A comparison of severe hemodynamic disturbances between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in neurocritical care patients

Michael J. Erdman, Bruce A. Doepker, Anthony T. Gerlach, Gary S. Phillips, Lucas Elijovich, G. Morgan Jones

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:: Dexmedetomidine and propofol are commonly used sedatives in neurocritical care as they allow for frequent neurologic examinations. However, both agents are associated with significant hemodynamic side effects. The primary objective of this study is to compare the prevalence of severe hemodynamic effects in neurocritical care patients receiving dexmedetomidine and propofol. DESIGN:: Multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study. SETTING:: Neurocritical care units at two academic medical centers with dedicated neurocritical care teams and board-certified neurointensivists. PATIENTS:: Neurocritical care patients admitted between July 2009 and September 2012 were evaluated and then matched 1:1 based on propensity scoring of baseline characteristics. INTERVENTIONS:: Continuous sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: A total of 342 patients (105 dexmedetomidine and 237 propofol) were included in the analysis, with 190 matched (95 in each group) by propensity score. The primary outcome of this study was a composite of severe hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 60 mm Hg) and bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beats/min) during sedative infusion. No difference in the primary composite outcome in both the unmatched (30% vs 30%, p = 0.94) or matched cohorts (28% vs 34%, p = 0.35) could be found. When analyzed separately, no differences could be found in the prevalence of severe hypotension or bradycardia in either the unmatched or matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:: Severe hypotension and bradycardia occur at similar prevalence in neurocritical care patients who receive dexmedetomidine or propofol. Providers should similarly consider the likelihood of hypotension or bradycardia before starting either sedative.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1696-1702
Number of pages7
JournalCritical care medicine
Volume42
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014

Fingerprint

Dexmedetomidine
Propofol
Bradycardia
Patient Care
Hemodynamics
Hypotension
Hypnotics and Sedatives
Propensity Score
Neurologic Examination
Arterial Pressure
Cohort Studies
Heart Rate
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

A comparison of severe hemodynamic disturbances between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in neurocritical care patients. / Erdman, Michael J.; Doepker, Bruce A.; Gerlach, Anthony T.; Phillips, Gary S.; Elijovich, Lucas; Jones, G. Morgan.

In: Critical care medicine, Vol. 42, No. 7, 01.01.2014, p. 1696-1702.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Erdman, Michael J. ; Doepker, Bruce A. ; Gerlach, Anthony T. ; Phillips, Gary S. ; Elijovich, Lucas ; Jones, G. Morgan. / A comparison of severe hemodynamic disturbances between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in neurocritical care patients. In: Critical care medicine. 2014 ; Vol. 42, No. 7. pp. 1696-1702.
@article{bcb87e8e6c594e96985949ce9b786b23,
title = "A comparison of severe hemodynamic disturbances between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in neurocritical care patients",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE:: Dexmedetomidine and propofol are commonly used sedatives in neurocritical care as they allow for frequent neurologic examinations. However, both agents are associated with significant hemodynamic side effects. The primary objective of this study is to compare the prevalence of severe hemodynamic effects in neurocritical care patients receiving dexmedetomidine and propofol. DESIGN:: Multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study. SETTING:: Neurocritical care units at two academic medical centers with dedicated neurocritical care teams and board-certified neurointensivists. PATIENTS:: Neurocritical care patients admitted between July 2009 and September 2012 were evaluated and then matched 1:1 based on propensity scoring of baseline characteristics. INTERVENTIONS:: Continuous sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: A total of 342 patients (105 dexmedetomidine and 237 propofol) were included in the analysis, with 190 matched (95 in each group) by propensity score. The primary outcome of this study was a composite of severe hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 60 mm Hg) and bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beats/min) during sedative infusion. No difference in the primary composite outcome in both the unmatched (30{\%} vs 30{\%}, p = 0.94) or matched cohorts (28{\%} vs 34{\%}, p = 0.35) could be found. When analyzed separately, no differences could be found in the prevalence of severe hypotension or bradycardia in either the unmatched or matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:: Severe hypotension and bradycardia occur at similar prevalence in neurocritical care patients who receive dexmedetomidine or propofol. Providers should similarly consider the likelihood of hypotension or bradycardia before starting either sedative.",
author = "Erdman, {Michael J.} and Doepker, {Bruce A.} and Gerlach, {Anthony T.} and Phillips, {Gary S.} and Lucas Elijovich and Jones, {G. Morgan}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/CCM.0000000000000328",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "1696--1702",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of severe hemodynamic disturbances between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in neurocritical care patients

AU - Erdman, Michael J.

AU - Doepker, Bruce A.

AU - Gerlach, Anthony T.

AU - Phillips, Gary S.

AU - Elijovich, Lucas

AU - Jones, G. Morgan

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE:: Dexmedetomidine and propofol are commonly used sedatives in neurocritical care as they allow for frequent neurologic examinations. However, both agents are associated with significant hemodynamic side effects. The primary objective of this study is to compare the prevalence of severe hemodynamic effects in neurocritical care patients receiving dexmedetomidine and propofol. DESIGN:: Multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study. SETTING:: Neurocritical care units at two academic medical centers with dedicated neurocritical care teams and board-certified neurointensivists. PATIENTS:: Neurocritical care patients admitted between July 2009 and September 2012 were evaluated and then matched 1:1 based on propensity scoring of baseline characteristics. INTERVENTIONS:: Continuous sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: A total of 342 patients (105 dexmedetomidine and 237 propofol) were included in the analysis, with 190 matched (95 in each group) by propensity score. The primary outcome of this study was a composite of severe hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 60 mm Hg) and bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beats/min) during sedative infusion. No difference in the primary composite outcome in both the unmatched (30% vs 30%, p = 0.94) or matched cohorts (28% vs 34%, p = 0.35) could be found. When analyzed separately, no differences could be found in the prevalence of severe hypotension or bradycardia in either the unmatched or matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:: Severe hypotension and bradycardia occur at similar prevalence in neurocritical care patients who receive dexmedetomidine or propofol. Providers should similarly consider the likelihood of hypotension or bradycardia before starting either sedative.

AB - OBJECTIVE:: Dexmedetomidine and propofol are commonly used sedatives in neurocritical care as they allow for frequent neurologic examinations. However, both agents are associated with significant hemodynamic side effects. The primary objective of this study is to compare the prevalence of severe hemodynamic effects in neurocritical care patients receiving dexmedetomidine and propofol. DESIGN:: Multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study. SETTING:: Neurocritical care units at two academic medical centers with dedicated neurocritical care teams and board-certified neurointensivists. PATIENTS:: Neurocritical care patients admitted between July 2009 and September 2012 were evaluated and then matched 1:1 based on propensity scoring of baseline characteristics. INTERVENTIONS:: Continuous sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: A total of 342 patients (105 dexmedetomidine and 237 propofol) were included in the analysis, with 190 matched (95 in each group) by propensity score. The primary outcome of this study was a composite of severe hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 60 mm Hg) and bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beats/min) during sedative infusion. No difference in the primary composite outcome in both the unmatched (30% vs 30%, p = 0.94) or matched cohorts (28% vs 34%, p = 0.35) could be found. When analyzed separately, no differences could be found in the prevalence of severe hypotension or bradycardia in either the unmatched or matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:: Severe hypotension and bradycardia occur at similar prevalence in neurocritical care patients who receive dexmedetomidine or propofol. Providers should similarly consider the likelihood of hypotension or bradycardia before starting either sedative.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84902535374&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84902535374&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000328

DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000328

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 1696

EP - 1702

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 7

ER -