Trends of vasopressor use in intensive care units in Colombia
Abstract
Introduction: Vasopressors are essential in the management of various types of shock.
Objective: To establish the trend of vasopressors use in the intensive care units (ICU) in a population of patients affiliated with the Colombian Health System, 2010-2017.
Methods: Observational trial using a population database of patients hospitalized in eleven ICUs in various cities in Colombia. The drugs dispensed to hospitalized patients over 18 years old, from January 2010 until December 2017 were considered. A review and analysis of the vasopressors dispensed per month was conducted, taking into account sociodemographic and pharmacological variables (vasopressor used and daily doses defined per 100/beds/day (DBD).
Results: 81,348 dispensations of vasopressors, equivalent to 26,414 treatments in 19,186 patients receiving care in 11 hospitals from 7 cities were reviewed. The mean age of patients was 66.3±18.1 years and 52.6 % were males. Of the total number of treatments recorded, 17,658 (66.8 %) were with just one vasopressor. Norepinephrine was the most frequently prescribed drug (75.9 % of the prescriptions dispensed; 60.5 DBD), followed by adrenaline (26.6 %; 41.6 DBD), dopamine (19.4%), dobutamine (16.0 %), vasopressin (8.5 %) and phenylephrine (0.9 %). The use of norepinephrine increased from 2010 to 2017 (+6.19 DBD), whilst the use of other drugs decreased, particularly the use of adrenaline (-60.6 DBD) and dopamine (-10.8 DBD).
Conclusions: Norepinephrine is the most widely used vasopressor showing a growing trend in terms of its use during the study period, which is supported by evidence in favor of its effectiveness and safety in patients with shock.
References
Thongprayoon C, Cheungpasitporn W, Harrison AM, et al. Temporal trends in the utilization of vasopressors in intensive care units: an epidemiologic study. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2016;17(1):19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40360-016-0063-z
Vincent J-L, De Backer D. Circulatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(18):1726-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1208943
Sakr Y, Reinhart K, Vincent J-L, et al. Does dopamine administration in shock influence outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(3):589-97. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000201896.45809.E3
De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(9):779-89. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0907118
Alberti C, Brun-Buisson C, Burchardi H, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis and infection in ICU patients from an international multicentre cohort study. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28(2):108-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-001-1143-z
Gamper G, Havel C, Arrich J, et al. Vasopressors for hypotensive shock. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD003709. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003709.pub4
Ortiz G, Dueñas C, Rodríguez F, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis in Colombian intensive care units. Biomédica. 2014;34(1):40-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.v34i1.1439
Franky JF. Unidades de cuidado intensivo ¿ayuda, o exceso que castiga al sistema de salud? Medicina. 2011;33(1):47-52.
Presidencia de la República de Colombia. Decreto 2423 de 1996, actualizado a 2019. Por el cual se determina la nomenclatura y clasificación de los procedimientos médicos, quirúrgicos y hospitalarios del Manual Tarifario y se dictan otras disposiciones. Colombia [internet]. 2018 [citado: 2019 ago. 8]. Disponible en: https://consultorsalud.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/manual_tarifario_soat_de_salud_2019_-_consultorsalud_1.pdf
Overgaard CB, Džavík V. Inotropes and vasopressors. Circulation. 2008;118(10):1047-56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.728840
Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(3):486-552. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002255
Bangash MN, Kong ML, Pearse RM. Use of inotropes and vasopressor agents in critically ill patients. Br J Pharmacol. 2012;165(7):2015-33. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2011.01588.x
Morozowich ST, Ramakrishna H. Pharmacologic agents for acute hemodynamic instability: Recent advances in the management of perioperative shock-A systematic review. Ann Card Anaesth. 2015;18(4):543. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9784.166464
Zarychanski R, Ariano RE, Paunovic B, et al. Historical perspectives in critical care medicine: blood transfusion, intravenous fluids, inotropes/vasopressors, and antibiotics. Crit Care Clin. 2009;25(1):201-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccc.2008.10.003
Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, et al. Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(9):877-87. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa067373
Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(2):580-637. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827e83af
American College of Surgeons. Advanced Trauma Life Support Course 10th edition [internet]. 2018 [citado: 2019 sep. 19]. Disponible en: https://viaaerearcp.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/atls-2018.pdf
Jia X, Kowalski RG, Sciubba DM, et al. Critical care of traumatic spinal cord injury. J Intensive Care Med. 2013;28(1):12-23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0885066611403270
Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur J Heart Fail. 2016;18(8):891-975. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.592
Shaker MS, Wallace DV, Golden DB, et al. Anaphylaxis–a 2020 Practice Parameter Update, Systematic Review and GRADE Analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020;145:1082-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2020.01.017
WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. ATC/DDD Index. Oslo, Noruega [internet]. 2020 [citado: 2021 feb. 6]. Disponible en: https://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/.
World Health Organization. ATC-DDD Toolkit / DDD indicators. Ginebra, Suiza [internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 feb. 6]. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/tools/atc-ddd-toolkit/indicators.
Srivali N, Thongprayoon C, Cheungpasitporn W, et al. Trends of Vasopressor Using in Medical Intensive Care Unit: A 7-Year Cohort Study. Intens Care Med Exper. 2015;3(Suppl 1):A960. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/2197-425X-3-S1-A960
Myburgh JA, Higgins A, Jovanovska A, et al. A comparison of epinephrine and norepinephrine in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34(12):2226. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1219-0
Sakr Y, Jaschinski U, Wittebole X, et al. Sepsis in intensive care unit patients: worldwide data from the intensive care over nations audit. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018;5(12):ofy313. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy313
Rodríguez F, Barrera L, De La Rosa G, et al. The epidemiology of sepsis in Colombia: a prospective multicenter cohort study in ten university hospitals. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(7):1675-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e318218a35e
Jentzer JC, Wiley B, Bennett C, et al. Temporal trends and clinical outcomes associated with vasopressor and inotrope use in the cardiac intensive care unit. Shock. 2020;53(4):452-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000001390
Scheeren TWL, Bakker J, De Backer D, et al. Current use of vasopressors in septic shock. Ann Intensive Care. 2019;9(1):20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-019-0498-7
De Backer D, Aldecoa C, Njimi H, et al. Dopamine versus norepinephrine in the treatment of septic shock: a meta-analysis. Critical Care Med. 2012;40(3):725-30. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e31823778ee
Thiele H, Ohman EM, de Waha-Thiele S, et al. Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(32):2671-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz363
Downloads
Article metrics | |
---|---|
Abstract views | |
Galley vies | |
PDF Views | |
HTML views | |
Other views |