Optimal Infusion Rate of Norepinephrine for Prevention of Spinal Hypotension for Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial, Using Up-Down Sequential Allocation.

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Fatima Khatoon, Mitko Kocarev, Roshan Fernando, Amber Naz, Fouzia Khalid, Eynas Omer Ibrahim Abdalla, Malachy Columb
{"title":"Optimal Infusion Rate of Norepinephrine for Prevention of Spinal Hypotension for Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial, Using Up-Down Sequential Allocation.","authors":"Fatima Khatoon, Mitko Kocarev, Roshan Fernando, Amber Naz, Fouzia Khalid, Eynas Omer Ibrahim Abdalla, Malachy Columb","doi":"10.1213/ANE.0000000000007231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Norepinephrine has recently been suggested to be as effective as phenylephrine for the prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Moreover, compared to phenylephrine, norepinephrine may be superior in maintaining heart rate (HR) and consequently, cardiac output (CO). A recent study demonstrated that norepinephrine given as a single intravenous bolus is approximately 13 times more potent than phenylephrine. However, it is uncertain whether this finding can be applied when these vasopressors are administered as infusions. Therefore, the optimum infusion rate of norepinephrine remains unknown. We aimed to determine the median effective dose (ED50; defined as the rate of vasopressor infusion required to prevent spinal hypotension in 50% of subjects) of both drugs needed to maintain maternal systolic blood pressure within 20% of the baseline after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery and to derive the relative potency ratio.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery with standardized spinal anesthesia were randomized into 2 groups. The first patient in group 1 received phenylephrine 1200 µg in normal saline 0.9% w/v 60 mL at 60 mL/h infusion rate (20 µg.min-1). The first patient in group 2 received norepinephrine 96 µg in normal saline 0.9% w/v 60 mL at 60 mL/h infusion rate (1.6 µg.min-1). Using up-down sequential allocation technique, the vasopressor dose for every subsequent patient was determined by the response in the previous patient. If effective, the next patient received a dose reduced by 150 µg of phenylephrine (2.5 µg.min-1) or 12 µg (0.2 µg.min-1) of norepinephrine. If ineffective, the dose for the next patient was increased by the same amount. The ED50s were determined according to the Dixon-Massey formula. Stroke volume (SV), HR, and CO were also measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ED50 was 12.7 µg.min-1 (95% CI, 10.5-14.9) for phenylephrine and 1.01 µg.min-1 (95% CI, 0.84-1.18) for norepinephrine, giving a potency ratio of 12.6 (95% CI, 9.92-15.9). HR, SV, and CO did not differ between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Norepinephrine is more potent than phenylephrine by a factor of approximately 13 when administered as infusion for equivalent maternal blood pressure control. Based on these findings, we recommend a variable rate prophylactic infusion of norepinephrine to be initiated at 1.9 to 3.8 µg.min-1 for the management of hypotension during cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia.</p>","PeriodicalId":7784,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and analgesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000007231","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Norepinephrine has recently been suggested to be as effective as phenylephrine for the prevention of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Moreover, compared to phenylephrine, norepinephrine may be superior in maintaining heart rate (HR) and consequently, cardiac output (CO). A recent study demonstrated that norepinephrine given as a single intravenous bolus is approximately 13 times more potent than phenylephrine. However, it is uncertain whether this finding can be applied when these vasopressors are administered as infusions. Therefore, the optimum infusion rate of norepinephrine remains unknown. We aimed to determine the median effective dose (ED50; defined as the rate of vasopressor infusion required to prevent spinal hypotension in 50% of subjects) of both drugs needed to maintain maternal systolic blood pressure within 20% of the baseline after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery and to derive the relative potency ratio.

