CCJM delivers practical clinical articles relevant to internists, cardiologists, endocrinologists, and other specialists, all written by known experts.

Theme
medstat_ccjm
Top Sections
CME
Reviews
1-Minute Consult
The Clinical Picture
Smart Testing
Symptoms to Diagnosis
ccjm
Main menu
CCJM Main Menu
Explore menu
CCJM Explore Menu
Proclivity ID
18804001
Unpublish
Negative Keywords
gaming
gambling
compulsive behaviors
ammunition
assault rifle
black jack
Boko Haram
bondage
child abuse
cocaine
Daech
drug paraphernalia
explosion
gun
human trafficking
ISIL
ISIS
Islamic caliphate
Islamic state
mixed martial arts
MMA
molestation
national rifle association
NRA
nsfw
pedophile
pedophilia
poker
porn
pornography
psychedelic drug
recreational drug
sex slave rings
slot machine
terrorism
terrorist
Texas hold 'em
UFC
substance abuse
abuseed
abuseer
abusees
abuseing
abusely
abuses
aeolus
aeolused
aeoluser
aeoluses
aeolusing
aeolusly
aeoluss
ahole
aholeed
aholeer
aholees
aholeing
aholely
aholes
alcohol
alcoholed
alcoholer
alcoholes
alcoholing
alcoholly
alcohols
allman
allmaned
allmaner
allmanes
allmaning
allmanly
allmans
alted
altes
alting
altly
alts
analed
analer
anales
analing
anally
analprobe
analprobeed
analprobeer
analprobees
analprobeing
analprobely
analprobes
anals
anilingus
anilingused
anilinguser
anilinguses
anilingusing
anilingusly
anilinguss
anus
anused
anuser
anuses
anusing
anusly
anuss
areola
areolaed
areolaer
areolaes
areolaing
areolaly
areolas
areole
areoleed
areoleer
areolees
areoleing
areolely
areoles
arian
arianed
arianer
arianes
arianing
arianly
arians
aryan
aryaned
aryaner
aryanes
aryaning
aryanly
aryans
asiaed
asiaer
asiaes
asiaing
asialy
asias
ass
ass hole
ass lick
ass licked
ass licker
ass lickes
ass licking
ass lickly
ass licks
assbang
assbanged
assbangeded
assbangeder
assbangedes
assbangeding
assbangedly
assbangeds
assbanger
assbanges
assbanging
assbangly
assbangs
assbangsed
assbangser
assbangses
assbangsing
assbangsly
assbangss
assed
asser
asses
assesed
asseser
asseses
assesing
assesly
assess
assfuck
assfucked
assfucker
assfuckered
assfuckerer
assfuckeres
assfuckering
assfuckerly
assfuckers
assfuckes
assfucking
assfuckly
assfucks
asshat
asshated
asshater
asshates
asshating
asshatly
asshats
assholeed
assholeer
assholees
assholeing
assholely
assholes
assholesed
assholeser
assholeses
assholesing
assholesly
assholess
assing
assly
assmaster
assmastered
assmasterer
assmasteres
assmastering
assmasterly
assmasters
assmunch
assmunched
assmuncher
assmunches
assmunching
assmunchly
assmunchs
asss
asswipe
asswipeed
asswipeer
asswipees
asswipeing
asswipely
asswipes
asswipesed
asswipeser
asswipeses
asswipesing
asswipesly
asswipess
azz
azzed
azzer
azzes
azzing
azzly
azzs
babeed
babeer
babees
babeing
babely
babes
babesed
babeser
babeses
babesing
babesly
babess
ballsac
ballsaced
ballsacer
ballsaces
ballsacing
ballsack
ballsacked
ballsacker
ballsackes
ballsacking
ballsackly
ballsacks
ballsacly
ballsacs
ballsed
ballser
ballses
ballsing
ballsly
ballss
barf
barfed
barfer
barfes
barfing
barfly
barfs
bastard
bastarded
bastarder
bastardes
bastarding
bastardly
bastards
bastardsed
bastardser
bastardses
bastardsing
bastardsly
bastardss
bawdy
bawdyed
bawdyer
bawdyes
