No abstract

IntroductionWhile propofol is associated with an infusion syndrome (PRIS) that may cause death, the incidence of PRIS is unknown. Determining the incidence of PRIS and the frequency of PRIS-related clinical manifestations are key steps prior to the completion of any controlled studies investigating PRIS. This prospective, multicenter study sought to determine the incidence of PRIS and PRIS-related clinical manifestations in a large cohort of critically ill adults prescribed propofol.MethodsCritically ill adults from 11 academic medical centers administered an infusion of propofol for [>/=] 24 hours were monitored at baseline and then on a daily basis until propofol was discontinued for the presence of 11 different PRIS-associated clinical manifestations and risk factors derived from 83 published case reports of PRIS.ResultsAmong 1017 patients [medical (35%), neurosurgical (25%)], PRIS (defined as metabolic acidosis plus cardiac dysfunction and [>/=] 1 of: rhabdomyolysis, hypertriglyceridemia or renal failure occurring after the start of propofol therapy) developed in 11 (1.1%) patients an average of 3 (1-6) [median (range)] days after the start of propofol. While most (91%) of the patients who developed PRIS were receiving a vasopressor (80% initiated after the start of propofol therapy), few received a propofol dose >83 mcg/kg/min (18%) or died (18%). Compared to the 1006 patients who did not develop PRIS, the APACHE II score (25 +/- 6 vs 20 +/- 7, P = 0.01) was greater in patients with PRIS but both the duration of propofol use (P = 0.43) and ICU length of stay (P = 0.82) were similar.ConclusionsDespite using a conservative definition for PRIS, and only considering new-onset PRIS clinical manifestations, the incidence of PRIS slightly exceeds 1%. Future controlled studies focusing on evaluating whether propofol manifests the derangements of critical illness more frequently than other sedatives will need to be large. These studies should also investigate the mechanism(s) and risk factors for PRIS.

Tele-ICU resources can be utilized to increase compliance with an established ICU sedation guideline and extend the benefits that daytime ICU clinical pharmacy services provide. Increased ICU pharmacist availability may have additional benefits not measured in this study.

PG toxicity is a potential complication associated with intravenous pentobarbital. Practitioners should be aware of the PG content of pentobarbital and should be familiar with the signs and symptoms associated with PG toxicity.

Objective: The objective of this article is to review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety, dosage and administration, and formulary considerations of deflazacort. Data Sources: A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE (1946 to December 31, 2019) was conducted using the terms deflazacort and Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Results were limited to clinical trials, humans, and English. Additional sources and data were obtained from the references of included articles and prescribing information. Study Selection and Data Extraction: All articles published after July 2014 related to pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, or safety of the therapy in human subjects were included. Data Synthesis: Deflazacort 0.9 mg/kg/d is a once-daily oral corticosteroid and is the first drug of its class to be Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for DMD. Studies with deflazacort show improved functional outcomes, delayed onset of cardiomyopathy, reduction in scoliosis surgery, and improved survival, but these improvements are supported by relatively weak evidence. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review presents data from studies published after the most recent DMD 2016 treatment guidelines and offers prescribing considerations, including pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, adverse effects, formulary considerations, and areas of uncertainty. Conclusions: Deflazacort presents an additional, FDA-approved corticosteroid option for patients that offers improved quality of life for DMD patients. However, there is weak evidence to support these benefits; a full risk-benefit analysis considering adverse events, efficacy, cost, and previous trials of steroid therapy is necessary when selecting therapy. Further research will help clarify deflazacort’s optimal dose, duration of treatment, and impact on quality of life.

Although pirfenidone appears to be an effective treatment for IPF, additional clinical trials are needed to better delineate its risk-benefit profile.

Four patients with severe burn injuries received enoxaparin 40 mg twice/day subcutaneously for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Peak antifactor Xa levels were measured 4 hours after administration of a dose, and trough antifactor Xa levels were measured 30 minutes before the next scheduled dose. Ultrasonography was performed once/week to assess the presence of VTE. Any occurrence of major bleeding was documented in the patients' charts. All patients had trough antifactor Xa levels below 0.1 U/ml. Enoxaparin dosages were subsequently adjusted to achieve trough antifactor Xa levels of 0.1-0.2 U/ml. This required dosages higher than those typically recommended for VTE prophylaxis (40 mg every 24 hrs or 30 mg every 12 hrs). One patient needed more than 60 mg every 12 hours. No patient had a venous thromboembolic event or major bleeding. The low antifactor Xa levels that were observed suggest that a reduced dose-response relationship may exist between subcutaneously administered enoxaparin and antifactor Xa activity in patients with severe burn injuries. Prospective studies should be performed to further investigate this relationship.

No abstract