Utilization of hyperinsulinemia euglycemia and intravenous fat emulsion following poison center recommendations

Successful Treatment of Antihypertensive Overdose Using Intravenous Angiotensin II

BACKGROUND

Despite multiple treatment options, antihypertensive overdose remains a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. Intravenous angiotensin II (AG II) is approved for use in vasodilatory shock. We describe 2 cases of refractory shock from antihypertensive overdose that were successfully treated using AG II.

CASE REPORTS

A 24-year-old female presented after an overdose of multiple antihypertensive medications, including an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI). She developed hypotension that was refractory to norepinephrine, epinephrine, and vasopressin, with a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 57 mm Hg 9 h after emergency department arrival. Fifteen minutes after starting AG II at 10 ng/kg/min, her heart rate and MAP rose by 7 beats/min and 12 mm Hg, respectively. Her hemodynamic parameters continued to improve thereafter. She developed acute kidney injury, which resolved prior to discharge. The second patient, a 65-year-old male, presented after an overdose of multiple antihypertensive medications, including an ACEI. Despite norepinephrine, epinephrine, and hyperinsulinemia-euglycemia, he remained bradycardic and hypotensive, with a heart rate of 47 beats/min and MAP of 59 mm Hg. Thirty minutes after starting AG II at 10 ng/kg/min, his heart rate was 61 beats/min and MAP was 66 mm Hg. He recovered without apparent sequelae. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Antihypertensive overdose can lead to shock refractory to catecholamine and vasopressin therapy. Our experience suggests that AG II is efficacious in antihypertensive overdose and may be particularly efficacious in instances of ACEI overdose. However, further study is required to confirm the appropriate indication(s).

Outcomes following calcium channel blocker exposures reported to a poison information center

Background

Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are widely used drugs that have a narrow therapeutic index. Even minor overdoses must be treated in-hospital due to the risk of severe hypotension and bradycardia. We aimed to describe trends in CCB use and overdoses in Denmark.

Methods

Data on enquiries concerning CCBs reported to the Danish Poisons Information Center (DPIC) from January 2009 to January 2015 was coupled with data on hospitalization and mortality obtained from Danish National Registers. We obtained data on the general use of CCBs in Denmark and retrieved medical charts on fatal cases.

Results

From a total of 126,987 enquiries to the DPIC in 2009–2014 we identified 339 CCB unique exposures (3‰ of all). Children < 5 years accounted for 20% all exposures and these were classified as ‘intake during playing’ (61%) and ‘medication errors’ (39%). Among adults ‘suicidal poisonings’ (58%), and ‘medication errors’ (34%) were most frequent. A majority (81%) of exposures led to hospital admission. Seven patients (2%) died from the CCB exposure and all were adults with ‘suicidal poisoning’. Amlodipine accounted for 95% of all CCB prescriptions, was involved in 71% of enquiries and in 29% of fatalities. Verapamil accounted for 3% of prescriptions, was involved in 13% of enquiries and 57% of fatalities.

Conclusion

Four fifths of enquiries to the DPIC result in hospitalization and one fifth concern small children. Mortality were infrequent and occurred only in adults with suicidal exposures and with and an overrepresentation of verapamil exposures.

Barriers and Facilitators of Intensivists' Adherence to Hyperinsulinemia-Euglycemia Therapy in the Treatment of Calcium Channel Blocker Poisoning

INTRODUCTION

Adherence to poison center (PC) recommendations for the management of calcium channel blocker (CCB) poisoning is inconsistent. This study aimed to identify behaviors that determine adherence to hyperinsulinemia-euglycemia therapy (HIET) for CCB poisoning.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted involving a convenience sample of 18 intensivists. Interview responses were analyzed using the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify relevant domains influencing physician adherence to HIET. Two independent reviewers performed qualitative content analysis of the interview transcripts to identify beliefs influencing decisions to initiate HIET. Initially, beliefs were classified and frequencies reported as being likely to facilitate, likely to decrease, or unlikely to affect adherence. Subsequently, beliefs were linked to a domain within the TDF. Based on the potential impact on physician behavior and frequency of reported behavior, we selected the most relevant domains likely to influence physician adherence to HIET for CCB poisoning.