bawdying
bawdyly
bawdys
beaner
beanered
beanerer
beaneres
beanering
beanerly
beaners
beardedclam
beardedclamed
beardedclamer
beardedclames
beardedclaming
beardedclamly
beardedclams
beastiality
beastialityed
beastialityer
beastialityes
beastialitying
beastialityly
beastialitys
beatch
beatched
beatcher
beatches
beatching
beatchly
beatchs
beater
beatered
beaterer
beateres
beatering
beaterly
beaters
beered
beerer
beeres
beering
beerly
beeyotch
beeyotched
beeyotcher
beeyotches
beeyotching
beeyotchly
beeyotchs
beotch
beotched
beotcher
beotches
beotching
beotchly
beotchs
biatch
biatched
biatcher
biatches
biatching
biatchly
biatchs
big tits
big titsed
big titser
big titses
big titsing
big titsly
big titss
bigtits
bigtitsed
bigtitser
bigtitses
bigtitsing
bigtitsly
bigtitss
bimbo
bimboed
bimboer
bimboes
bimboing
bimboly
bimbos
bisexualed
bisexualer
bisexuales
bisexualing
bisexually
bisexuals
bitch
bitched
bitcheded
bitcheder
bitchedes
bitcheding
bitchedly
bitcheds
bitcher
bitches
bitchesed
bitcheser
bitcheses
bitchesing
bitchesly
bitchess
bitching
bitchly
bitchs
bitchy
bitchyed
bitchyer
bitchyes
bitchying
bitchyly
bitchys
bleached
bleacher
bleaches
bleaching
bleachly
bleachs
blow job
blow jobed
blow jober
blow jobes
blow jobing
blow jobly
blow jobs
blowed
blower
blowes
blowing
blowjob
blowjobed
blowjober
blowjobes
blowjobing
blowjobly
blowjobs
blowjobsed
blowjobser
blowjobses
blowjobsing
blowjobsly
blowjobss
blowly
blows
boink
boinked
boinker
boinkes
boinking
boinkly
boinks
bollock
bollocked
bollocker
bollockes
bollocking
bollockly
bollocks
bollocksed
bollockser
bollockses
bollocksing
bollocksly
bollockss
bollok
bolloked
bolloker
bollokes
bolloking
bollokly
bolloks
boner
bonered
bonerer
boneres
bonering
bonerly
boners
bonersed
bonerser
bonerses
bonersing
bonersly
bonerss
bong
bonged
bonger
bonges
bonging
bongly
bongs
boob
boobed
boober
boobes
boobies
boobiesed
boobieser
boobieses
boobiesing
boobiesly
boobiess
boobing
boobly
boobs
boobsed
boobser
boobses
boobsing
boobsly
boobss
booby
boobyed
boobyer
boobyes
boobying
boobyly
boobys
booger
boogered
boogerer
boogeres
boogering
boogerly
boogers
bookie
bookieed
bookieer
bookiees
bookieing
bookiely
bookies
bootee
booteeed
booteeer
booteees
booteeing
booteely
bootees
bootie
bootieed
bootieer
bootiees
bootieing
bootiely
booties
booty
bootyed
bootyer
bootyes
bootying
bootyly
bootys
boozeed
boozeer
boozees
boozeing
boozely
boozer
boozered
boozerer
boozeres
boozering
boozerly
boozers
boozes
boozy
boozyed
boozyer
boozyes
boozying
boozyly
boozys
bosomed
bosomer
bosomes
bosoming
bosomly
bosoms
bosomy
bosomyed
bosomyer
bosomyes
bosomying
bosomyly
bosomys
bugger
buggered
buggerer
buggeres
buggering
buggerly
buggers
bukkake
bukkakeed
bukkakeer
bukkakees
bukkakeing
bukkakely
bukkakes
bull shit
bull shited
bull shiter
bull shites
bull shiting
bull shitly
bull shits
bullshit
bullshited
bullshiter
bullshites
bullshiting
bullshitly
bullshits
bullshitsed
bullshitser
bullshitses
bullshitsing
bullshitsly
bullshitss
bullshitted
bullshitteded
bullshitteder
bullshittedes
bullshitteding
bullshittedly
bullshitteds
bullturds
bullturdsed
bullturdser
bullturdses
bullturdsing
bullturdsly
bullturdss
bung
bunged
bunger
bunges
bunging
bungly
bungs
