Naloxone decreases tolerance to hypotensive, hypovolemic stress healthy humans

Central inhibition of opioid receptor subtypes and its effect on haemorrhagic hypotension in conscious sheep

AIM

To investigate the contribution of cerebral mu-, kappa- and delta-opioid receptors in causing the hypotension, bradycardia and renal hypoperfusion evoked by haemorrhage.

METHODS

Adult conscious ewes were bled continuously from a jugular vein until mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was reduced to below 50 mmHg. Starting 30 min before and continuing until 60 min after haemorrhage either artificial cerebrospinal fluid (control), d-Phe-Cys-Tyr-d-Trp-Orn-Thr-Pen-Thr-NH(2) (CTOP micro-receptor antagonist), ICI 174,864 (delta-receptor antagonist) or nor-binaltorphimine dihydrochloride (nor-BNI, kappa-receptor antagonist) were infused intracerebroventricularly. In a randomized crossover fashion the effect of antagonizing one central opioid receptor subtype was compared to control experiments in the same animal (n = 6 in all groups).

RESULTS

Compared to corresponding controls, nor-BNI and ICI 174,864 significantly increased the haemorrhage volume needed to reduce MAP to below 50 mmHg (+4.7 mL kg(-1), SD 1.8 and +3.1 mL kg(-1), SD 3.0 respectively). In the nor-BNI group this was accompanied by a significantly augmented tachycardia before MAP fell. Both nor-BNI and ICI 174,864 also postponed haemorrhagic bradycardia and prolonged adequate blood flow to the kidney. The infusions did not affect the circulation per se or the recovery after haemorrhage. The micro-opioid receptor blockade had no effect on baseline circulation or the response to haemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

Activation of kappa- and delta-opioid receptors adjacent to the ventricular compartment contributes to initiating haemorrhagic hypotension and bradycardia in conscious sheep. However, other parts of the brain and different receptors are likely to play a role as well.

Lower body negative pressure as a model to study progression to acute hemorrhagic shock in humans

Hemorrhage is a leading cause of death in both civilian and battlefield trauma. Survival rates increase when victims requiring immediate intervention are correctly identified in a mass-casualty situation, but methods of prioritizing casualties based on current triage algorithms are severely limited. Development of effective procedures to predict the magnitude of hemorrhage and the likelihood for progression to hemorrhagic shock must necessarily be based on carefully controlled human experimentation, but controlled study of severe hemorrhage in humans is not possible. It may be possible to simulate hemorrhage, as many of the physiological compensations to acute hemorrhage can be mimicked in the laboratory by applying negative pressure to the lower extremities. Lower body negative pressure (LBNP) sequesters blood from the thorax into dependent regions of the pelvis and legs, effectively decreasing central blood volume in a similar fashion as acute hemorrhage. In this review, we compare physiological responses to hemorrhage and LBNP with particular emphasis on cardiovascular compensations that both share in common. Through evaluation of animal and human data, we present evidence that supports the hypothesis that LBNP, and resulting volume sequestration, is an effective technique to study physiological responses and mechanisms associated with acute hemorrhage in humans. Such experiments could lead to clinical algorithms that identify bleeding victims who will likely progress to hemorrhagic shock and require lifesaving intervention(s).

Naloxone for shock

BACKGROUND

There is pre-clinical evidence, involving several animal species, suggesting that opioid peptides play a role in the physiopathology of shock (endotoxic, hypovolemic, cardiogenic, spinal, anaphylactic). Many case reports have suggested that naloxone (an opiate antagonist) might be an effective treatment for shock in humans, but others have not supported such a point of view. This controversy led us to undertake a meta-analysis of the available evidence on the efficacy of naloxone as a treatment measure of shock in humans.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of naloxone in human shock and to estimate the methodological quality of the clinical trials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerized bibliographic search up to December 2002, review of references of all papers found on the subject and contact with primary investigators of eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials evaluating naloxone in human shock, regardless of the patient's age (adult, child or neonate).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three independent reviewers extracted data on study design, intervention, outcome and methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Three independent readers reviewed 80 human publications and selected six clinical trials. Overall agreement on study selection was perfect (concordance: 100%). This meta-analysis includes six studies involving 126 patients with septic, cardiogenic, hemorrhagic or spinal shock. Naloxone therapy was associated with statistically significant hemodynamic improvement (odds ratio 0.24; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.09-0.68). The mean arterial pressure was significantly higher in the naloxone groups than in the placebo groups (weighted mean difference: +9.33 mmHg; 95%CI 7.07-11.59). No heterogeneity was found for this outcome. The death rate was lower in the naloxone group (odds ratio 0.59; 95%CI 0.21-1.67) but this was consistent with the play of chance. A significant heterogeneity for the latter outcome was detected (p<0.05).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Naloxone improves blood pressure, especially mean arterial blood pressure. However, the clinical usefulness of naloxone to treat shock remains to be determined, and additional randomized controlled trials are needed to assess its usefulness.