RESULTS

Positive beliefs were identified in the following domains: "behavioral regulation" (e.g., algorithm for adjustment of perfusions), "belief about capabilities" (e.g., confidence about being able to manage HIET), "belief about consequences" (e.g., fear of clinical deterioration), and "reinforcement" (e.g., clinical instability). Negative beliefs were identified in the following domains as "nature of behavior" (e.g., preference for vasopressors over HIET) and "environmental context and resources" (e.g., accessing dextrose 50% and increased nurse workload).

CONCLUSION

This qualitative study identified potential behavioral targets for future implementation strategies to address to improve adherence to HIET.

Experts Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Calcium Channel Blocker Poisoning in Adults

OBJECTIVE

To provide a management approach for adults with calcium channel blocker poisoning.

DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA EXTRACTION

Following the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument, initial voting statements were constructed based on summaries outlining the evidence, risks, and benefits.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We recommend 1) for asymptomatic patients, observation and consideration of decontamination following a potentially toxic calcium channel blocker ingestion (1D); 2) as first-line therapies (prioritized based on desired effect), IV calcium (1D), high-dose insulin therapy (1D-2D), and norepinephrine and/or epinephrine (1D). We also suggest dobutamine or epinephrine in the presence of cardiogenic shock (2D) and atropine in the presence of symptomatic bradycardia or conduction disturbance (2D); 3) in patients refractory to the first-line treatments, we suggest incremental doses of high-dose insulin therapy if myocardial dysfunction is present (2D), IV lipid-emulsion therapy (2D), and using a pacemaker in the presence of unstable bradycardia or high-grade arteriovenous block without significant alteration in cardiac inotropism (2D); 4) in patients with refractory shock or who are periarrest, we recommend incremental doses of high-dose insulin (1D) and IV lipid-emulsion therapy (1D) if not already tried. We suggest venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, if available, when refractory shock has a significant cardiogenic component (2D), and using pacemaker in the presence of unstable bradycardia or high-grade arteriovenous block in the absence of myocardial dysfunction (2D) if not already tried; 5) in patients with cardiac arrest, we recommend IV calcium in addition to the standard advanced cardiac life-support (1D), lipid-emulsion therapy (1D), and we suggest venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation if available (2D).

CONCLUSION

We offer recommendations for the stepwise management of calcium channel blocker toxicity. For all interventions, the level of evidence was very low.

Lipid rescue 911: Are poison centers recommending intravenous fat emulsion therapy for severe poisoning?

Intravenous fat emulsion (IFE) therapy is a novel treatment that has been used to reverse the acute toxicity of some xenobiotics with varied success. We sought to determine how US Poison Control Centers (PCCs) have incorporated IFE as a treatment strategy for poisoning. A closed-format multiple-choice survey instrument was developed, piloted, revised, and then sent electronically to every medical director of an accredited US PCC in March 2011. Addresses were obtained from the American Association of Poison Control Centers listserv, and participation was voluntary and remained anonymous. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The majority of PCC medical directors completed the survey (45 out of 57; 79 %). Of the 45 respondents, all felt that IFE therapy played a role in the acute overdose setting. Most PCCs (30 out of 45; 67 %) have a protocol for IFE therapy. In a scenario with "cardiac arrest" due to a single xenobiotic, directors stated that their center would "always" or "often" recommend IFE after overdose of bupivacaine (43 out of 45; 96 %), verapamil (36 out of 45; 80 %), amitriptyline (31 out of 45; 69 %), or an unknown xenobiotic (12 out of 45; 27 %). In a scenario with "shock" due to a single xenobiotic, directors stated that their PCC would "always" or "often" recommend IFE after overdose of bupivacaine (40 out of 45; 89 %), verapamil (28 out of 45; 62 %), amitriptyline (25 out of 45; 56 %), or an unknown xenobiotic (8 out of 45; 18 %). IFE therapy is being recommended by US PCCs; protocols and dosing regimens are nearly uniform. Most directors feel that IFE is safe but are more likely to recommend IFE in patients with cardiac arrest than in patients with severe hemodynamic compromise.