Constant Infusion of Epinephrine, but Not Bolus Treatment, Improves Haemodynamic Recovery in Anaphylactic Shock in Dogs
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Objective: Epinephrine (Epi) is the treatment of choice for reversing cardiovascular collapse in anaphylactic shock (AS). In this condition, most treatment guidelines have been anecdotally derived and no randomized clinical trials have been conducted. In the present study, we examined the time course of haemodynamic recovery in a canine model of AS when Epi was administered at the initiation of allergen challenge before fully developed shock had occurred.
Methods: Randomized, controlled, crossover studies were performed approximately 3-5 weeks apart in ragweed-sensitized dogs while the animals were ventilated and anaesthetized. Epi was administered by bolus intravenous (i.v.), subcutaneous (s.c.), intramuscular (i.m.) routes and by continuous i.v. infusion (CI). The findings obtained in the Epi treatment (T) studies were compared with those found in a no treatment (NT) study. In the bolus studies, Epi was administered at 0.01 mg/kg, while in the CI study, the dose of Epi was titrated to maintain mean arterial pressure (MAP) at 70% of preshock levels. MAP, cardiac output (CO), stroke volume (SV), and pulmonary wedge pressure (Pwp) were determined over a 3 h period.
Results: In the CI study, haemodynamics (CO, MAP, and SV) were significantly higher than those measured in the NT study and the bolus studies over approximately the first hour of the study. In the CI study, the amount of Epi infused was significantly less than in the bolus studies.
Conclusion: When administered at the initiation of allergen challenge, bolus treatment of Epi by i.m., i.v., or s.c. routes caused limited haemodynamic improvement in AS. In contrast, constant infusion of Epi at a lower total dose produced significant haemodynamic improvement. Within the limits of this anaesthetized canine model, the results suggest that CI should be the preferred route in the treatment of AS when this treatment option is available.
Adrenaline Auto-Injectors for Preventing Fatal Anaphylaxis.
Sim M, Sharma V, Li K, Gowland M, Garcez T, Shilladay C Clin Exp Allergy. 2024; 55(1):19-35.
PMID: 39383344 PMC: 11707323. DOI: 10.1111/cea.14565.
Management of Refractory Anaphylaxis: An Overview of Current Guidelines.
Pouessel G, Dribin T, Tacquard C, Tanno L, Cardona V, Worm M Clin Exp Allergy. 2024; 54(7):470-488.
PMID: 38866583 PMC: 11439156. DOI: 10.1111/cea.14514.
Refractory Anaphylaxis: A New Entity for Severe Anaphylaxis.
Pouessel G, Deschildre A, Dribin T, Ansotegui I, Cardona V, Chinthrajah R J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2023; 11(7):2043-2048.
PMID: 37172716 PMC: 10716823. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2023.04.037.
Fujizuka K, Nakamura M, Tamura J, Kawai-Kowase K Acute Med Surg. 2022; 9(1):e790.
PMID: 36285105 PMC: 9585046. DOI: 10.1002/ams2.790.
Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis: concise clinical guidance.
Whyte A, Soar J, Dodd A, Hughes A, Sargant N, Turner P Clin Med (Lond). 2022; 22(4):332-339.
PMID: 35882481 PMC: 9345203. DOI: 10.7861/clinmed.2022-0073.