Background: There are limited data regarding the incidence of adverse events associated with administering lacosamide by intravenous push (IVP) compared with IV piggyback (IVPB). Objective: The objective of this analysis was to compare the safety profile, including cardiovascular effects, sedative effects, and IV site reactions of IVP and IVPB lacosamide administration. Methods: A retrospective pre/post cohort analysis comparing patients who received lacosamide via IVP and IVPB was conducted. Safety end points included hypotension, bradycardia, medication-related sedation, and IV site reactions. The relationship between patient characteristics and the incidence of safety end points was analyzed using the Student t-test and χ2 test as appropriate. Results: Bradycardia occurred after 0.19% of IVP administrations and 1.09% of IVPB administrations assessed ( P = 0.07). Hypotension was observed in 3.16% of IVP administrations compared to 1.59% in the IVPB cohort ( P = 0.12). Post lacosamide-related sedation was noted in 11.32% and 11.68% of the IVP and IVPB cohorts, respectively ( P = 0.87). Infusion site reaction rates of 1.80% and 0.84% were documented in the IVP and IVPB cohorts, respectively ( P = 0.33). Of note, only 1 adverse event required clinical intervention. One 200-mg dose in the IVP cohort required a fluid bolus postadministration. Conclusion and Relevance: IVP lacosamide was associated with a similar incidence of cardiovascular, neurological, and infusion site–related adverse events compared with IVPB, in which nearly every adverse event was deemed clinically insignificant. Lacosamide administered via IVP may be considered a safe alternative method of administration in the acute care setting.
In patients'≥75 years, strategies of anaesthesia optimisation are not in accordance with eligible guidelines. Implementation of these techniques varies independently of factors related to the patient or the type of surgery and may be dependent on the generated constraints.
Background: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) may occur in up to 81% of critically ill patients and can lead to many complications. Opioid antagonists are a reasonable approach and may be used for managing OIC. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of enteral naloxone (NLX) versus subcutaneous methylnaltrexone (MNTX) for the management of OIC in critically ill patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult patients who received NLX or MNTX and a continuous opioid infusion for at least 48 hours. The primary end point was time to resolution of constipation, defined as hours to first bowel movement (BM) after the first dose of an opioid antagonist. Reversal of analgesia was assessed by comparing the total number of morphine milligram equivalents (MME) 24 hours preopioid and postopioid antagonist administration. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess treatment response within 48 hours. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between patients receiving NTX (n = 89) and MNTX (n = 71). However, the time to the first BM with NLX was 18 hours compared with 41 hours with MNTX ( P = 0.004). There was no difference in MME requirements 24 hours pre/post NLX or MNTX administration. Naloxone administration was identified as a statistically significant predictor of BM within 48 hours (odds ratio [OR] = 2.68 [1.33-5.38]). Conclusion and Relevance: The time to first BM was shorter with enteral NLX. Both NLX and MNTX appear to be effective for the management of OIC without causing reversal of analgesia. Future controlled, prospective trials comparing these agents are warranted.
Introduction Ultrasound-facilitated catheter-directed thrombolysis is used with low-dose alteplase to treat pulmonary embolism. This reduces the bleeding risk that accompanies systemic administration of higher alteplase doses. While studies suggest that alteplase given over 2 to 6 hours is safe and effective, few data exist to support alteplase stability under these conditions. Therefore, we undertook this in vitro study to determine the duration of alteplase stability. Methods Alteplase was prepared in solutions of 8 mg in 100 mL, 6 mg in 150 mL, and 8 mg in 200 mL. Solutions were administered through the EkoSonicTM Endovascular System with and without ultrasound, to simulate administration over 2, 4, and 6 hours. Alteplase was assessed with reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC). Assays were performed at time 0 and at 30-minute intervals during simulated infusion. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assay was used to measure alteplase concentrations that were at time 0 and at 15-minute intervals during simulated infusion. Results Using RP-HPLC, in the absence of ultrasound, the alteplase concentration remained within 1% of the original concentration through 120, 240, and 360 minutes of infusion. Using RP-HPLC for measurement, alteplase, in the presence of ultrasound, degraded steadily over time to approximately 90%, 80%, and 70% of its original amounts in 120, 240, and 360 minutes, respectively. Alteplase that remained was available for enzymatic activity. Conclusions Alteplase solutions of 0.04 and 0.08 mg/mL degraded steadily over time during simulated ultrasound-facilitated catheter-directed administration. Alteplase that did not degrade remained available for enzymatic activity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.