busty
bustyed
bustyer
bustyes
bustying
bustyly
bustys
butt
butt fuck
butt fucked
butt fucker
butt fuckes
butt fucking
butt fuckly
butt fucks
butted
buttes
buttfuck
buttfucked
buttfucker
buttfuckered
buttfuckerer
buttfuckeres
buttfuckering
buttfuckerly
buttfuckers
buttfuckes
buttfucking
buttfuckly
buttfucks
butting
buttly
buttplug
buttpluged
buttpluger
buttpluges
buttpluging
buttplugly
buttplugs
butts
caca
cacaed
cacaer
cacaes
cacaing
cacaly
cacas
cahone
cahoneed
cahoneer
cahonees
cahoneing
cahonely
cahones
cameltoe
cameltoeed
cameltoeer
cameltoees
cameltoeing
cameltoely
cameltoes
carpetmuncher
carpetmunchered
carpetmuncherer
carpetmuncheres
carpetmunchering
carpetmuncherly
carpetmunchers
cawk
cawked
cawker
cawkes
cawking
cawkly
cawks
chinc
chinced
chincer
chinces
chincing
chincly
chincs
chincsed
chincser
chincses
chincsing
chincsly
chincss
chink
chinked
chinker
chinkes
chinking
chinkly
chinks
chode
chodeed
chodeer
chodees
chodeing
chodely
chodes
chodesed
chodeser
chodeses
chodesing
chodesly
chodess
clit
clited
cliter
clites
cliting
clitly
clitoris
clitorised
clitoriser
clitorises
clitorising
clitorisly
clitoriss
clitorus
clitorused
clitoruser
clitoruses
clitorusing
clitorusly
clitoruss
clits
clitsed
clitser
clitses
clitsing
clitsly
clitss
clitty
clittyed
clittyer
clittyes
clittying
clittyly
clittys
cocain
cocaine
cocained
cocaineed
cocaineer
cocainees
cocaineing
cocainely
cocainer
cocaines
cocaining
cocainly
cocains
cock
cock sucker
cock suckered
cock suckerer
cock suckeres
cock suckering
cock suckerly
cock suckers
cockblock
cockblocked
cockblocker
cockblockes
cockblocking
cockblockly
cockblocks
cocked
cocker
cockes
cockholster
cockholstered
cockholsterer
cockholsteres
cockholstering
cockholsterly
cockholsters
cocking
cockknocker
cockknockered
cockknockerer
cockknockeres
cockknockering
cockknockerly
cockknockers
cockly
cocks
cocksed
cockser
cockses
cocksing
cocksly
cocksmoker
cocksmokered
cocksmokerer
cocksmokeres
cocksmokering
cocksmokerly
cocksmokers
cockss
cocksucker
cocksuckered
cocksuckerer
cocksuckeres
cocksuckering
cocksuckerly
cocksuckers
coital
coitaled
coitaler
coitales
coitaling
coitally
coitals
commie
commieed
commieer
commiees
commieing
commiely
commies
condomed
condomer
condomes
condoming
condomly
condoms
coon
cooned
cooner
coones
cooning
coonly
coons
coonsed
coonser
coonses
coonsing
coonsly
coonss
corksucker
corksuckered
corksuckerer
corksuckeres
corksuckering
corksuckerly
corksuckers
cracked
crackwhore
crackwhoreed
crackwhoreer
crackwhorees
crackwhoreing
crackwhorely
crackwhores
crap
craped
craper
crapes
craping
craply
crappy
crappyed
crappyer
crappyes
crappying
crappyly
crappys
cum
cumed
cumer
cumes
cuming
cumly
cummin
cummined
cumminer
cummines
cumming
cumminged
cumminger
cumminges
cumminging
cummingly
cummings
cummining
cumminly
cummins
cums
cumshot
cumshoted
cumshoter
cumshotes
cumshoting
cumshotly
cumshots
cumshotsed
cumshotser
cumshotses
cumshotsing
cumshotsly
cumshotss
cumslut
cumsluted
cumsluter
cumslutes
cumsluting
cumslutly
cumsluts
cumstain
cumstained
cumstainer
cumstaines
cumstaining
cumstainly
cumstains
cunilingus
cunilingused
cunilinguser
cunilinguses
cunilingusing
cunilingusly
cunilinguss
cunnilingus
cunnilingused
