Literature DB >> 31676007

The place of dexmedetomidine light sedation in patients with acute brain injury.

Simone Carelli1,2, Gennaro De Pascale3,4, Nicoletta Filetici3,4, Maria Grazia Bocci3,4, Gian Marco Maresca3,4, Salvatore Lucio Cutuli3,4, Cecilia Maria Pizzo3,4, Giuseppe Bello3,4, Luca Montini3,4, Anselmo Caricato3,4, Giorgio Conti3,4, Massimo Antonelli3,4.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31676007      PMCID: PMC6825350          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-019-2637-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor, An individualized titration of sedative and analgesic drugs is pivotal in the late phase management of acute brain injury (ABI) patients, when weaning from mechanical ventilation (MV) needs to be implemented [1]. Due to its pharmacologic profile, dexmedetomidine (Dex) represents a drug of choice in such setting. Nevertheless, its use in ABI patients has been recently debated mainly as a consequence of its hemodynamic effects [2, 3]. The present study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes and safety profile of Dex administration in this patients’ category. We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data on the main clinical features and adverse events observed during light sedation with dexmedetomidine (Dex-LS) in ICU patients with ABI. Light sedation was defined by the maintenance of a Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) score between 1 and − 2. The rate of potential side effects during Dex-LS was compared with the 6-h period before Dex initiation (see Additional file 1 for further details). The main clinical and analgosedation characteristics of the 101 included patients are listed in Table 1. Traumatic ABI (77.2%) was the main admission diagnosis, and haemorrhage (59.4% of the cohort) was the most common admission feature (see Additional file 1: Table S1). Out of 101 patients, 80 were mechanically ventilated during Dex-LS. In most cases, dexmedetomidine was administered in association with other sedatives, opioids or antipsycotic drugs, for a median duration and dosage of 64 h and 0.6 μg/kg/h, respectively.
Table 1

Features of 101 patients undergoing Dex-LS

Clinical characteristics
 Age, years53 [35–68]
 Male84 (83.2)
 Neuro-psychiatric comorbidities24 (23.8)
- Preesistent psychosis12 (11.9)
- Preesistent dementia5 (5)
- Preesistent epilepsy7 (6.9)
 Traumatic brain injury (TBI)78 (77.2)
- Isolated traumatic brain injury14 (13.8)
- Polytrauma with traumatic brain injury64 (63.4)
 Non-traumatic brain injury23 (22.8)
 ISS at admission (TBI only)23 [17–29]
 Head-AIS at admission (TBI only)3 [2–4]
 GCS at admission*10 [7–14]
 SAPS II at Dex-LS start34 [26–44]
 SOFA at Dex-LS start4 [3–7]
 MV at admission91 (90.1)
 MV at Dex-LS start80 (79.2)
 ICU LOS pre-Dex-LS, days4 [2–8]
 ICU LOS post-Dex-LS, days8 [3–15]
 ICU mortality4 (4)
 Hospital mortality8 (7.9)
 Hours of MV#39 [12–72]
 MV in assisted mode#71 (88.8)
 MV in assisted mode, hours#24 [6–48]
 Successful weaning#56 (70)
 Successful weaning in pts with previous weaning failure##16 (57.1)
 Spontaneous breathing, hours#25 [0–72]
Analgosedation details
 RASS0 [− 1/0]
 Propofol co-infusion35 (34.7)
 Midazolam co-infusion0
 Remifentanil co-infusion59 (58.4)
 Other opioids co-infusion**15 (14.9)
 Antipsychotic drugs co-administration***40 (39.6)
 Dex length of infusion, hours64 [33–120]
 Dex start dosage, μg/kg/h0.7 [0.5–0.9]
 Dex median dosage, μg/kg/h0.6 [0.5–0.9]
 Dex maximum dosage, μg/kg/h0.9 [0.6–1.2]
 Dex dosage at suspension, μg/kg/h0.5 [0.3–0.8]
Hemodynamic parameters and adverse events (n = 101)
Pre-Dex infusion###Dex-LSP value
 RASS− 2 [− 3/0]0 [− 1/0]< 0.001
 HR, bpm78 [70–89]80 [66–91]0.165
 SAP, mmHg133 [124–146]139 [126–150]0.136
 DAP, mmHg65 [56–72]69 [62–78]< 0.001
 MAP, mmHg85 [78–98]90 [84–99]0.039
 Bradycardia2 (2)23 (22.8)< 0.001
- Bradycardia in pts receiving remifentanil co-infusion^12 (20.3)
- Dex median dosage in pts with bradycardia, μg/kg/h^^0.6 [0.4–0.9]
 Arterial hypotension requiring vasopressors42 (41.6)27 (26.7)0.037
 Seizures3 (3)3 (3)1
 ICP, mmHg*9 [8–14]8 [7–10]0.164

