Leshko, Nicole A.

Background: Levetiracetam administration via intravenous push (IVP) may improve outcomes in status epilepticus (SE) by decreasing time to administration. However, there is a paucity of literature describing the safety of IVP administration of higher loading doses used for early management of SE. Objective: The purpose of this evaluation was to investigate the safety of high-dose IVP levetiracetam. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-arm cohort study conducted at an academic medical center. Patients were included if they received IVP levetiracetam ≥3000 mg. The primary outcome was a composite of clinically significant adverse events (AEs) within 1-hour post-administration of levetiracetam: hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, tachycardia, arrhythmia, and/or injection site reaction. Results: A total of 140 patients met inclusion criteria, receiving a median levetiracetam dose of 4000 mg (interquartile range [IQR] = 3000, 4500). Seventeen (12.1%) patients experienced a clinically significant AE. The most common clinically significant AE was hypotension (9.2% [10/109]), followed by tachycardia (3.6% [4/112]), arrhythmia (1.8% [2/112]), hypertension (0.9% [1/109]), and injection site reaction (0.7% [1/140]). Eighty percent [8/10] of patients who experienced clinically significant hypotension were on at least 1 medication with potential confounding hemodynamic effects. Conclusion and Relevance: In this retrospective, single-arm analysis, high-dose (≥3000 mg) IVP levetiracetam was relatively well-tolerated but associated with a higher rate of clinically significant hypotension than has been reported in the previous literature, although several confounding factors may have contributed to this outcome. Our findings support the continued use of high-dose IVP levetiracetam with appropriate hemodynamic monitoring; hemodynamic effects should be further explored in future studies.

Background Thromboelastography is a viscoelastic test with multiple potential advantages over conventional coagulation tests in various disease states. Thromboelastography rapidly provides qualitative and quantitative information related to a patient’s coagulation status. Objective To describe recent studies of the use of thromboelastography in various clinical states and how thromboelastography is used in coagulation management. Methods A literature review using the MEDLINE and PubMed databases was conducted. The updated methodology for integrated reviews by Whittemore and Knafl was followed. Coauthors evaluated separate areas that were independently reviewed by other coauthors to ensure appropriateness for inclusion. Results The use of thromboelastography for various clinical conditions with challenging hemostatic profiles has increased. This integrative review covers the use of thromboelastography in patients with trauma, medication-induced coagulopathy, acute and chronic liver failure, and cardiothoracic surgery. Potential future directions are also discussed. Discussion Thromboelastography has numerous potential benefits over conventional coagulation tests for assessing coagulation status in patients in various clinical states. Nurses can support clinical decisions to use the most appropriate test for their patients. Conclusions Each team member should be involved in assessing the usefulness of thromboelastography. Critical care nurses and the multidisciplinary team must identify patients in whom its use is warranted, interpret the results, and provide appropriate interventions in response to the results and clinical status of the patient.