Department of Clinical Pharmacology Bispebjerg Hospital University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.
Department of Clinical Medicine Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Nov 3;9(21):e016828. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.016828. Epub 2020 Oct 26.
Background Intravenous high-dose glucagon is a recommended antidote against beta-blocker poisonings, but clinical effects are unclear. We therefore investigated hemodynamic effects and safety of high-dose glucagon with and without concomitant beta-blockade. Methods and Results In a randomized crossover study, 10 healthy men received combinations of esmolol (1.25 mg/kg bolus+0.75 mg/kg/min infusion), glucagon (50 µg/kg), and identical volumes of saline placebo on 5 separate days in random order (saline+saline; esmolol+saline; esmolol+glucagon bolus; saline+glucagon infusion; saline+glucagon bolus). On individual days, esmolol/saline was infused from -15 to 30 minutes. Glucagon/saline was administered from 0 minutes as a 2-minute intravenous bolus or as a 30-minute infusion (same total glucagon dose). End points were hemodynamic and adverse effects of glucagon compared with saline. Compared with saline, glucagon bolus increased mean heart rate by 13.0 beats per minute (95% CI, 8.0-18.0; <0.001), systolic blood pressure by 15.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 8.0-23.2; =0.002), diastolic blood pressure by 9.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 6.3-12.6; <0.001), and cardiac output by 18.0 % (95% CI, 9.7-26.9; =0.003) at the 5-minute time point on days without beta-blockade. Similar effects of glucagon bolus occurred on days with beta-blockade and between 15 and 30 minutes during infusion. Hemodynamic effects of glucagon thus reflected pharmacologic glucagon plasma concentrations. Glucagon-induced nausea occurred in 80% of participants despite ondansetron pretreatment. Conclusions High-dose glucagon boluses had significant hemodynamic effects regardless of beta-blockade. A glucagon infusion had comparable and apparently longer-lasting effects compared with bolus, indicating that infusion may be preferable to bolus injections. Registration Information URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03533179.
静脉内给予大剂量胰高血糖素是治疗β-受体阻滞剂中毒的推荐解毒剂,但临床效果尚不清楚。因此,我们研究了大剂量胰高血糖素联合或不联合β-受体阻滞剂的血流动力学效应和安全性。
在一项随机交叉研究中,10 名健康男性在 5 天内以随机顺序接受了以下 5 种组合的治疗:艾司洛尔(1.25mg/kg 推注+0.75mg/kg/min 输注)、胰高血糖素(50μg/kg)和生理盐水安慰剂(生理盐水+生理盐水;艾司洛尔+生理盐水;艾司洛尔+胰高血糖素推注;生理盐水+胰高血糖素输注;生理盐水+胰高血糖素推注)。在单独的日子里,艾司洛尔/生理盐水从-15 分钟输注至 30 分钟。在 0 分钟时给予胰高血糖素/生理盐水,持续 2 分钟静脉推注或 30 分钟输注(相同的胰高血糖素总剂量)。研究终点是与生理盐水相比,胰高血糖素的血流动力学和不良反应。与生理盐水相比,胰高血糖素推注使平均心率增加 13.0 次/分钟(95%CI,8.0-18.0;<0.001),收缩压升高 15.6mmHg(95%CI,8.0-23.2;=0.002),舒张压升高 9.4mmHg(95%CI,6.3-12.6;<0.001),心输出量增加 18.0%(95%CI,9.7-26.9;=0.003),在无β-受体阻滞剂的日子里,在 5 分钟时。在有β-受体阻滞剂的日子里,以及在输注期间的 15 至 30 分钟,胰高血糖素推注也有类似的作用。因此,胰高血糖素的血流动力学作用反映了其药理学的血浆浓度。尽管给予了昂丹司琼预处理,但胰高血糖素仍引起 80%的参与者出现恶心。
无论是否存在β-受体阻滞剂,大剂量胰高血糖素推注均具有显著的血流动力学作用。与推注相比,胰高血糖素输注具有相当且明显更持久的作用,表明输注可能优于推注。