Intraosseous Administration of 23.4% NaCl for Treatment of Intracranial Hypertension

Medical management of cerebral edema in large hemispheric infarcts

Acute ischemic stroke confers a high burden of morbidity and mortality globally. Occlusion of large vessels of the anterior circulation, namely the intracranial carotid artery and middle cerebral artery, can result in large hemispheric stroke in ~8% of these patients. Edema from stroke can result in a cascade effect leading to local compression of capillary perfusion, increased stroke burden, elevated intracranial pressure, herniation and death. Mortality from large hemispheric stroke is generally high and surgical intervention may reduce mortality and improve good outcomes in select patients. For those patients who are not eligible candidates for surgical decompression either due timing, medical co-morbidities, or patient and family preferences, the mainstay of medical management for cerebral edema is hyperosmolar therapy. Other neuroprotectants for cerebral edema such as glibenclamide are under investigation. This review will discuss current guidelines and evidence for medical management of cerebral edema in large hemispheric stroke as well as discuss important neuromonitoring and critical care management targeted at reducing morbidity and mortality for these patients.

Safety and Tolerability of 23.4% Hypertonic Saline Administered Over 2 to 5 Minutes for the Treatment of Cerebral Herniation and Intracranial Pressure Elevation

BACKGROUND

Hyperosmolar therapy is the cornerstone of medical management of sustained elevated intracranial pressure from cerebral edema. Acute intracranial hypertension and herniation is a medical emergency that requires rapid treatment and stabilization to prevent secondary brain injury or death. Intravenous hypertonic sodium chloride (NaCl) 23.4% is an effective treatment modality commonly used in this setting. Because of its high osmolarity, use has historically been limited primarily to central venous line administration as an intermittent infusion due to concerns about thrombophlebitis, injection site pain, and tissue necrosis or injury with extravasation. The objective of this analysis was to prospectively evaluate the safety of administration of 23.4% NaCl as a rapid intravenous push over 2-5 min.

METHODS

A prospective analysis of patients admitted between April 2021 and December 2021 who received 23.4% NaCl intravenous push over 2-5 min in a central or peripheral line was performed. Safety end points included incidence of new onset hypotension [defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mm Hg or SBP decrease of at least 20 mm Hg], bradycardia (defined as heart rate < 50 beats per minute), and infusion site reactions documented within 1 h of administration. For secondary safety outcomes, highest and lowest SBP and lowest heart rates documented within 1 h before 23.4% NaCl administration were compared with values collected within 1 h post administration and evaluated by mixed-design analysis of variance test with adjustment for peripheral versus central line administration.

RESULTS

We identified 32 patients who received 79 administrations of 23.4% NaCl through a central line or peripheral line during the study period. An SBP decrease of at least 20 mm Hg was observed in 13% of patients, an SBP < 90 mm Hg occurred in 16% of patients, and bradycardia occurred in 3% of patients who received 23.4% NaCl. Injection site pain was reported by one patient without documented thrombophlebitis, cellulitis, or tissue damage. Pain was not reported during two subsequent administrations in the same patient. There was no documented occurrence of soft tissue injury or necrosis in any patient. Compared with baseline vital signs before 23.4% NaCl administration, no difference in vital signs post administration was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Central and peripheral administration of 23.4% NaCl over 2-5 min was well tolerated, and incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or infusion site-related adverse events was rare.

Management of Cerebral Edema, Brain Compression, and Intracranial Pressure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the pathophysiology and management of cerebral edema, brain compression, and elevated intracranial pressure (ICP). It also provides a brief introduction to the concept of the glymphatic system and select cellular contributors to cerebral edema.

RECENT FINDINGS

Cerebral edema and brain compression should be treated in a tiered approach after the patient demonstrates a symptomatic indication to start treatment. All patients with acute brain injury should be treated with standard measures to optimize intracranial compliance and minimize risk of ICP elevation. When ICP monitors are used, therapies should target maintaining ICP at 22 mm Hg or less. Evidence exists that serial clinical examination and neuroimaging may be a reasonable alternative to ICP monitoring; however, clinical trials in progress may demonstrate advantages to advanced monitoring techniques. Early decompressive craniectomy and hypothermia are not neuroprotective in traumatic brain injury and should be reserved for situations refractory to initial medical interventions. Medical therapies that acutely lower plasma osmolality may lead to neurologic deterioration from osmotic cerebral edema, and patients with acute brain injury and renal or liver failure are at elevated risk.

