Modern Management of Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema

Midazolam versus morphine in acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: results of a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Benzodiazepines have been used as safe anxiolytic drugs for decades and some authors have suggested they could be an alternative for morphine for treating acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPE). We compared the efficacy and safety of midazolam and morphine in patients with ACPE.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A randomized, multicentre, open-label, blinded endpoint clinical trial was performed in seven Spanish emergency departments (EDs). Patients >18 years old clinically diagnosed with ACPE and with dyspnoea and anxiety were randomized (1:1) at ED arrival to receive either intravenous midazolam or morphine. Efficacy was assessed by in-hospital all-cause mortality (primary endpoint). Safety was assessed through serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the composite endpoint included 30-day mortality and SAE. Analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial was stopped early after a planned interim analysis by the safety monitoring committee. At that time, 111 patients had been randomized: 55 to midazolam and 56 to morphine. There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint (in-hospital mortality for midazolam vs. morphine 12.7% vs. 17.9%; risk ratio[RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-1.74; p = 0.60). SAE were less common with midazolam versus morphine (18.2% vs. 42.9%; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.80; p = 0.007), as were the composite endpoint (23.6% vs. 44.6%; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.92; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Although the number of patients was too small to draw final conclusions and there were no significant differences in mortality between midazolam and morphine, a significantly higher rate of SAEs was found in the morphine group.

Intravenous furosemide vs nebulized furosemide in patients with pulmonary edema: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pulmonary edema is one of the most common acute respiratory disorders that diagnosis and treatment of the disease still remain as a health problem. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of intravenous furosemide and nebulized furosemide in control of the symptoms of the patients with pulmonary edem.

METHODS

In this clinical trial, 80 patients were enrolled with pulmonary edema. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. In the intervention group the patients received nebulized furosemide at a dose of 1 mg furosemide for 20 minutes in 2 mL of sodium chloride 0.9% and in the control group the patients received intravenous furosemide at a dose of 1 mg/kg. Then, hemodynamic parameters and estimation of the clinical severity of the pulmonary edema in both groups was performed for 2 hours.

RESULTS

According to our results, we can say that nebulized furosemide is not superior to intravenous furosemide in reducing dyspnea and crackles in patients with acute pulmonary edema, but significantly improved respiratory rate and arterial blood oxygen and has less hemodynamic changes than the intravenous furosemide.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study showed the beneficial effects of nebulized furosemide in the treatment of pulmonary edema, which can be prescribed as a treatment in addition to standard treatment and significantly lead in better control of pulmonary edema in the short term.

Clinical Mimics: An Emergency Medicine-Focused Review of Asthma Mimics

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common diagnosis or preexisting condition, and many patients with acute asthma exacerbation may present to the emergency department with wheezing and respiratory distress. However, many conditions may mimic this presentation.

OBJECTIVES

This review provides an overview of common asthma mimics and an approach to evaluation and management.

DISCUSSION

Asthma is characterized by an obstructive pulmonary disease with recurrent exacerbations. The disease may present with a variety of symptoms, including wheezing, chest tightness, shortness of breath, and even respiratory failure. Mimics include anaphylaxis, angioedema, central airway obstruction, heart failure, allergic reaction, foreign body aspiration, pulmonary embolism, and vocal cord dysfunction. The approach to evaluation and management of these patients includes assessment for life-threatening conditions while treatment and resuscitation is underway. Providers should assess for red flags, including no history of asthma, lack of severe asthma, and no improvement with standard treatments. Focused assessment with history, physical examination, chest imaging, electrocardiogram, and laboratory studies may provide benefit. Through consideration of these mimics and treatment, providers can provide rapid management.

CONCLUSIONS

While asthma is a common disease, many asthma mimics exist. Through consideration of other diseases with wheezing and assessing for red flags, such as patients presenting without a history of asthma or patients with a history of only mild asthma presenting with severe symptoms, emergency providers may decrease the chance of early diagnostic closure and anchoring while improving the care of these patients.

Congestive Heart Failure

Patients with acute decompensated heart failure are usually critically ill and require immediate treatment. However, most are not volume overloaded. Emergency department (ED) management is based on rapid initiation of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation and aggressive titration of nitrates. Afterload reduction with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor can be considered. A diuretic should not be administered before optimal preload and afterload reduction has been achieved. Short-term inotropic therapy can be considered in select patients with cardiogenic shock and acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) who fail to respond to standard therapy.

Global end-diastolic volume is an important contributor to increased extravascular lung water in patients with acute lung injury and acuterespiratory distress syndrome: a multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

Extravascular lung water (EVLW), as measured by the thermodilution method, reflects the extent of pulmonary edema. Currently, there are no clinically effective treatments for preventing increases in pulmonary vascular permeability, a hallmark of lung pathophysiology, in patients with acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS). In this study, we examined the contributions of hemodynamic and osmolarity factors, for which appropriate interventions are expected in critical care, to EVLW in patients with ALI/ARDS.

