Iskaros Olivia, Arnouk Serena, Papadopoulos John, Merchan Cristian
New York University Langone Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Neurohospitalist. 2024 Apr;14(2):122-128. doi: 10.1177/19418744231216851. Epub 2023 Nov 27.
Increased intracranial pressure due to cerebral edema is a medical emergency in which 23.4% sodium chloride (23.4% NaCl) may be a lifesaving intervention. Currently, safety data is limited on slow IV push (IVP) administration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of IVP administration of 23.4% NaCl and determine the number of infusion-related adverse events (IRAEs) compared to slow IV infusion (SIV) administration.
We performed a retrospective review of patients who received a dose of 23.4% NaCl at the from January 2015 to June 2020 as either SIV over 30 minutes or IVP over 2-5 minutes.
In total, 81 patients, 55 in the IVP group and 26 in the SIV group, were included in the analysis. There was a significantly faster time from order entry to dose completion (IVP 25 [13,58] vs SIV 73 [55,113] minutes, < .001). There was no difference in IRAEs between the groups (IVP 17 [31%] vs SIV 6 [23%], = .466). Hypotension was most common (IVP 13 [24%] vs SIV 5 [19%], = .656) followed by bradycardia (IVP 6 [11%] vs SIV 1 [4%], = .291). There were no extravasations reported.
Overall, among a cohort of patients with cerebral edema, we found no difference in the incidence of IRAEs between SIV and IVP administration of 23.4% NaCl, and found a faster time to complete administration fssor the latter. In emergent scenarios where time may impact neurologic function, 23.4% NaCl administered IVP may be an alternative to SIV administration.
脑水肿导致的颅内压升高是一种医疗急症,23.4% 氯化钠(23.4% NaCl)可能是一种挽救生命的干预措施。目前,关于缓慢静脉推注(IVP)给药的安全性数据有限。本研究的目的是评估23.4% NaCl静脉推注给药的安全性,并确定与缓慢静脉输注(SIV)给药相比,输液相关不良事件(IRAEs)的数量。
我们对2015年1月至2020年6月期间接受一剂23.4% NaCl的患者进行了回顾性研究,给药方式为30分钟内缓慢静脉输注或2 - 5分钟内静脉推注。
总共81例患者纳入分析,其中静脉推注组55例,缓慢静脉输注组26例。从医嘱录入到给药完成的时间,静脉推注组显著更快(静脉推注组25 [13,58]分钟 vs 缓慢静脉输注组73 [55,113]分钟,P <.001)。两组间输液相关不良事件无差异(静脉推注组17例 [31%] vs 缓慢静脉输注组6例 [23%],P =.466)。低血压最为常见(静脉推注组13例 [24%] vs 缓慢静脉输注组5例 [19%],P =.656),其次是心动过缓(静脉推注组6例 [11%] vs缓慢静脉输注组1例 [4%],P =.291)。未报告有外渗情况。
总体而言,在一组脑水肿患者中,我们发现缓慢静脉输注和静脉推注23.4% NaCl的输液相关不良事件发生率无差异,且静脉推注完成给药的时间更快。在时间可能影响神经功能的紧急情况下,静脉推注23.4% NaCl可能是缓慢静脉输注的一种替代方法。