Dex dexmedetomidine, LS light sedation, ISS Injury Severity Score, AIS Abbreviated Injury Scale, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, SAPS II Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, MV mechanical ventilation, LOS length of stay, RASS Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, HR heart rate, SAP systolic arterial pressure, DAP diastolic arterial pressure, MAP mean arterial pressure, ICP intracranial pressure, pts patients

Data are shown as median [IQR] or N (%)

*GCS at admission was available in 96 patients. ICP was monitored in 10 patients

**Sufentanil, morphine

***Haloperidol, quetiapine, chlorpromazine

#Eighty out of 101 patients were mechanically ventilated during Dex-LS

##Twenty-eight patients failed at least a weaning attempt before Dex-LS

###Data of 6-h pre-Dex infusion period were analysed

^Fifty-nine patients received remifentanil co-infusion

^^Twenty-three patients had bradycardia event(s)

Features of 101 patients undergoing Dex-LS Dex dexmedetomidine, LS light sedation, ISS Injury Severity Score, AIS Abbreviated Injury Scale, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, SAPS II Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, MV mechanical ventilation, LOS length of stay, RASS Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, HR heart rate, SAP systolic arterial pressure, DAP diastolic arterial pressure, MAP mean arterial pressure, ICP intracranial pressure, pts patients Data are shown as median [IQR] or N (%) *GCS at admission was available in 96 patients. ICP was monitored in 10 patients **Sufentanil, morphine ***Haloperidol, quetiapine, chlorpromazine #Eighty out of 101 patients were mechanically ventilated during Dex-LS ##Twenty-eight patients failed at least a weaning attempt before Dex-LS ###Data of 6-h pre-Dex infusion period were analysed ^Fifty-nine patients received remifentanil co-infusion ^^Twenty-three patients had bradycardia event(s) Dexmedetomidine has been administered safely in our population of ABI patients. Dex infusion rate and duration were comparable with those previously described [2, 3]. The rate of systemic arterial hypotension was consistent with available findings [2, 3] and lower compared with the pre-infusion period. The 23% rate of bradycardia takes place in the wide range of occurrence reported in ABI patients [2]. Nevertheless, bradycardia never imposed dexmedetomidine interruption. These findings should be interpreted in the light of the relatively young age and low severity scores of our population, where Dex was frequently co-infused with other sedatives or opioids. Neither seizure rate nor intracranial pressure increased during Dex-LS, supporting the clinical absence of Dex impact on cerebral physiology [4]. During Dex-LS, the majority of patients were weaned from MV, including more than half who previously failed a weaning attempt. These observations are in line with the available evidence comparing Dex sedation with midazolam and propofol use, even though in ICU patients without ABI [5]. In conclusion, despite the intrinsic limitations of our retrospective design lacking a control group, this study suggests that when used to target light sedation in our cohort of ABI patients, dexmedetomidine was safe and enabled the weaning from MV and the maintenance of spontaneous breathing. Additional file 1. Electronic Supplementary Material.
  5 in total

1.  Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam or propofol for sedation during prolonged mechanical ventilation: two randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Stephan M Jakob; Esko Ruokonen; R Michael Grounds; Toni Sarapohja; Chris Garratt; Stuart J Pocock; J Raymond Bratty; Jukka Takala
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  ICU sedation with dexmedetomidine after severe traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Stephen S Humble; Laura D Wilson; Taylor C Leath; Matthew D Marshall; Daniel Z Sun; Pratik P Pandharipande; Mayur B Patel
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 3.  Role of Dexmedetomidine for Sedation in Neurocritical Care Patients: A Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Current Evidence.

Authors:  Georgia G Tsaousi; Massimo Lamperti; Federico Bilotta
Journal:  Clin Neuropharmacol       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.592

4.  A pilot study of cerebral and haemodynamic physiological changes during sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol in patients with acute brain injury.

Authors:  M L James; D M Olson; C Graffagnino
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.669

Review 5.  Optimizing sedation in patients with acute brain injury.

Authors:  Mauro Oddo; Ilaria Alice Crippa; Sangeeta Mehta; David Menon; Jean-Francois Payen; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Giuseppe Citerio
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 9.097

  5 in total
  1 in total

1.  Consensus Statement on Analgo-sedation in Neurocritical Care and Review of Literature.

Authors:  Hemanshu Prabhakar; Swagata Tripathy; Nidhi Gupta; Vasudha Singhal; Charu Mahajan; Indu Kapoor; Jaya Wanchoo; Mani Kalaivani
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2021-02
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.