高剂量胰岛素治疗钙通道阻滞剂中毒患者的血管舒张:氨氯地平与非二氢吡啶的比较

IF 3.3
Jon B Cole, Samantha C Lee, Matthew E Prekker, Nathan M Kunzler, Kelly A Considine, Brian E Driver, Michael A Puskarich, Travis D Olives
{"title":"高剂量胰岛素治疗钙通道阻滞剂中毒患者的血管舒张:氨氯地平与非二氢吡啶的比较","authors":"Jon B Cole,&nbsp;Samantha C Lee,&nbsp;Matthew E Prekker,&nbsp;Nathan M Kunzler,&nbsp;Kelly A Considine,&nbsp;Brian E Driver,&nbsp;Michael A Puskarich,&nbsp;Travis D Olives","doi":"10.1080/15563650.2022.2131565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> High dose insulin (HDI), an inotrope and vasodilator, is a standard therapy for calcium channel blocker (CCB) poisoning. HDI causes vasodilation by stimulating endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS). Most literature supporting HDI for CCB poisoning involves verapamil toxicity; however, amlodipine now causes more CCB poisonings. Unlike other CCBs, amlodipine stimulates eNOS and may cause synergistic vasodilation with HDI. The purpose of this study was to determine if amlodipine-poisoned patients treated with HDI had more evidence of vasodilation than similarly treated patients with non-dihydropyridine (non-DHP) poisoning.<b>Methods:</b> This was a retrospective study from a single poison center. Cases were identified via the generic code \"Calcium Antagonists\" in which the therapy \"High Dose Insulin/Glucose\" was \"performed, whether or not recommended\" from 2019-2021. Evidence of vasodilation was assessed via maximum number of vasopressor infusions per case, vasopressor doses, and use of rescue methylene blue to treat refractory vasoplegia.<b>Results:</b> Thirty-three patients were enrolled: 18 poisoned with amlodipine, 15 with non-DHPs (verapamil <i>n</i> = 10, diltiazem <i>n</i> = 5). The median number of maximum concomitant vasopressors in the amlodipine group was 3 (IQR: 2-5; range 0-6) and 2 in the non-DHP group (IQR: 1-3; range 0-5; <i>p</i> = 0.04); median difference in maximum concomitant vasopressors between groups was 1 (95% confidence interval: 0-2). Median maximum epinephrine dosing was higher in the amlodipine group (0.31 mcg/kg/min) compared to non-DHPs (0.09 mcg/kg/min; <i>p</i> = 0.03). Use of rescue methylene blue was more common in the amlodipine group (7/18 [39%]) than in the non-DHP group (0; <i>p</i> = 0.009).<b>Conclusions:</b> Amlodipine poisoned patients treated with HDI required more vasopressors, higher doses of epinephrine, and more often received rescue methylene blue than similarly treated patients with verapamil or diltiazem poisoning. These differences suggest amlodipine-poisoned patients had more evidence of vasodilation. Further study is warranted to determine if synergistic vasodilation occurs when HDI is used to treat amlodipine poisoning.</p>","PeriodicalId":520593,"journal":{"name":"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)","volume":" ","pages":"1205-1213"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vasodilation in patients with calcium channel blocker poisoning treated with high-dose insulin: a comparison of amlodipine versus non-dihydropyridines.\",\"authors\":\"Jon B Cole,&nbsp;Samantha C Lee,&nbsp;Matthew E Prekker,&nbsp;Nathan M Kunzler,&nbsp;Kelly A Considine,&nbsp;Brian E Driver,&nbsp;Michael A Puskarich,&nbsp;Travis D Olives\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15563650.2022.2131565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> High dose insulin (HDI), an inotrope and vasodilator, is a standard therapy for calcium channel blocker (CCB) poisoning. HDI causes vasodilation by stimulating endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS). Most literature supporting HDI for CCB poisoning involves verapamil toxicity; however, amlodipine now causes more CCB poisonings. Unlike other CCBs, amlodipine stimulates eNOS and may cause synergistic vasodilation with HDI. The purpose of this study was to determine if amlodipine-poisoned patients treated with HDI had more evidence of vasodilation than similarly treated patients with non-dihydropyridine (non-DHP) poisoning.<b>Methods:</b> This was a retrospective study from a single poison center. Cases were identified via the generic code \\\"Calcium Antagonists\\\" in which the therapy \\\"High Dose Insulin/Glucose\\\" was \\\"performed, whether or not recommended\\\" from 2019-2021. Evidence of vasodilation was assessed via maximum number of vasopressor infusions per case, vasopressor doses, and use of rescue methylene blue to treat refractory vasoplegia.<b>Results:</b> Thirty-three patients were enrolled: 18 poisoned with amlodipine, 15 with non-DHPs (verapamil <i>n</i> = 10, diltiazem <i>n</i> = 5). The median number of maximum concomitant vasopressors in the amlodipine group was 3 (IQR: 2-5; range 0-6) and 2 in the non-DHP group (IQR: 1-3; range 0-5; <i>p</i> = 0.04); median difference in maximum concomitant vasopressors between groups was 1 (95% confidence interval: 0-2). Median maximum epinephrine dosing was higher in the amlodipine group (0.31 mcg/kg/min) compared to non-DHPs (0.09 mcg/kg/min; <i>p</i> = 0.03). Use of rescue methylene blue was more common in the amlodipine group (7/18 [39%]) than in the non-DHP group (0; <i>p</i> = 0.009).<b>Conclusions:</b> Amlodipine poisoned patients treated with HDI required more vasopressors, higher doses of epinephrine, and more often received rescue methylene blue than similarly treated patients with verapamil or diltiazem poisoning. These differences suggest amlodipine-poisoned patients had more evidence of vasodilation. Further study is warranted to determine if synergistic vasodilation occurs when HDI is used to treat amlodipine poisoning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1205-1213\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2022.2131565\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/10/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2022.2131565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

