic shock. This retrospective study evaluated whether the shortage of norepinephrine had an adverse effect on patients admitted to the intensive care unit with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review, which compared patients who received norepinephrine versus those who did not. Eligible patients were those ≥ 18 years old who were admitted to an intensive care unit with a diagnosis of sepsis and were initiated on a vasopressor to maintain hemodynamic stability. The specific primary endpoint was whether using norepinephrine versus other vasopressors had an effect on ICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes included mortality, blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, development of renal insufficiency, and vasopressor requirements. RESULTS: There were 288 patients screened and 214 patients who met the inclusion criteria (norepinephrine group=106 and nonnorepinephrine group=108). After accounting for potential differences in disease severity (APACHE II score), age, weight and gender, there was no difference in ICU length of stay (p=0.4); however, the odds of survival were 5.9 (95% CI: 3.1 to 11.1) times higher for those in the non-norepinephrine group (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Based on this retrospective analysis, patients that did not receive norepinephrine had a similar ICU LOS but had a higher rate of survival. The norepinephrine shortage did not have an adverse effect on patient outcomes.
PURPOSE: With the previous norepinephrine shortage, alternative agents were required to treat patients with septic shock. This retrospective study evaluated whether the shortage of norepinephrine had an adverse effect on patients admitted to the intensive care unit with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review, which compared patients who received norepinephrine versus those who did not. Eligible patients were those ≥ 18 years old who were admitted to an intensive care unit with a diagnosis of sepsis and were initiated on a vasopressor to maintain hemodynamic stability. The specific primary endpoint was whether using norepinephrine versus other vasopressors had an effect on ICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes included mortality, blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, development of renal insufficiency, and vasopressor requirements. RESULTS: There were 288 patients screened and 214 patients who met the inclusion criteria (norepinephrine group=106 and nonnorepinephrine group=108). After accounting for potential differences in disease severity (APACHE II score), age, weight and gender, there was no difference in ICU length of stay (p=0.4); however, the odds of survival were 5.9 (95% CI: 3.1 to 11.1) times higher for those in the non-norepinephrine group (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Based on this retrospective analysis, patients that did not receive norepinephrine had a similar ICU LOS but had a higher rate of survival. The norepinephrine shortage did not have an adverse effect on patient outcomes.
Authors: Amanda M Baumer; Angela M Clark; David R Witmer; Shirley B Geize; Lee C Vermeulen; Joseph H Deffenbaugh Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 2.637
Authors: Yasser Sakr; Konrad Reinhart; Jean-Louis Vincent; Charles L Sprung; Rui Moreno; V Marco Ranieri; Daniel De Backer; Didier Payen Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Daniel De Backer; Patrick Biston; Jacques Devriendt; Christian Madl; Didier Chochrad; Cesar Aldecoa; Alexandre Brasseur; Pierre Defrance; Philippe Gottignies; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James A Russell; Keith R Walley; Anthony C Gordon; D James Cooper; Paul C Hébert; Joel Singer; Cheryl L Holmes; Sangeeta Mehta; John T Granton; Michelle M Storms; Deborah J Cook; Jeffrey J Presneill Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: R Phillip Dellinger; Mitchell M Levy; Jean M Carlet; Julian Bion; Margaret M Parker; Roman Jaeschke; Konrad Reinhart; Derek C Angus; Christian Brun-Buisson; Richard Beale; Thierry Calandra; Jean-Francois Dhainaut; Herwig Gerlach; Maurene Harvey; John J Marini; John Marshall; Marco Ranieri; Graham Ramsay; Jonathan Sevransky; B Taylor Thompson; Sean Townsend; Jeffrey S Vender; Janice L Zimmerman; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: James A Russell; Keith R Walley; Joel Singer; Anthony C Gordon; Paul C Hébert; D James Cooper; Cheryl L Holmes; Sangeeta Mehta; John T Granton; Michelle M Storms; Deborah J Cook; Jeffrey J Presneill; Dieter Ayers Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-02-28 Impact factor: 91.245