METHODS

We performed a subgroup analysis of a multicenter observational study of patients with acute pulmonary edema. Overall, 207 patients with ALI/ARDS were enrolled in the study. Multivariate regression analysis was used to evaluate the associations of hemodynamic and serum osmolarity parameters with the EVLW index (EVLWI; calculated as EVLW/Ideal body weight). We analyzed factors measured on the day of enrollment (day 0), and on days 1 and 2 after enrollment.

RESULTS

Multivariate regression analysis showed that global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI) was significantly associated with EVLWI measured on days 0, 1, and 2 (P = 0.002, P < 0.001, and P = 0.003, respectively), whereas other factors were not significantly associated with EVLWI measured on all 3 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Among several hemodynamic and serum osmolarity factors that could be targets for appropriate intervention, GEDVI appears to be a key contributor to EVLWI in patients with ALI/ARDS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000003627.

Update on diastolic heart failure or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in the older adults

Nearly half of all heart failure (HF) patients have diastolic HF (DHF) or clinical HF with normal or near-normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Although the terminology has not been clearly defined, it is increasingly being referred to as HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). The prevalence of HFPEF increases with age, especially among older women. Identifying HFPEF is important because the etiology, pathogenesis, prognosis, and optimal management may differ from that for systolic HF (SHF) or HF with reduced ejection fraction. The clinical presentation of HF is similar for both SHF and HFPEF. As in SHF, HFPEF is a clinical diagnosis. Once a clinical diagnosis of HF has been made, the presence of HFPEF can be established by confirming a normal or near-normal LVEF, often by an echocardiogram. HFPEF is often associated with a history of hypertension, concentric left ventricular hypertrophy, vascular stiffness, and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. As in SHF, HFPEF is also associated with poor outcomes. While therapies with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers improve outcomes in SHF, there is currently no such evidence of their benefits in older HFPEF patients. In this review recent advances in the diagnosis and management of HFPEF in older adults are discussed.

Early emergency management of acute decompensated heart failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is characterized by a complex spectrum of pathophysiology that emerges as a common clinical disease state, which manifests as a failure of the circulation to provide for the needs of the body systems. Whereas ADHF is often characterized by the findings of pulmonary congestion and dyspnea, a variety of clinical presentations are possible, with each requiring differing management strategies. This review examines the approach of the four-quadrant clinical profile for differentiation of the ADHF patient during the emergent resuscitative phase of the decompensation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical and diagnostic information can be used to determine the relative degree of pulmonary congestion and peripheral tissue perfusion in patients suspected of ADHF. This information can be used in a four-quadrant approach to differentiate patients into pathophysiologic categories. These profiles can then be translated into management strategies from a physiology based perspective in which the specific mechanisms of the failure are targeted.

SUMMARY

ADHF can present in a variety of clinical forms in the emergent setting. Categorization of the ADHF patient according to their individual hemodynamic profile can assist in management decisions during the emergent resuscitative phase of the decompensation based upon an approach that targets causative pathophysiologic mechanisms.

Furosemide is associated with acute kidney injury in critically ill patients

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in critically ill patients. Diuretics are used without any evidence demonstrating a beneficial effect on renal function. The objective of the present study is to determine the incidence of AKI in an intensive care unit (ICU) and if there is an association between the use of furosemide and the development of AKI. The study involved a hospital cohort in which 344 patients were consecutively enrolled from January 2010 to January 2011. A total of 132 patients (75 females and 57 males, average age 64 years) remained for analysis. Most exclusions were related to ICU discharge in the first 24 h. Laboratory, sociodemographic and clinical data were collected until the development of AKI, medical discharge or patient death. The incidence of AKI was 55% (95%CI = 46-64). The predictors of AKI found by univariate analysis were septic shock: OR = 3.12, 95%CI = 1.36-7.14; use of furosemide: OR = 3.27, 95%CI = 1.57-6.80, and age: OR = 1.02, 95%CI = 1.00-1.04. Analysis of the subgroup of patients with septic shock showed that the odds ratio of furosemide was 5.5 (95%CI = 1.16-26.02) for development of AKI. Age, use of furosemide, and septic shock were predictors of AKI in critically ill patients. Use of furosemide in the subgroup of patients with sepsis/septic shock increased (68.4%) the chance of development of AKI when compared to the sample as a whole (43.9%)

Randomized placebo controlled trial of furosemide on subjective perception of dyspnoea in patients with pulmonary oedema because of hypertensive crisis

BACKGROUND

To compare the administration of furosemide with placebo on the subjective perception of dyspnoea in patients with acute pulmonary oedema because of hypertensive crisis. Design  Randomized, controlled and double-blinded clinical trial.

SETTING

Municipal emergency medical service system and university-based emergency department.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-nine patients with pulmonary oedema because of hypertensive crisis.

INTERVENTIONS

Additional to administration of oxygen, morphine-hydrochloride and urapidil until the systolic blood pressure was below 160mmHg, the patients were randomized to receive furosemide 80mg IV bolus (furosemide group) or saline placebo (placebo group).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the subjective perception of dyspnoea as measured with a modified BORG scale at one hour after randomization. Secondary outcome parameters were the subjective perception of dyspnoea of patients as measured with a modified BORG scale and a visual analogue scale at 2, 3 and 6h after randomization of the patient; course of the systolic arterial pressure and peripheral oxygen saturation and lactate at admission and at 6h after admission.

