A multicenter investigation of the hemodynamic effects of induction agents for trauma rapid sequence intubation

Management of Respiratory Failure in Hemorrhagic Shock

Hemorrhagic shock results in acute respiratory failure due to respiratory muscle fatigue and inadequate pulmonary blood flow. Because positive pressure ventilation can reduce venous return and cardiac output, clinicians should use the minimum possible mean airway pressure during assisted or mechanical ventilation, particularly during episodes of severe hypovolemia. Hypoperfusion also worsens dead space fraction. Therefore, clinicians should monitor capnography during mechanical ventilation and recognize that hypercapnia may be treated with fluid resuscitation rather than increasing minute ventilation.

Interventions associated with survival after prehospital intubation in the deployed combat setting

INTRODUCTION

Airway compromise is the second leading cause of potentially preventable death on the battlefield. Prehospital airway management is often unavoidable in a kinetic combat environment and expected to increase in future wars where timely evacuation will be unreliable and air superiority not guaranteed. We compared characteristics of survivors to non-survivors among combat casualties undergoing prehospital airway intubation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We requested all Department of Defense Trauma Registry (DODTR) encounters during 2007-2023 with documentation of any airway intervention or assessment within the first 72-h after injury. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all casualties with intubation documented in the prehospital setting. We used descriptive and inferential statistical analysis to compare survivors through 7 days post injury versus non-survivors. We constructed 3 multivariable logistic regression models to test for associations between interventions and 7-day survival after adjusting for injury severity score, mechanism of injury, and receipt of sedatives, paralytics, and blood products.

RESULTS

There were 1377 of 48,301 patients with documentation of prehospital intubation in a combat setting. Of these, 1028 (75%) survived through 7 days post injury. Higher proportions of survivors received ketamine, paralytic agents, parenteral opioids, and parenteral benzodiazepines; there was no difference in the proportions of survivors versus non-survivors receiving etomidate. The multivariable models consistently demonstrated positive associations between 7-day survival and receipt of non-depolarizing paralytics and opioid analgesics.

CONCLUSIONS

We found an association between non-depolarizing paralytic and opioid receipt with 7-day survival among patients undergoing prehospital intubation. The literature would benefit from future multi-center randomized controlled trials to establish optimal pharmacologic strategies for trauma patients undergoing prehospital intubation.

Etomidate versus Ketamine as Prehospital Induction Agent in Patients with Suspected Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

BACKGROUND

Severe traumatic brain injury is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among young people around the world. Prehospital care focuses on the prevention and treatment of secondary brain injury and commonly includes tracheal intubation after induction of general anesthesia. The choice of induction agent in this setting is controversial. This study therefore investigated the association between the chosen induction medication etomidate versus S(+)-ketamine and the 30-day mortality in patients with severe traumatic brain injury who received prehospital airway management in the Netherlands.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of the prospectively collected observational data of the Brain Injury: Prehospital Registry of Outcomes, Treatments and Epidemiology of Cerebral Trauma (BRAIN-PROTECT) cohort study. Patients with suspected severe traumatic brain injury who were transported to a participating trauma center and who received etomidate or S(+)-ketamine for prehospital induction of anesthesia for advanced airway management were included. Statistical analyses were performed with multivariable logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 1,457 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant association between the administered induction medication and 30-day mortality was observed in unadjusted analyses (32.9% mortality for etomidate versus 33.8% mortality for S(+)-ketamine; P = 0.716; odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32; P = 0.711), as well as after adjustment for potential confounders (odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.73; P = 0.765; and risk difference 0.017; 95% CI, -0.051 to 0.084; P = 0.686). Likewise, in planned subgroup analyses for patients with confirmed traumatic brain injury and patients with isolated traumatic brain injury, no significant differences were found. Consistent results were found after multiple imputations of missing data.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis found no evidence for an association between the use of etomidate or S(+)-ketamine as an anesthetic agent for intubation in patients with traumatic brain injury and mortality after 30 days in the prehospital setting, suggesting that the choice of induction agent may not influence the patient mortality rate in this population.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

The Effect of Propofol on Peri-Induction Hemodynamics and Resuscitation in Operative Penetrating Trauma

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhaging trauma patients may be disproportionately affected by choice of induction agent during rapid sequence intubation (RSI). Etomidate, ketamine, and propofol are safe in the trauma population-at-large but have not been assessed in patients with ongoing hemorrhage. We hypothesize that in hemorrhaging patients with penetrating injury, propofol deleteriously affects peri-induction hypotension compared to etomidate and ketamine.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study. Primary outcome was the effect of induction agent on peri-induction systolic blood pressure. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of peri-induction vasopressor use and quantity of peri-induction blood transfusion requirements. Linear multivariate regression modeling assessed the effect of induction agent on the variables of interest.

