Literature DB >> 34959024

Prospective real-time evaluation of the QTc interval variation after low-dose droperidol among emergency department patients.

Luis Hernández-Rodríguez1, Fernanda Bellolio2, Daniel Cabrera3, Alicia E Mattson4, Derek VanMeter3, Andrew E Grush5, Lucas Oliveira J E Silva6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the QTc interval variation after low-dose droperidol in a population of undifferentiated, stable, and non-agitated patients receiving droperidol in the emergency department.
METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients aged ≥12 years of age who received low-dose droperidol (≤ 2.5 mg) for indications other than acute behavioral disturbances. QTc intervals were monitored in real-time during pre-specified observation periods in the ED. Primary outcome was variation of QTc interval after droperidol administration, defined as the maximum delta (change) of QTc interval. Other outcomes included proportion of patients with a QTc ≥ 500 ms after droperidol, delta ≥ +60 ms, and incidence of clinical adverse events. Patients were monitored up to 30 min after IV bolus and up to 46 min after infusion.
RESULTS: A total of 68 patients were included (mean age 42.1 years, 66.2% females). The median dose of droperidol was 1.875 mg (range 0.625 mg, 2.5 mg) and 94.1% received droperidol for headache management. Most patients received droperidol as a 2-min bolus (n = 41, 60.3%). The mean maximum delta of QTc interval after droperidol across all 68 patients was +29.9 ms (SD 15). A total of 12 patients (17.6%) experienced a QTc interval ≥ 500 ms during the observation period after droperidol, and 3 patients (4.4%) had a delta QTc ≥ +60 ms. There were no serious arrhythmias, such as TdP, or deaths among the 68 participants in this study (0/68). However, 13.2% (n = 9) had at least one non-serious adverse event including restlessness and/or anxiety.
CONCLUSION: The QTc interval slightly increased after droperidol administration, but these prolongations were brief, mostly below 500 msec and did not lead to serious arrhythmias. The yield of continuous cardiac monitoring in patients receiving low doses of droperidol is likely low.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34959024      PMCID: PMC8761164          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.12.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Emerg Med        ISSN: 0735-6757            Impact factor:   2.469


  41 in total

1.  Droperidol, when used for sedation during ERCP, may prolong the QT interval.

Authors:  Panot Yimcharoen; Evan L Fogel; Richard J Kovacs; Stephen H Rosenfeld; Lee McHenry; James L Watkins; Waleed M Alazmi; Stuart Sherman; Glen A Lehman
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Does low-dose droperidol increase the risk of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia or death in the surgical patient?

Authors:  Gregory A Nuttall; Ann M Malone; Carrie A Michels; Laurie C Trudell; Tricia D Renk; Mary E Shirk Marienau; William C Oliver; Michael J Ackerman
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 7.892

3.  Management of acute undifferentiated agitation in the emergency department: a randomized double-blind trial of droperidol, ziprasidone, and midazolam.

Authors:  Marc Martel; Ann Sterzinger; James Miner; Joseph Clinton; Michelle Biros
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 3.451

4.  A randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy of intramuscular droperidol for the treatment of acute migraine headache.

Authors:  Peter B Richman; John Allegra; Barnet Eskin; James Doran; Ulrich Reischel; Costas Kaiafas; Ashraf H Nashed
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.469

5.  Intramuscular droperidol versus intramuscular dimenhydrinate for the treatment of acute peripheral vertigo in the emergency department: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Carol Irving; Peter Richman; Costas Kaiafas; Barnet Eskin; John Allegra
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.451

6.  Randomized clinical trial comparing intravenous midazolam and droperidol for sedation of the acutely agitated patient in the emergency department.

Authors:  Jonathan C Knott; David McD Taylor; David J Castle
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2005-08-18       Impact factor: 5.721

7.  Effectiveness and safety of droperidol in a United States emergency department.

Authors:  Charlene M Gaw; Daniel Cabrera; Fernanda Bellolio; Alicia E Mattson; Christine M Lohse; Molly M Jeffery
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 2.469

8.  Droperidol vs prochlorperazine for the treatment of acute headache.

Authors:  Christopher S Weaver; James B Jones; Carey D Chisholm; Michael J Foley; Beverly K Giles; Geoffrey G Somerville; Edward J Brizendine; William H Cordell
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 1.484

9.  Effect of serum electrolytes within normal ranges on QTc prolongation: a cross-sectional study in a Chinese rural general population.

Authors:  Yintao Chen; Xiaofan Guo; Guozhe Sun; Zhao Li; Liqiang Zheng; Yingxian Sun
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 2.298

10.  High dose droperidol and QT prolongation: analysis of continuous 12-lead recordings.

Authors:  Leonie Calver; Geoffrey K Isbister
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.335

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.