The effect of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in traumatic brain injury: evaluation of some hemodynamic and intracranial pressure changes

Association of Early Dexmedetomidine Utilization With Clinical and Functional Outcomes Following Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Transforming Clinical Research and Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study

OBJECTIVE

To examine early sedation patterns, as well as the association of dexmedetomidine exposure, with clinical and functional outcomes among mechanically ventilated patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data.

SETTING

Eighteen Level-1 Trauma Centers, United States.

PATIENTS

Adult (age > 17) patients with msTBI (as defined by Glasgow Coma Scale < 13) who required mechanical ventilation from the Transforming Clinical Research and Knowledge in TBI (TRACK-TBI) study.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Using propensity-weighted models, we examined the association of early dexmedetomidine exposure (within the first 5 d of ICU admission) with the primary outcome of 6-month Glasgow Outcomes Scale Extended (GOS-E) and the following secondary outcomes: length of hospital stay, hospital mortality, 6-month Disability Rating Scale (DRS), and 6-month mortality. The study population included 352 subjects who required mechanical ventilation within 24 hours of admission. The initial sedative medication was propofol for 240 patients (68%), midazolam for 59 patients (17%), ketamine for 6 patients (2%), dexmedetomidine for 3 patients (1%), and 43 patients (12%) never received continuous sedation. Early dexmedetomidine was administered in 77 of the patients (22%), usually as a second-line agent. Compared with unexposed patients, early dexmedetomidine exposure was not associated with better 6-month GOS-E (weighted odds ratio [OR] = 1.48; 95% CI, 0.98-2.25). Early dexmedetomidine exposure was associated with lower DRS (weighted OR = -3.04; 95% CI, -5.88 to -0.21). In patients requiring ICP monitoring within the first 24 hours of admission, early dexmedetomidine exposure was associated with higher 6-month GOS-E score (OR 2.17; 95% CI, 1.24-3.80), lower DRS score (adjusted mean difference, -5.81; 95% CI, -9.38 to 2.25), and reduced length of hospital stay (hazard ratio = 1.50; 95% CI, 1.02-2.20).

CONCLUSION

Variation exists in early sedation choice among mechanically ventilated patients with msTBI. Early dexmedetomidine exposure was not associated with improved 6-month functional outcomes in the entire population, although may have clinical benefit in patients with indications for ICP monitoring.

Safety, Efficacy, and Clinical Outcomes of Dexmedetomidine for Sedation in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review

Dexmedetomidine is a promising alternative sedative agent for moderate-severe Traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. Although the data are limited, the posited benefits of dexmedetomidine in this population are a reduction in secondary brain injury compared with current standard sedative regimens. In this scoping review, we critically appraised the literature to examine the effects of dexmedetomidine in patients with moderate-severe TBI to examine the safety, efficacy, and cerebral and systemic physiological outcomes within this population. We sought to identify gaps in the literature and generate directions for future research. Two researchers and a librarian queried PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and APA PsycINFO databases. Of 920 studies imported for screening, 11 were identified for inclusion in the review. The primary outcomes in the included studied were cerebral physiology, systemic hemodynamics, sedation levels and delirium, and the presence of paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity. Dexmedetomidine dosing ranged from 0.2 to 1 ug/kg/h, with 3 studies using initial boluses of 0.8 to 1.0 ug/kg over 10 minutes. Dexmedetomidine used independently or as an adjunct seems to exhibit a similar hemodynamic safety profile compared with standard sedation regimens, albeit with transient episodes of bradycardia and hypotension, decrease episodes of agitation and may serve to alleviate symptoms of sympathetic hyperactivity. This scoping review suggests that dexmedetomidine is a safe and efficacious sedation strategy in patients with TBI. Given its rapid onset of action and anxiolytic properties, dexmedetomidine may serve as a feasible sedative for TBI patients.

Dexmedetomidine Utilization During Air Medical Transport for Agitated Patients

Fixed Wing Air Ambulance providers routinely transport patients agitated from traumatic brain injury sequelae across long distances in a unique environment. The current paradigm limits options available to air medical clinicians to those routinely found on ground based, short distance vehicles, plus whatever a sending facility might be willing to provide. We postulate that dexmedetomidine offers a safe, effective alternative to improve patient care and enhance the safe operation of aircraft.

Modern Sedation and Analgesia Strategies in Neurocritical Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients with acute neurologic injury require a specialized approach to critical care, particularly with regard to sedation and analgesia. This article reviews the most recent advances in methodology, pharmacology, and best practices of sedation and analgesia for the neurocritical care population.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to established agents such as propofol and midazolam, dexmedetomidine and ketamine are two sedative agents that play an increasingly central role, as they have a favorable side effect profile on cerebral hemodynamics and rapid offset can facilitate repeated neurologic exams. Recent evidence suggests that dexmedetomidine is also an effective component when managing delirium. Combined analgo-sedation with low doses of short-acting opiates is a preferred sedation strategy to facilitate neurologic exams as well as patient-ventilator synchrony. Optimal care for patients in the neurocritical care population requires an adaptation of general ICU strategies that incorporates understanding of neurophysiology and the need for close neuromonitoring. Recent data continues to improve care tailored to this population.

Pharmacologic Interventions to Prevent Delirium in Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

To compare the relative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions in the prevention of delirium in ICU trauma patients.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Embase, and Cochrane Registry of Clinical Trials from database inception until June 7, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacologic interventions in critically ill trauma patients.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.

DATA EXTRACTION

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for network analysis were followed. Random-effects models were fit using a Bayesian approach to network meta-analysis. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, each with 95% credible intervals. Treatment rankings were estimated for each outcome in the form of surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total 3,541 citations were screened; six randomized clinical trials (n = 382 patients) were included. Compared with combined propofol-dexmedetomidine, there may be no difference in delirium prevalence with dexmedetomidine (HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.39-6.94), propofol (HR 2.38, 95% CI 0.68-11.36), nor haloperidol (HR 3.38, 95% CI 0.65-21.79); compared with dexmedetomidine alone, there may be no effect with propofol (HR 1.66, 95% CI 0.79-3.69) nor haloperidol (HR 2.30, 95% CI 0.88-6.61).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that there is no difference found between pharmacologic interventions on delirium occurrence, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, or mortality, in trauma ICU patients.

Neurosurgical Anesthesia: Optimizing Outcomes with Agent Selection

Anesthesia in neurosurgery embodies a vital element in the development of neurosurgical intervention. This undisputed interest has offered surgeons and anesthesiologists an array of anesthetic selections to utilize, though with this allowance comes the equally essential requirement of implementing a maximally appropriate agent. To date, there remains a lack of consensus and official guidance on optimizing anesthetic choice based on operating priorities including hemodynamic parameters (e.g., CPP, ICP, MAP) in addition to the route of procedure and pathology. In this review, the authors detail the development of neuroanesthesia, summarize the advantages and drawbacks of various anesthetic classes and agents, while lastly cohesively organizing the current literature of randomized trials on neuroanesthesia across various procedures.