RESULTS

169 patients were included, 146 received propofol and 23 received etomidate or ketamine. Univariate analysis revealed no difference in peri-induction systolic blood pressure (P = .53), peri-induction vasopressor administration (P = .62), or transfusion requirements within the first hour after induction (PRBC P = .24, FFP P = .19, PLT P = .29). Choice of RSI agent did not independently predict peri-induction systolic blood pressure or blood product administration. Rather, only presenting shock index independently predicted peri-induction hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to directly assess the peri-induction effects of anesthetic induction agent choice in penetrating trauma patients undergoing emergent hemorrhage control surgery. Propofol does not appear to worsen peri-induction hypotension regardless of dose. Patient physiology is most predictive of peri-induction hypotension.

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma/American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma: Clinical protocol for damage-control resuscitation for the adult trauma patient

ABSTRACT

Damage-control resuscitation in the care of critically injured trauma patients aims to limit blood loss and prevent and treat coagulopathy by combining early definitive hemorrhage control, hypotensive resuscitation, and early and balanced use of blood products (hemostatic resuscitation) and the use of other hemostatic agents. This clinical protocol has been developed to provide evidence-based recommendations for optimal damage-control resuscitation in the care of trauma patients with hemorrhage.

Perspective: the top 11 priorities to improve trauma outcomes, from system to patient level

BACKGROUND

The Haemorrhage, Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, Exposure/Environmental control approach to individual patient management in trauma is well established and embedded in numerous training courses worldwide. Further improvements in trauma outcomes are likely to result from a combination of system-level interventions in prevention and quality improvement, and from a sophisticated approach to clinical innovation.

TOP ELEVEN TRAUMA PRIORITIES

Based on a narrative review of remaining preventable mortality and morbidity in trauma, the top eleven priorities for those working throughout the spectrum of trauma care, from policy-makers to clinicians, should be: (1) investment in effective trauma prevention (likely to be the most cost-effective intervention); (2) prioritisation of resources, quality improvement and innovation in prehospital care (where the most preventable mortality remains); (3) building a high-performance trauma team; (4) applying evidence-based clinical interventions that stop bleeding, open & protect the airway, and optimise breathing most effectively; (5) maintaining enough circulating blood volume and ensuring adequate cardiac function; (6) recognising the role of the intensive care unit in modern damage control surgery; (7) prioritising good intensive care unit intercurrent care, especially prophylaxis for thromboembolic disease; (8) conducting a thorough tertiary survey, noting that on average the intensive care unit is where approximately 15% of injuries are detected; (9) facilitating early extubation; (10) investing in formal quantitative and qualitative quality assurance and improvement; and (11) improving clinical trial design.

CONCLUSION

Dramatic reductions in population trauma mortality and injury case fatality rate over recent decades have demonstrated the value of a comprehensive approach to trauma quality and process improvement. Continued attention to these principles, targeting areas with highest remaining preventable mortality while also prioritising functional outcomes, should remain the focus of both clinician and policy-makers.

Rapid sequence intubation and the role of the emergency medicine pharmacist: 2022 update

PURPOSE

The dosing, potential adverse effects, and clinical outcomes of the most commonly utilized pharmacologic agents for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) are reviewed for the practicing emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP).

SUMMARY

RSI is the process of establishing a safe, functional respiratory system in patients unable to effectively breathe on their own. Various medications are chosen to sedate and even paralyze the patient to facilitate an efficient endotracheal intubation. The mechanism of action and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of these agents were described in a 2011 review. Since then, the role of the EMP as well as the published evidence regarding RSI agents, including dosing, adverse effects, and clinical outcomes, has grown. It is necessary for the practicing EMP to update previous practice patterns in order to continue to provide optimal patient care.

CONCLUSION

While the agents used in RSI have changed little, knowledge regarding optimal dosing, appropriate patient selection, and possible adverse effects continues to be gained. The EMP is a key member of the bedside care team and uniquely positioned to communicate this evolving data.