cunnilinguser
cunnilinguses
cunnilingusing
cunnilingusly
cunnilinguss
cunny
cunnyed
cunnyer
cunnyes
cunnying
cunnyly
cunnys
cunt
cunted
cunter
cuntes
cuntface
cuntfaceed
cuntfaceer
cuntfacees
cuntfaceing
cuntfacely
cuntfaces
cunthunter
cunthuntered
cunthunterer
cunthunteres
cunthuntering
cunthunterly
cunthunters
cunting
cuntlick
cuntlicked
cuntlicker
cuntlickered
cuntlickerer
cuntlickeres
cuntlickering
cuntlickerly
cuntlickers
cuntlickes
cuntlicking
cuntlickly
cuntlicks
cuntly
cunts
cuntsed
cuntser
cuntses
cuntsing
cuntsly
cuntss
dago
dagoed
dagoer
dagoes
dagoing
dagoly
dagos
dagosed
dagoser
dagoses
dagosing
dagosly
dagoss
dammit
dammited
dammiter
dammites
dammiting
dammitly
dammits
damn
damned
damneded
damneder
damnedes
damneding
damnedly
damneds
damner
damnes
damning
damnit
damnited
damniter
damnites
damniting
damnitly
damnits
damnly
damns
dick
dickbag
dickbaged
dickbager
dickbages
dickbaging
dickbagly
dickbags
dickdipper
dickdippered
dickdipperer
dickdipperes
dickdippering
dickdipperly
dickdippers
dicked
dicker
dickes
dickface
dickfaceed
dickfaceer
dickfacees
dickfaceing
dickfacely
dickfaces
dickflipper
dickflippered
dickflipperer
dickflipperes
dickflippering
dickflipperly
dickflippers
dickhead
dickheaded
dickheader
dickheades
dickheading
dickheadly
dickheads
dickheadsed
dickheadser
dickheadses
dickheadsing
dickheadsly
dickheadss
dicking
dickish
dickished
dickisher
dickishes
dickishing
dickishly
dickishs
dickly
dickripper
dickrippered
dickripperer
dickripperes
dickrippering
dickripperly
dickrippers
dicks
dicksipper
dicksippered
dicksipperer
dicksipperes
dicksippering
dicksipperly
dicksippers
dickweed
dickweeded
dickweeder
dickweedes
dickweeding
dickweedly
dickweeds
dickwhipper
dickwhippered
dickwhipperer
dickwhipperes
dickwhippering
dickwhipperly
dickwhippers
dickzipper
dickzippered
dickzipperer
dickzipperes
dickzippering
dickzipperly
dickzippers
diddle
diddleed
diddleer
diddlees
diddleing
diddlely
diddles
dike
dikeed
dikeer
dikees
dikeing
dikely
dikes
dildo
dildoed
dildoer
dildoes
dildoing
dildoly
dildos
dildosed
dildoser
dildoses
dildosing
dildosly
dildoss
diligaf
diligafed
diligafer
diligafes
diligafing
diligafly
diligafs
dillweed
dillweeded
dillweeder
dillweedes
dillweeding
dillweedly
dillweeds
dimwit
dimwited
dimwiter
dimwites
dimwiting
dimwitly
dimwits
dingle
dingleed
dingleer
dinglees
dingleing
dinglely
dingles
dipship
dipshiped
dipshiper
dipshipes
dipshiping
dipshiply
dipships
dizzyed
dizzyer
dizzyes
dizzying
dizzyly
dizzys
doggiestyleed
doggiestyleer
doggiestylees
doggiestyleing
doggiestylely
doggiestyles
doggystyleed
doggystyleer
doggystylees
doggystyleing
doggystylely
doggystyles
dong
donged
donger
donges
donging
dongly
dongs
doofus
doofused
doofuser
doofuses
doofusing
doofusly
doofuss
doosh
dooshed
doosher
dooshes
dooshing
dooshly
dooshs
dopeyed
dopeyer
dopeyes
dopeying
dopeyly
dopeys
douchebag
douchebaged
douchebager
douchebages
douchebaging
douchebagly
douchebags
douchebagsed
douchebagser
douchebagses
douchebagsing
douchebagsly
douchebagss
doucheed
doucheer
douchees
doucheing
douchely
douches
douchey
doucheyed
doucheyer
doucheyes
doucheying
doucheyly
doucheys
drunk
drunked
drunker
drunkes
drunking
drunkly
drunks
dumass
dumassed
dumasser
