Assessment of Midodrine Initiation and Vasopressor Liberation in Patients With Septic Shock in a Community-Teaching Hospital.

IF 1.1 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Joel Kennedy, Alyssa Osmonson, Jessica A Starr, Sarah B Blackwell
{"title":"Assessment of Midodrine Initiation and Vasopressor Liberation in Patients With Septic Shock in a Community-Teaching Hospital.","authors":"Joel Kennedy, Alyssa Osmonson, Jessica A Starr, Sarah B Blackwell","doi":"10.1177/08971900251384131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> In observational trials, midodrine decreased vasopressor duration, length of stay (LOS), and mortality but not in randomized controlled trials. The goal of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of using midodrine to wean intravenous (IV) vasopressors in patients with septic shock. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> This single-center, retrospective study was conducted at a 505-bed community teaching hospital between September 2021 and December 2022. Patients were ≥18 years of age with septic shock, admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), required IV vasopressors for hemodynamic support, and demonstrated clinical stability. Outcomes were compared across patients receiving IV vasopressors with midodrine vs. IV vasopressors alone. <b>Results:</b> Among 139 patients, midodrine was associated with increased time to IV vasopressor discontinuation, 5.5 ± 6.5 days vs. 2.4 ± 1.6 days (mean difference 3.1, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.7, <i>P</i> = 0.0003). In patients started on midodrine within 48 hours of stability, time to IV vasopressor discontinuation was similar to the vasopressor alone cohort. Secondary outcomes including ICU and hospital LOS after vasopressor initiation, ICU and in-hospital mortality, and ICU readmission were similar between groups. Twenty patients were discharged from the hospital on midodrine. Incident bradycardia was increased in the midodrine group, but hypertension was similar between groups. <b>Conclusions:</b> Patients in the midodrine group exhibited a longer time to vasopressor discontinuation; however, this difference was only apparent in those with midodrine initiation more than 48 hours after hemodynamic stability in a post-hoc subgroup analysis. These outcomes may be attributed to midodrine being used as salvage therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":16818,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacy practice","volume":" ","pages":"8971900251384131"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacy practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08971900251384131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: In observational trials, midodrine decreased vasopressor duration, length of stay (LOS), and mortality but not in randomized controlled trials. The goal of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of using midodrine to wean intravenous (IV) vasopressors in patients with septic shock. Materials and Methods: This single-center, retrospective study was conducted at a 505-bed community teaching hospital between September 2021 and December 2022. Patients were ≥18 years of age with septic shock, admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), required IV vasopressors for hemodynamic support, and demonstrated clinical stability. Outcomes were compared across patients receiving IV vasopressors with midodrine vs. IV vasopressors alone. Results: Among 139 patients, midodrine was associated with increased time to IV vasopressor discontinuation, 5.5 ± 6.5 days vs. 2.4 ± 1.6 days (mean difference 3.1, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.7, P = 0.0003). In patients started on midodrine within 48 hours of stability, time to IV vasopressor discontinuation was similar to the vasopressor alone cohort. Secondary outcomes including ICU and hospital LOS after vasopressor initiation, ICU and in-hospital mortality, and ICU readmission were similar between groups. Twenty patients were discharged from the hospital on midodrine. Incident bradycardia was increased in the midodrine group, but hypertension was similar between groups. Conclusions: Patients in the midodrine group exhibited a longer time to vasopressor discontinuation; however, this difference was only apparent in those with midodrine initiation more than 48 hours after hemodynamic stability in a post-hoc subgroup analysis. These outcomes may be attributed to midodrine being used as salvage therapy.

某社区教学医院感染性休克患者Midodrine起始和血管加压素释放的评估。
目的:在观察性试验中,米多卡因降低血管加压持续时间、住院时间(LOS)和死亡率,但在随机对照试验中没有。本研究的目的是评估在脓毒性休克患者中使用米多卡因戒断静脉(IV)血管加压药物的有效性和安全性。材料与方法:该单中心回顾性研究于2021年9月至2022年12月在一家拥有505个床位的社区教学医院进行。患者年龄≥18岁,患有感染性休克,住进重症监护病房(ICU),需要静脉血管加压药物进行血流动力学支持,临床表现稳定。结果比较了静脉血管加压药物联合米多卡因与静脉血管加压药物单独使用的患者。结果:139例患者中,midodrine与静脉停药时间增加相关,分别为5.5±6.5天对2.4±1.6天(平均差值3.1,95%可信区间1.5 ~ 4.7,P = 0.0003)。在稳定48小时内开始使用米多定的患者中,静脉停药的时间与单独使用血管加压素的患者相似。次要结局包括血管加压药物启动后ICU和医院LOS、ICU和院内死亡率以及ICU再入院,两组间相似。20例患者使用米多定出院。midodrine组的心动过缓发生率增加,但两组间高血压发生率相似。结论:米多定组患者血管加压药停药时间较长;然而,在事后亚组分析中,这种差异仅在血液动力学稳定后超过48小时才出现。这些结果可能归因于midodrine被用作救助性治疗。
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
Journal of pharmacy practice
Journal of pharmacy practice PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pharmacy Practice offers the practicing pharmacist topical, important, and useful information to support pharmacy practice and pharmaceutical care and expand the pharmacist"s professional horizons. The journal is presented in a single-topic, scholarly review format. Guest editors are selected for expertise in the subject area, who then recruit contributors from that practice or topic area.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信