Intermittent versus continuous intravenous epoprostenol for the treatment of digital ischemia.

Abstract

Digital ischemia can be a painful complication of Raynaud's phenomenon or systemic sclerosis, which is caused by narrowing of blood vessels in the toes and hands. Epoprostenol is a potent vasodilator that may be used to treat digital ischemia in this patient population. Our institution provides epoprostenol infusion using two different administration techniques: a 30-h continuous infusion option and a 5-day intermittent 6-h infusion. In this retrospective chart review, we compared two administration techniques of intravenous epoprostenol administered to patients with digital ischemia. The primary outcome was to compare the efficacy of intravenous epoprostenol 30-h continuous infusion versus 5-day intermittent infusion, as defined by the presence of treatment failure. Between June 2019 and June 2020, 72 adult patient encounters met the inclusion criteria (intermittent: n = 20; continuous: n = 52). The primary outcome did not achieve a statistically significant difference between the two groups: intermittent 20% versus continuous 33.3% p = 0.390, odds ratio = 0.57 (95% confidence interval = 0.17-1.90). Adverse reactions were documented in 28% of patients across both treatment groups, and there was no difference detected when treatment groups were compared (25% vs 28.8%). Patients who received the 5-day infusion experienced a significantly longer average length of stay, with a mean of 8.9 days versus 3 days for those treated with the continuous 30-h infusion (p < 0.05; 95% confidence interval = 2.15-9.47). This study determined that the efficacy and safety profiles of the two administration techniques may not be comparable. Each protocol offers advantages over the other, and selection should be guided by patient history and risk factors to optimize management.