Abstract Purpose After a long period of low utilization, droperidol has become easier to obtain in the US market. This comprehensive review discusses the safety, indications, clinical efficacy, and dosing of droperidol for use in the emergency department (ED) setting. Summary In 2001 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mandated a boxed warning in the labeling of droperidol after reports of QT interval prolongation associated with droperidol use. Since that time, it has been difficult to access droperidol in the United States; as a result, many practicing clinicians lack experience in its clinical use. Multiple studies have been conducted to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of droperidol use in ED patients. Results consistently show the safety of droperidol and its clinical efficacy when used as an analgesic, antiemetic, and sedative. Now that droperidol is more widely available for use in the US market, pharmacists and prescribers need to reliably translate safety and efficacy data compiled since 2001 to help ensure appropriate and effective use of the medication. Conclusion Droperidol is an effective and safe option for the treatment of acute agitation, migraine, nausea, and pain for patients in the ED setting. Healthcare professionals can adopt droperidol for use in clinical practice, and they should become familiar with how to dose and monitor droperidol for safe and effective use.
Recruiting the right residents
JACCP: JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY | October 8, 2018 | Volume: 1 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 121-121
Study ObjectiveHigh‐dose intravenous vitamin C is a potential treatment option for patients with sepsis and may interfere with point‐of‐care (POC) blood glucose (BG) testing. This study aimed to determine if vitamin C dosing used for sepsis affected POC BG level results.DesignProspective observational pilot study.SettingIntensive care unit in a large academic tertiary care medical center.PatientsFive consecutive critically ill adults hospitalized between April 1 and June 1, 2017, who received two or more doses of intravenous vitamin C 1500 mg for the treatment of sepsis and had at least two paired POC BG levels and laboratory venous BG levels measured within 1 hour of each other during vitamin C therapy.Measurements and Main ResultsThe performance of POC BG level measurement was compared with the reference method of laboratory BG level measurement. The concordance to minimum accuracy criteria for BG meters set forth by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2013, the measurement of agreement between POC BG level and laboratory BG level using the Bland‐Altman method, and the clinical accuracy through Parkes error grid analysis were assessed. A total of 16 paired POC and laboratory BG level measurements from the five patients were included. The accuracy of POC BG with laboratory BG level measurements during vitamin C administration according to ISO 15197:2013 criteria was 81.3%, which did not meet the minimum accuracy criteria of 95%. The Bland‐Altman analysis showed a mean difference between POC and laboratory BG levels of 8.9 mg/dl, and the Parkes error grid analysis showed that the differences between POC and laboratory BG level measurements would not have resulted in a change in clinical action.ConclusionThe accuracy and agreement of POC and laboratory BG level measurements in critically ill patients receiving vitamin C were consistent with previously published reports in critically ill patients not receiving vitamin C and did not demonstrate clinically significant interference due to vitamin C dosing for sepsis.
Low-Dose Prothrombin Complex Concentrate in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices
Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have become an important advancement for patients with end-stage heart failure. Left ventricular assist devices come with the risk of stroke and pump thrombosis, and to mitigate these risks, anticoagulation is given to these patients. With anticoagulation comes increased bleeding risk, and urgent reversal may be necessary. Reports have shown that the risk of thrombosis with prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) does exist, especially in patients with baseline risk factors for thrombosis. We describe two cases of warfarin reversal with low-dose 4-factor PCC (4F-PCC) in two different LVAD patient scenarios. Low-dose 4F-PCC was administered to one patient with a Heart Mate II (HM II) LVAD, international normalized ratio (INR) of 4.7 on admission and in need of an urgent procedure. He received approximately 16 units/kg of 4F-PCC with reversal of his INR to 2.3 within 45 minutes. The second patient also had a HM II LVAD and presented with a right occipital intraparenchymal hemorrhage and subdural hematoma with an INR of 3.7. He received approximately 11 units/kg of 4F-PCC with INR reversal to 1.6 within 1 hour. Both of these patients had no thrombotic complications and successful reversal of their INR with low-dose 4F-PCC. Further investigation into low-dose 4F-PCC dosing strategies is warranted.
Cystatin C Falsely Underestimated GFR in a Critically Ill Patient with a New Diagnosis of AIDS
Case Reports in Nephrology | May 17, 2016 | Volume: 2016 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: 1-4
Cystatin C has been suggested to be a more accurate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) surrogate than creatinine in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) because it is unaffected by skeletal muscle mass and dietary influences. However, little is known about the utility of this marker for monitoring medications in the critically ill. We describe the case of a 64-year-old female with opportunistic infections associated with a new diagnosis of AIDS. During her course, she experienced neurologic, cardiac, and respiratory failure; yet her renal function remained preserved as indicated by an eGFR ≥ 120 mL/min and a urine output > 1 mL/kg/hr without diuresis. The patient was treated with nephrotoxic agents; therefore cystatin C was assessed to determine if cachexia was resulting in a falsely low serum creatinine. Cystatin C measured 1.50 mg/L which corresponded to an eGFR of 36 mL/min. Given the >60 mL/min discrepancy, serial 8-hour urine samples were collected and a GFR > 120 mL/min was confirmed. It is unclear why cystatin C was falsely elevated, but we hypothesize that it relates to the proinflammatory state with AIDS, opportunistic infections, and corticosteroids. More research is needed before routine use of cystatin C in this setting can be recommended.