SUMMARY

A tiered approach to the management of cerebral edema and brain compression can reduce secondary brain injury when implemented according to core physiologic principles. However, our knowledge of the pathophysiology of acute brain injury is incomplete, and the conceptual framework underlying decades of clinical management may need to be revised in response to currently evolving discoveries regarding the pathophysiology of acute brain injury.

Safety and Efficacy of 23.4% Sodium Chloride Administered via Peripheral Venous Access for the Treatment of Cerebral Herniation and Intracranial Pressure Elevation

BACKGROUND

Sodium chloride (NaCl) 23.4% solution has been shown to reduce intracranial pressure (ICP) and reverse transtentorial herniation. A limitation of 23.4% NaCl is its high osmolarity (8008 mOsm/l) and the concern for tissue injury or necrosis following extravasation when administered via peripheral venous access. The use of this agent is therefore often limited to central venous or intraosseous routes of administration. Our objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of administration of 23.4% NaCl via peripheral venous access compared with administration via central venous access.

METHODS

We reviewed pharmacy records to identify all administrations of 23.4% NaCl at our institution between December 2017 and February 2020. Medical records were then reviewed to identify complications, such as extravasation, soft tissue injury or necrosis, hypotension (mean arterial pressure less than 65 mm Hg), pulmonary edema, hemolysis, and osmotic demyelination. We also compared the change in physiological variables, such as ICP, mean arterial pressure, cerebral perfusion pressure, and heart rate, as well as laboratory values, such as sodium, chloride, bicarbonate, creatinine, and hemoglobin, following administration of 23.4% NaCl via the peripheral and central venous routes.

RESULTS

We identified 299 administrations of 23.4% NaCl (242 central and 57 peripheral) in 141 patients during the study period. There was no documented occurrence of soft tissue injury or necrosis in any patient. One patient developed hypotension following central administration. Among the 38 patients with ICP monitoring at the time of drug administration, there was no significant difference in median ICP reduction (- 13 mm Hg [central] vs. - 24 mm Hg [peripheral], p = 0.21) or cerebral perfusion pressure augmentation (16 mm Hg [central] vs. 15 mm Hg [peripheral], p = 0.87) based on route of administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Peripheral venous administration of 23.4% NaCl is safe and achieves a reduction in ICP equivalent to that achieved by administration via central venous access.

Intravenous vs intraosseous adrenaline administration in cardiac arrest: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac arrest refers to the sudden termination of cardiac ejection function due to various causes. Adrenaline is an important component of resuscitation among individuals experiencing cardiac arrest. The adrenaline delivery method chiefly involved intraosseous infusion and intravenous access. However, the impact of different adrenaline delivery methods on cardiac arrest has been unclear in previous research. Thus, the present study aimed to synthesize the available evidence regarding intravenous vs intraosseous adrenaline administration in cardiac arrest.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. As per the inclusion criteria, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on adrenaline administration in cardiac arrest were selected. The primary outcome was prehospital restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC); the secondary endpoints were survival, favorable neurological outcome at discharge, and poor neurological outcome at ≥3 mon.We plan to use the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the bias risk for RCTs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will grade the certainty of the evidence for all the outcome measures across studies. RevMan 5.3.5 will be used for meta-analysis. If the heterogeneity tests show slight or no statistical heterogeneity, the fixed effects model will be used, in other cases, the random effect model will be used for data synthesis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

This protocol will determine which epinephrine delivery method is the optimal in the management of cardiac arrest. Our findings will help clinicians and health professionals in making accurate clinical decisions about adrenaline administrations in cardiac arrest.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was not required because this study was planned as a secondary analysis. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications, journals, and academic.

INPLASY REGISTRATION NUMBER

INPLASY202090100 (DOI:10.37766/inplasy2020.9.0100).