Methods: Sixty healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery with standardized spinal anesthesia were randomized into 2 groups. The first patient in group 1 received phenylephrine 1200 µg in normal saline 0.9% w/v 60 mL at 60 mL/h infusion rate (20 µg.min-1). The first patient in group 2 received norepinephrine 96 µg in normal saline 0.9% w/v 60 mL at 60 mL/h infusion rate (1.6 µg.min-1). Using up-down sequential allocation technique, the vasopressor dose for every subsequent patient was determined by the response in the previous patient. If effective, the next patient received a dose reduced by 150 µg of phenylephrine (2.5 µg.min-1) or 12 µg (0.2 µg.min-1) of norepinephrine. If ineffective, the dose for the next patient was increased by the same amount. The ED50s were determined according to the Dixon-Massey formula. Stroke volume (SV), HR, and CO were also measured.

Results: The ED50 was 12.7 µg.min-1 (95% CI, 10.5-14.9) for phenylephrine and 1.01 µg.min-1 (95% CI, 0.84-1.18) for norepinephrine, giving a potency ratio of 12.6 (95% CI, 9.92-15.9). HR, SV, and CO did not differ between the groups.

Conclusions: Norepinephrine is more potent than phenylephrine by a factor of approximately 13 when administered as infusion for equivalent maternal blood pressure control. Based on these findings, we recommend a variable rate prophylactic infusion of norepinephrine to be initiated at 1.9 to 3.8 µg.min-1 for the management of hypotension during cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia.

预防剖宫产脊柱低血压的去甲肾上腺素最佳输注率:采用上下顺序分配的随机对照试验。
背景:最近有人认为去甲肾上腺素在预防剖宫产脊髓麻醉后低血压方面与苯肾上腺素一样有效。此外,与苯肾上腺素相比,去甲肾上腺素在维持心率(HR)和心输出量(CO)方面可能更有优势。最近的一项研究表明,去甲肾上腺素单次静脉注射的效力约为苯肾上腺素的 13 倍。然而,目前还不确定这一发现是否适用于输注这些血管加压药。因此,去甲肾上腺素的最佳输注速度仍然未知。我们的目的是确定两种药物的中位有效剂量(ED50,定义为防止 50%受试者出现脊髓性低血压所需的血管加压剂输注速度),以便在剖宫产脊髓麻醉后将产妇收缩压维持在基线的 20% 以内,并得出相对效力比:60 名健康的择期剖宫产患者在接受标准化脊髓麻醉后被随机分为两组。第一组患者接受苯肾上腺素 1200 µg 加入 0.9% w/v 普通生理盐水 60 mL 中,输注速度为 60 mL/h(20 µg.min-1)。第 2 组的第一位患者接受去甲肾上腺素 96 µg 加入 0.9% w/v 的生理盐水 60 mL,以 60 mL/h 的输注速度(1.6 µg.min-1)输注。采用上下顺序分配技术,根据前一位患者的反应决定后一位患者的血管加压剂剂量。如果有效,下一位患者的剂量将减少 150 µg 苯肾上腺素(2.5 µg.min-1)或 12 µg 去甲肾上腺素(0.2 µg.min-1)。如果效果不佳,下一位患者的剂量也会相应增加。ED50s 根据 Dixon-Massey 公式确定。同时还测量了每搏容量(SV)、心率和 CO:苯肾上腺素的 ED50 为 12.7 µg.min-1(95% CI,10.5-14.9),去甲肾上腺素的 ED50 为 1.01 µg.min-1(95% CI,0.84-1.18),效力比为 12.6(95% CI,9.92-15.9)。各组之间的心率、SV 和 CO 没有差异:结论:输注去甲肾上腺素比输注苯肾上腺素在控制产妇血压方面的效力高出约 13 倍。基于这些研究结果,我们建议以 1.9 至 3.8 µg.min-1 的速度开始输注去甲肾上腺素,以预防在脊髓麻醉下剖宫产时出现低血压。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Anesthesia and analgesia
Anesthesia and analgesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
7.00%
发文量
817
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of patients under the care of health care professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care medicine, and pain medicine. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the science of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical, laboratory, and administrative advances that guide therapy. Anesthesia & Analgesia seeks a balance between definitive clinical and management investigations and outstanding basic scientific reports. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts containing rigorous design and analysis, even if unusual in their approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信