Campbell Ronna L, Bellolio M Fernanda, Knutson Benjamin D, Bellamkonda Venkatesh R, Fedko Martin G, Nestler David M, Hess Erik P
Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2015 Jan-Feb;3(1):76-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2014.06.007. Epub 2014 Aug 29.
Epinephrine is the drug of choice for the management of anaphylaxis, and fatal anaphylaxis is associated with delayed epinephrine administration. Data on adverse cardiovascular (CV) complications and epinephrine overdose are limited.
To compare rates of CV adverse events and epinephrine overdoses associated with anaphylaxis management between various routes of epinephrine administration among patients with anaphylaxis in the emergency department.
This was an observational cohort study from April 2008 to July 2012. Patients in the emergency department who met diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis were included. We collected demographics; route of epinephrine administration; trigger; overdose; and adverse CV events, including arrhythmia, cardiac ischemia, stroke, angina, and hypertension.
The study cohort included 573 patients, of whom, 301 (57.6%) received at least 1 dose of epinephrine. A total of 362 doses of epinephrine were administered to 301 patients: 67.7% intramuscular (IM) autoinjector, 19.6% IM injection, 8.3% subcutaneous injection, 3.3% intravenous (IV) bolus, and 1.1% IV continuous infusion. There were 8 CV adverse events and 4 overdoses with 8 different patients. All the overdoses occurred when epinephrine was administered IV bolus. Adverse CV events were associated with 3 of 30 doses of IV bolus epinephrine compared with 4 of 316 doses of IM epinephrine (10% vs 1.3%; odds ratio 8.7 [95% CI, 1.8-40.7], P = .006). Similarly, overdose occurred with 4 of 30 doses of IV bolus epinephrine compared with 0 of 316 doses of IM epinephrine (13.3% vs 0%; odds ratio 61.3 [95% CI, 7.5 to infinity], P < .001).
The risk of overdose and adverse CV events is significantly higher with IV bolus epinephrine administration. Analysis of the data supports the safety of IM epinephrine and a need for extreme caution and further education about IV bolus epinephrine in anaphylaxis.
肾上腺素是治疗过敏反应的首选药物,致命性过敏反应与肾上腺素给药延迟有关。关于心血管不良并发症和肾上腺素过量的数据有限。
比较急诊科过敏反应患者中不同肾上腺素给药途径在过敏反应治疗中相关的心血管不良事件发生率和肾上腺素过量情况。
这是一项2008年4月至2012年7月的观察性队列研究。纳入急诊科符合过敏反应诊断标准的患者。我们收集了人口统计学资料、肾上腺素给药途径、诱发因素、过量情况以及心血管不良事件,包括心律失常、心肌缺血、中风、心绞痛和高血压。
研究队列包括573名患者,其中301名(57.6%)接受了至少1剂肾上腺素。共向301名患者给予了362剂肾上腺素:67.7%通过肌内(IM)自动注射器给药,19.6%通过肌内注射给药,8.3%通过皮下注射给药,3.3%通过静脉推注给药,1.1%通过静脉持续输注给药。有8例心血管不良事件和4例过量情况,涉及8名不同患者。所有过量情况均发生在静脉推注肾上腺素时。与316剂肌内注射肾上腺素中的4例相比,30剂静脉推注肾上腺素中有3例出现心血管不良事件(10%对1.3%;优势比8.7[95%CI,1.8 - 40.7],P = 0.006)。同样,30剂静脉推注肾上腺素中有4例出现过量情况,而316剂肌内注射肾上腺素中无过量情况(13.3%对0%;优势比61.3[95%CI,7.5至无穷大],P < 0.001)。
静脉推注肾上腺素给药时,过量和心血管不良事件的风险显著更高。数据分析支持肌内注射肾上腺素的安全性,以及在过敏反应中对静脉推注肾上腺素需极度谨慎并进行进一步教育的必要性。