RESULTS

In 25 patients in the furosemide group and in 28 patients in the placebo group, a BORG score could be obtained. There was no statistically significant difference in the severity of dyspnoea at one hour after randomization (P=0·40). The median BORG score at 1h after randomization in the furosemide group was 3 (IQR 2 to 4) compared to 3 (IQR 2 to 7) in the placebo group (P=0·40). Those patients who were randomized to the placebo group needed higher doses of urapidil at 20min after randomization. There were no significant differences in the rate of adverse events, nonfatal cardiac arrests or death between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The subjective perception of dyspnoea in patients with hypertensive pulmonary oedema was not influenced by the application of a loop-diuretic. Therefore, additional furosemide therapy needs to be scrutinized in the therapy of these patients.

Prolonged Respiratory Failure Following Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Case Report

We have recently treated a case of acute anterior wall myocardial infarction who developed prolonged respiratory failure. The clinical details and possible mechanism are discussed.

Diuretic, opiate and nitrate use in severe acidotic acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: analysis from the 3CPO trial

BACKGROUND

Drug treatments for acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPO) have not been rigorously evaluated and recent observational data suggests some agents are related to poorer outcome.

AIM

We aimed to examine the effect of treatment with diuretics, nitrates and opiates on 7-day mortality, acidosis and respiratory distress in UK Emergency Department (ED) patients with severe acidotic pulmonary oedema.

DESIGN

Analysis of data from the 3CPO trial; a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Data were analysed from patients recruited with severe acidotic pulmonary oedema to the 3CPO trial in 26 UK EDs between 2003 and 2007. The effects of these treatments on 7-day mortality, improvement in acidosis (pH change between baseline and 1 h) and improvement in respiratory distress (patient measured breathlessness using a Visual Analogue Score between baseline and 1 h) were tested using univariate logistic regression analysis, and a regression model used to adjust for confounding baseline differences.

RESULTS

Nitrates were given to 947/1048 (90.4%) patients, diuretics to 934/1049 (89.0%) patients and opiates to 541/1052 patients (51.4%). Adjusted analysis showed that opiate treatment was associated with less improvement in acidosis [difference in improvement in pH -0.022, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.014 to -0.030, P < 0.001], but no difference in mortality or improvement in respiratory distress. We found no evidence that nitrate or diuretic use were associated with any difference in mortality, improvement in acidosis or respiratory distress.

CONCLUSION

Opiate use is associated with less improvement in acidosis during initial treatment and may attenuate effective treatment of severe acidotic ACPO.

Pharmacological interventions for hypertensive emergencies

BACKGROUND

Hypertensive emergencies, marked hypertension associated with acute end-organ damage, are life-threatening conditions. Many anti-hypertensive drugs have been used in these clinical settings. The benefits and harms of such treatment and the best first-line treatment are not known.

OBJECTIVES

To answer the following two questions using randomized controlled trials (RCTs): 1) does anti-hypertensive drug therapy as compared to placebo or no treatment affect mortality and morbidity in patients presenting with a hypertensive emergency? 2) Does one first-line antihypertensive drug class as compared to another antihypertensive drug class affect mortality and morbidity in these patients?

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane clinical trial register. In addition, we searched for references in review articles and trials. We attempted to contact trialists. Most recent search August 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All unconfounded, truly randomized trials that compare an antihypertensive drug versus placebo, no treatment, or another antihypertensive drug from a different class in patients presenting with a hypertensive emergency.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Quality of concealment allocation was scored. Data on randomized patients, total serious adverse events, all-cause mortality, non-fatal cardiovascular events, withdrawals due to adverse events, length of follow-up, blood pressure and heart rate were extracted independently and cross checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen randomized controlled trials (representing 869 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Two trials included a placebo arm. All studies (except one) were open-label trials. Seven drug classes were evaluated in those trials: nitrates (9 trials), ACE-inhibitors (7), diuretics (3), calcium channel blockers (6), alpha-1 adrenergic antagonists (4), direct vasodilators (2) and dopamine agonists (1). Mortality event data were reported in 7 trials. No meta-analysis was performed for clinical outcomes, due to insufficient data. The pooled effect of 3 different anti-hypertensive drugs in one placebo-controlled trial showed a statistically significant greater reduction in both systolic [WMD -13, 95%CI -19,-7] and diastolic [WMD -8, 95%CI, -12,-3] blood pressure with antihypertensive therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no RCT evidence demonstrating that anti-hypertensive drugs reduce mortality or morbidity in patients with hypertensive emergencies. Furthermore, there is insufficient RCT evidence to determine which drug or drug class is most effective in reducing mortality and morbidity. There were some minor differences in the degree of blood pressure lowering when one class of antihypertensive drug is compared to another. However, the clinical significance is unknown. RCTs are needed to assess different drug classes to determine initial and longer term mortality and morbidity outcomes.