背景:大剂量胰岛素(HDI)是钙通道阻滞剂(CCB)中毒的标准治疗方法。HDI通过刺激内皮一氧化氮合酶(eNOS)引起血管舒张。大多数支持HDI治疗CCB中毒的文献涉及维拉帕米毒性;然而,氨氯地平现在引起更多的CCB中毒。与其他CCBs不同,氨氯地平刺激eNOS,并可能引起与HDI的协同血管舒张。本研究的目的是确定氨氯地平中毒患者接受HDI治疗是否比接受类似治疗的非二氢吡啶(非dhp)中毒患者有更多的血管舒张证据。方法:这是一项来自单一中毒中心的回顾性研究。病例通过通用代码“钙拮抗剂”进行鉴定,其中“高剂量胰岛素/葡萄糖”治疗在2019-2021年“进行,无论是否推荐”。血管舒张的证据通过每个病例的最大血管加压剂输注次数、血管加压剂剂量和使用抢救亚甲蓝治疗难治性血管截瘫来评估。结果:33例患者入组:氨氯地平中毒18例,非dhp中毒15例(维拉帕米10例,地尔硫卓5例)。氨氯地平组最大并发血管加压药物中位数为3种(IQR: 2-5;范围0-6),非dhp组为2 (IQR: 1-3;范围0 - 5;p = 0.04);两组间最大合并血管加压药物的中位差为1(95%可信区间:0-2)。氨氯地平组肾上腺素的中位最大剂量(0.31 mcg/kg/min)高于非dhps组(0.09 mcg/kg/min;p = 0.03)。氨氯地平组(7/18[39%])比非dhp组(0;p = 0.009)。结论:与维拉帕米或地尔硫卓中毒的患者相比,HDI治疗的氨氯地平中毒患者需要更多的血管加压剂,更高剂量的肾上腺素,并且更频繁地接受亚甲基蓝抢救。这些差异表明氨氯地平中毒患者有更多血管舒张的证据。需要进一步的研究来确定HDI治疗氨氯地平中毒时是否会发生协同血管舒张。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Vasodilation in patients with calcium channel blocker poisoning treated with high-dose insulin: a comparison of amlodipine versus non-dihydropyridines.

Background: High dose insulin (HDI), an inotrope and vasodilator, is a standard therapy for calcium channel blocker (CCB) poisoning. HDI causes vasodilation by stimulating endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS). Most literature supporting HDI for CCB poisoning involves verapamil toxicity; however, amlodipine now causes more CCB poisonings. Unlike other CCBs, amlodipine stimulates eNOS and may cause synergistic vasodilation with HDI. The purpose of this study was to determine if amlodipine-poisoned patients treated with HDI had more evidence of vasodilation than similarly treated patients with non-dihydropyridine (non-DHP) poisoning.Methods: This was a retrospective study from a single poison center. Cases were identified via the generic code "Calcium Antagonists" in which the therapy "High Dose Insulin/Glucose" was "performed, whether or not recommended" from 2019-2021. Evidence of vasodilation was assessed via maximum number of vasopressor infusions per case, vasopressor doses, and use of rescue methylene blue to treat refractory vasoplegia.Results: Thirty-three patients were enrolled: 18 poisoned with amlodipine, 15 with non-DHPs (verapamil n = 10, diltiazem n = 5). The median number of maximum concomitant vasopressors in the amlodipine group was 3 (IQR: 2-5; range 0-6) and 2 in the non-DHP group (IQR: 1-3; range 0-5; p = 0.04); median difference in maximum concomitant vasopressors between groups was 1 (95% confidence interval: 0-2). Median maximum epinephrine dosing was higher in the amlodipine group (0.31 mcg/kg/min) compared to non-DHPs (0.09 mcg/kg/min; p = 0.03). Use of rescue methylene blue was more common in the amlodipine group (7/18 [39%]) than in the non-DHP group (0; p = 0.009).Conclusions: Amlodipine poisoned patients treated with HDI required more vasopressors, higher doses of epinephrine, and more often received rescue methylene blue than similarly treated patients with verapamil or diltiazem poisoning. These differences suggest amlodipine-poisoned patients had more evidence of vasodilation. Further study is warranted to determine if synergistic vasodilation occurs when HDI is used to treat amlodipine poisoning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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