Oyen, Lance J.

Objective: To summarize published data regarding the steps of rapid-sequence intubation (RSI); review premedications, induction agents, neuromuscular blockers (NMB), and studies supporting use or avoidance; and discuss the benefits and deficits of combinations of induction agents and NMBs used when drug shortages occur. Data Source: A search of Medline databases (1966–October 2013) was conducted. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Databases were searched using the terms rapid-sequence intubation, fentanyl, midazolam, atropine, lidocaine, phenylephrine, ketamine, propofol, etomidate thiopental, succinylcholine, vecuronium, atracurium, and rocuronium. Citations from publications were reviewed for additional references. Data Synthesis: Data were reviewed to support the use or avoidance of premedications, induction agents, and paralytics and combinations to consider when drug shortages occur. Conclusions: RSI is used to secure a definitive airway in often uncooperative, nonfasted, unstable, and/or critically ill patients. Choosing the appropriate premedication, induction drug, and paralytic will maximize the success of tracheal intubation and minimize complications.

Background: Little guidance exists on effective management of postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) following noncardiac, nonthoracic (NCNT) surgery. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify whether a difference exists between intravenous (IV) metoprolol and diltiazem when used to achieve hemodynamically stable rate control in POAF following NCNT surgery. Methods: This retrospective cohort study examined critically ill adult surgical patients experiencing POAF with rapid ventricular response. Inclusion in the metoprolol or diltiazem treatment group was determined by the initial rate control agent chosen by the prescriber. The primary end point was hemodynamically stable rate control, defined by heart rate (HR) <110 beats/min and blood pressure >90 mm Hg, maintained for 6 hours. Main Results: Patients on metoprolol (n = 66) and diltiazem (n = 55) were similar in age, comorbidities, surgical procedure distribution, acuity of illness, and home rate and rhythm control medications continued during hospitalization; 76% of diltiazem-treated patients achieved hemodynamically stable rate control, compared with only 53% of those receiving metoprolol ( P = .005). Safety end points were similar between groups, including the portion requiring a new vasopressor or fluid bolus for hemodynamic support. Conclusions: In NCNT surgery, patients with POAF, IV diltiazem more effectively controlled HR and hemodynamics compared with metoprolol. Results warrant further research into optimal medical management of POAF in this population using these 2 agents.

OBJECTIVE: To review dexamethasone interaction with corticotropin stimulation testing, particularly as it applies to treating septic shock. DATA SOURCES: Pertinent literature was identified through MEDLINE (1966–February 2004) using combinations of the key words dexamethasone, adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation, and pretreat. Only articles written in the English language and evaluating human subjects were considered. Reference lists of identified articles were reviewed for additional citations. DATA SYNTHESIS: Accurate interpretation of the corticotropin stimulation test is important to identify patients with septic shock who may benefit from corticosteroid supplementation. In healthy volunteers, short-term dexamethasone administration prior to the corticotropin stimulation test may depress the baseline cortisol level, but does not inhibit the response to the corticotropin challenge. This may result in a slight increase in the difference between baseline and post-stimulation values. CONCLUSIONS: In 2 small trials in healthy adults, short-term, low-dose dexamethasone pretreatment decreased baseline cortisol levels, but values following corticotropin stimulation were unaffected. Accordingly, caution in interpreting corticotropin stimulation test results is warranted. However, the application of the findings from these studies to patients with septic shock is difficult, given the important differences in physiology between normal and septic patients. As of December 29, 2004, a dexamethasone dose >2 mg or prolonged dexamethasone therapy (>2 days, totaling 4 mg) preceding corticotropin stimulation has not been studied in any population.