Cargando…
A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern
Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), or “paralytics,” often are deployed in the sickest patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) when usual care fails. Despite the publication of guidelines on the use of NMBAs in the ICU in 2002, clinicians have needed more direction to determine which patients w...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519794/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23062076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-43 |
_version_ | 1782252738881519616 |
---|---|
author | Price, David Kenyon, Nicholas J Stollenwerk, Nicholas |
author_facet | Price, David Kenyon, Nicholas J Stollenwerk, Nicholas |
author_sort | Price, David |
collection | PubMed |
description | Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), or “paralytics,” often are deployed in the sickest patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) when usual care fails. Despite the publication of guidelines on the use of NMBAs in the ICU in 2002, clinicians have needed more direction to determine which patients would benefit from NMBAs and which patients would be harmed. Recently, new evidence has shown that paralytics hold more promise when used in carefully selected lung injury patients for brief periods of time. When used in early acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), NMBAs assist to establish a lung protective strategy, which leads to improved oxygenation, decreased pulmonary and systemic inflammation, and potentially improved mortality. It also is increasingly recognized that NMBAs can cause harm, particularly critical illness polyneuromyopathy (CIPM), when used for prolonged periods or in septic shock. In this review, we address several practical considerations for clinicians who use NMBAs in their practice. Ultimately, we conclude that NMBAs should be considered a lung protective adjuvant in early ARDS and that clinicians should consider using an alternative NMBA to the aminosteroids in septic shock with less severe lung injury pending further studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3519794 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Springer |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35197942012-12-12 A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern Price, David Kenyon, Nicholas J Stollenwerk, Nicholas Ann Intensive Care Review Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), or “paralytics,” often are deployed in the sickest patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) when usual care fails. Despite the publication of guidelines on the use of NMBAs in the ICU in 2002, clinicians have needed more direction to determine which patients would benefit from NMBAs and which patients would be harmed. Recently, new evidence has shown that paralytics hold more promise when used in carefully selected lung injury patients for brief periods of time. When used in early acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), NMBAs assist to establish a lung protective strategy, which leads to improved oxygenation, decreased pulmonary and systemic inflammation, and potentially improved mortality. It also is increasingly recognized that NMBAs can cause harm, particularly critical illness polyneuromyopathy (CIPM), when used for prolonged periods or in septic shock. In this review, we address several practical considerations for clinicians who use NMBAs in their practice. Ultimately, we conclude that NMBAs should be considered a lung protective adjuvant in early ARDS and that clinicians should consider using an alternative NMBA to the aminosteroids in septic shock with less severe lung injury pending further studies. Springer 2012-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC3519794/ /pubmed/23062076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-43 Text en Copyright ©2012 Price et al.; licensee Springer. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Price, David Kenyon, Nicholas J Stollenwerk, Nicholas A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
title | A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
title_full | A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
title_fullStr | A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
title_full_unstemmed | A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
title_short | A fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
title_sort | fresh look at paralytics in the critically ill: real promise and real concern |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519794/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23062076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-43 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pricedavid afreshlookatparalyticsinthecriticallyillrealpromiseandrealconcern AT kenyonnicholasj afreshlookatparalyticsinthecriticallyillrealpromiseandrealconcern AT stollenwerknicholas afreshlookatparalyticsinthecriticallyillrealpromiseandrealconcern AT pricedavid freshlookatparalyticsinthecriticallyillrealpromiseandrealconcern AT kenyonnicholasj freshlookatparalyticsinthecriticallyillrealpromiseandrealconcern AT stollenwerknicholas freshlookatparalyticsinthecriticallyillrealpromiseandrealconcern |