A retrospective data analysis on the induction medications used in trauma rapid sequence intubations and their effects on outcomes

PURPOSE

Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in trauma patients is common; however, the induction agents used have been debated. We determined which induction medications were used most frequently for adult trauma RSIs and their associations with hemodynamics and outcomes. We hypothesized that etomidate is the most commonly used induction agent and has similar outcomes to other induction agents.

METHODS

This retrospective review at two U.S. level I trauma centers evaluated adult trauma patients undergoing RSI within 24 h of admission, between 01/01/2016 and 12/31/2017. We compared patient characteristics and outcomes by induction agent. Comparisons on the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes of peri-intubation hypotension, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), ventilator days, and complications used logistic regression or negative binomial regression. Regression models adjusted for hospital site, age, patient severity measures, and intubation location.

RESULTS

Among 1303 trauma patients undergoing RSI within 24 h of admission, 948 (73%) were intubated in the emergency department (ED) and 325 (25%) in the operating room (OR). The most common induction agents were etomidate (68%), propofol (17%), and ketamine (11%). In-hospital mortality was highest in the etomidate group (25.5%), followed by ketamine (17%), and propofol (1.8%).

CONCLUSION

Etomidate was most commonly used in ED intubations; propofol was most used in the OR. Compared to propofol, patients induced with etomidate had higher mortality and complication rates. Findings should be interpreted with caution given limited generalizability and residual confounding by indication.

Mapping haemodynamic changes with rapid sequence induction agents in the emergency department

OBJECTIVE

Patients intubated in the ED are at an increased risk of post-intubation hypotension. However, evidence regarding the most appropriate induction agent is lacking. The present study aims to describe and compare the haemodynamic effect of propofol, ketamine and thiopentone during rapid sequence induction.

METHODS

This is an observational study using data prospectively collected from the Australian and New Zealand Emergency Department Airway Registry between June 2012 and March 2019. The distribution of induction agents across medical and trauma patients were obtained with descriptive statistics. The relationship between induction agent, dose and change in pre- and post-intubation systolic blood pressure (SBP) was described using multivariable logistic regression. The SBP pre- and post-intubation was the primary measure of haemodynamic stability.

RESULTS

From the 5063 intubation episodes, 2229 met the inclusion criteria. Of those, 785 (35.2%) patients were induced with thiopentone, 773 (34.7%) with propofol and 671 (30.1%) with ketamine. Of the included population, 396 (17.8%) patients experienced a reduction in pre-intubation SBP exceeding 20%. Both propofol (P = 0.01) and ketamine (P = 0.01) had an independent and dose-dependent association with hypotension, noting that a higher proportion of patients induced with ketamine had a shock index exceeding 0.9.

CONCLUSION

Propofol was associated with post-intubation hypotension and it is recommended clinicians consider using the lowest effective dose to reduce this risk. Reflecting its perceived haemodynamic stability, patients who received ketamine were more likely to have a higher shock index; however, there was also an association with post-intubation hypotension.

Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Rapid Sequence Induction (RSI) is used for emergency tracheal intubation to minimise the risk of pulmonary aspiration of stomach contents. Ketamine and propofol are two commonly used induction agents for RSI in trauma patients. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal induction agent for RSI in the trauma population. The aim of this study was to compare 30-day mortality in trauma patients after emergency intubation prehospitally or within 30 min after arrival in the trauma centre using either ketamine or propofol for RSI.

METHODS

In this investigator-initiated, retrospective study we included adult trauma patients emergently intubated with ketamine or propofol registered in the local trauma registry at Rigshospitalet, a tertiary university hospital that hosts a level-1 trauma centre. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital and Intensive Care Unit length of stay as well as duration of mechanical ventilation. We analysed outcomes using multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for age, sex, injury severity score, shock (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg) and Glasgow Coma Scale score before intubation and present results as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

From January 1st, 2015 through December 31st, 2019 we identified a total of 548 eligible patients. A total of 228 and 320 patients received ketamine and propofol, respectively. The 30-day mortality for patients receiving ketamine and propofol was 20.2% and 22.8% (P = 0.46), respectively. Adjusted OR for 30-day mortality was 0.98 [0.58-1.66], P = 0.93. We found no significant association between type of induction agent and hospital length of stay, Intensive Care Unit length of stay or duration of mechanical ventilation.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, trauma patients intubated with ketamine did not have a lower 30-day mortality as compared with propofol.