Are there any contraindications to using midodrine for intradialytic hypotension?

Oral Midodrine Administration During the First 24 Hours of Sepsis to Reduce the Need of Vasoactive Agents: Placebo-Controlled Feasibility Clinical Trial

Objectives:

Our preliminary data and observational studies suggested an increasing “off label” use of oral midodrine as a vasopressor sparing agent in various groups of critically ill patients, including those with sepsis. We designed this clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility of use of midodrine hydrochloride in early sepsis to reduce the duration for IV vasopressors and decrease ICU and hospital length of stay.

Design:

Pilot, two-center, placebo-controlled, double blinded randomized clinical trial.

Setting:

Medical ICUs at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi were the study sites.

Patients and Methods:

Adult patients (≥ 18 yr old) were included within 24 hours of meeting the Sepsis-3 definition if the mean arterial pressure remained less than 70 mm Hg despite receiving timely antibiotics and initial IV fluid bolus of 30 cc/kg.

Intervention:

Three doses of 10 mg midodrine versus placebo were administered.

Measurements and Main Results:

Total 32 patients were randomized into midodrine (n = 17) and placebo groups (n = 15). There were no major differences in baseline variables between the groups except for higher baseline creatinine in the midodrine group (2.0 ± 0.9 mg/dL) versus placebo group (1.4 ± 0.6 mg /dL), p = 0.03. The median duration of IV vasopressor requirement was 14.5 ± 8.1 hours in midodrine group versus 18.8 ± 7.1 hours in the placebo group, p value equals to 0.19. Patients in the midodrine group needed 729 ± 963 norepinephrine equivalent compared with 983 ± 1,569 norepinephrine equivalent in the placebo group, p value equals to 0.59. ICU length of stay was 2.29 days (interquartile range, 1.65–3.9 d) in the midodrine group, compared with 2.45 days (interquartile range, 1.6–3.2 d) in the placebo group, p value equals to 0.36. No serious adverse events were observed in either group.

Conclusions:

Phase II clinical trial powered for clinical outcomes (duration of vasopressor use, need for central venous catheter, and ICU and hospital length of stay) is justified.

Hemodynamic Instability during Dialysis: The Potential Role of Intradialytic Exercise

Acute haemodynamic instability is a natural consequence of disordered cardiovascular physiology during haemodialysis (HD). Prevalence of intradialytic hypotension (IDH) can be as high as 20–30%, contributing to subclinical, transient myocardial ischemia. In the long term, this results in progressive, maladaptive cardiac remodeling and impairment of left ventricular function. This is thought to be a major contributor to increased cardiovascular mortality in end stage renal disease (ESRD). Medical strategies to acutely attenuate haemodynamic instability during HD are suboptimal. Whilst a programme of intradialytic exercise training appears to facilitate numerous chronic adaptations, little is known of the acute physiological response to this type of exercise. In particular, the potential for intradialytic exercise to acutely stabilise cardiovascular hemodynamics, thus preventing IDH and myocardial ischemia, has not been explored. This narrative review aims to summarise the characteristics and causes of acute haemodynamic instability during HD, with an overview of current medical therapies to treat IDH. Moreover, we discuss the acute physiological response to intradialytic exercise with a view to determining the potential for this nonmedical intervention to stabilise cardiovascular haemodynamics during HD, improve coronary perfusion, and reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in ESRD.

Feasibility, Utility, and Safety of Midodrine During Recovery Phase From Septic Shock

BACKGROUND

We describe the feasibility, utility, and safety of oral midodrine to replace IV vasopressors during recovery from septic shock.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study performed in a medical ICU. All study subjects had a diagnosis of septic shock requiring at least 24 hours of IV vasopressors and demonstrated clinical stability with stable or decreasing doses of IV vasopressors. The two groups compared were those who received IV vasopressors only and those who received IV vasopressors with adjunctive midodrine.

RESULTS

Of the 275 study patients, 140 received an IV vasopressor only and 135 received midodrine in addition to an IV vasopressor. There was no difference between the groups' demographics (age, sex, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation 4 score). Mean IV vasopressor duration was 3.8 days in the IV vasopressor only group and 2.9 days in the IV vasopressor with midodrine group (P < .001). An IV vasopressor was reinstituted after discontinuation in 21 of 140 (15%) patients in the IV vasopressor only group and in 7 of 135 (5.2%) patients in the IV vasopressor with midodrine group (P = .007). ICU length of stay was 9.4 days in the IV vasopressor only group and 7.5 days in the IV vasopressor with midodrine group (P = .017). There were no complications associated with midodrine use except transient bradycardia in one patient, which resolved upon discontinuation of midodrine.

CONCLUSIONS

Midodrine may reduce the duration of IV vasopressors during recovery phase from septic shock and may be associated with a reduction in length of stay in the ICU.

[Fluid overload and arterial hypertension in hemodialysis patients]

The water sodium overload is a factor of morbi-mortality and its treatment is one of the markers of adequacy of the hemodialysis treatment. Its first clinical assessment was improved by tools such as echocardiography and ultrasonography of the inferior vena cava, the per-dialytic curve of plasma volume, measuring BNP or proBNP and by impedancemetry. The combination of the evaluation of these parameters and of the clinical situation allows one to assess the extracellular overload, the state of the blood volume and the potential of plasma refilling. The latter is a key factor of the per-dialytic hemodynamic tolerance. It is itself a determining factor in weight can be achieved at the end of the session. Getting the "dry" weight can require modifications of the prescriptions of the hemodialysis sessions, a filling by albumin even a drugs support. Finally, the overload treatment is the central part of the treatment of arterial hypertension, which has to benefit however often from antihypertensive treatment the profit of which is demonstrated.