dumasses
dumassing
dumassly
dumasss
dumbass
dumbassed
dumbasser
dumbasses
dumbassesed
dumbasseser
dumbasseses
dumbassesing
dumbassesly
dumbassess
dumbassing
dumbassly
dumbasss
dummy
dummyed
dummyer
dummyes
dummying
dummyly
dummys
dyke
dykeed
dykeer
dykees
dykeing
dykely
dykes
dykesed
dykeser
dykeses
dykesing
dykesly
dykess
erotic
eroticed
eroticer
erotices
eroticing
eroticly
erotics
extacy
extacyed
extacyer
extacyes
extacying
extacyly
extacys
extasy
extasyed
extasyer
extasyes
extasying
extasyly
extasys
fack
facked
facker
fackes
facking
fackly
facks
fag
faged
fager
fages
fagg
fagged
faggeded
faggeder
faggedes
faggeding
faggedly
faggeds
fagger
fagges
fagging
faggit
faggited
faggiter
faggites
faggiting
faggitly
faggits
faggly
faggot
faggoted
faggoter
faggotes
faggoting
faggotly
faggots
faggs
faging
fagly
fagot
fagoted
fagoter
fagotes
fagoting
fagotly
fagots
fags
fagsed
fagser
fagses
fagsing
fagsly
fagss
faig
faiged
faiger
faiges
faiging
faigly
faigs
faigt
faigted
faigter
faigtes
faigting
faigtly
faigts
fannybandit
fannybandited
fannybanditer
fannybandites
fannybanditing
fannybanditly
fannybandits
farted
farter
fartes
farting
fartknocker
fartknockered
fartknockerer
fartknockeres
fartknockering
fartknockerly
fartknockers
fartly
farts
felch
felched
felcher
felchered
felcherer
felcheres
felchering
felcherly
felchers
felches
felching
felchinged
felchinger
felchinges
felchinging
felchingly
felchings
felchly
felchs
fellate
fellateed
fellateer
fellatees
fellateing
fellately
fellates
fellatio
fellatioed
fellatioer
fellatioes
fellatioing
fellatioly
fellatios
feltch
feltched
feltcher
feltchered
feltcherer
feltcheres
feltchering
feltcherly
feltchers
feltches
feltching
feltchly
feltchs
feom
feomed
feomer
feomes
feoming
feomly
feoms
fisted
fisteded
fisteder
fistedes
fisteding
fistedly
fisteds
fisting
fistinged
fistinger
fistinges
fistinging
fistingly
fistings
fisty
fistyed
fistyer
fistyes
fistying
fistyly
fistys
floozy
floozyed
floozyer
floozyes
floozying
floozyly
floozys
foad
foaded
foader
foades
foading
foadly
foads
fondleed
fondleer
fondlees
fondleing
fondlely
fondles
foobar
foobared
foobarer
foobares
foobaring
foobarly
foobars
freex
freexed
freexer
freexes
freexing
freexly
freexs
frigg
frigga
friggaed
friggaer
friggaes
friggaing
friggaly
friggas
frigged
frigger
frigges
frigging
friggly
friggs
fubar
fubared
fubarer
fubares
fubaring
fubarly
fubars
fuck
fuckass
fuckassed
fuckasser
fuckasses
fuckassing
fuckassly
fuckasss
fucked
fuckeded
fuckeder
fuckedes
fuckeding
fuckedly
fuckeds
fucker
fuckered
fuckerer
fuckeres
fuckering
fuckerly
fuckers
fuckes
fuckface
fuckfaceed
fuckfaceer
fuckfacees
fuckfaceing
fuckfacely
fuckfaces
fuckin
fuckined
fuckiner
fuckines
fucking
fuckinged
fuckinger
fuckinges
fuckinging
fuckingly
fuckings
fuckining
fuckinly
fuckins
fuckly
fucknugget
fucknuggeted
fucknuggeter
fucknuggetes
fucknuggeting
fucknuggetly
fucknuggets
fucknut
fucknuted
fucknuter
fucknutes
fucknuting
fucknutly
fucknuts
fuckoff
fuckoffed
fuckoffer
fuckoffes
fuckoffing
fuckoffly
fuckoffs
fucks
fucksed
fuckser
fuckses
fucksing
fucksly
fuckss
fucktard
fucktarded
fucktarder
fucktardes
fucktarding
fucktardly
fucktards
fuckup
fuckuped
fuckuper
fuckupes
fuckuping
fuckuply
fuckups
fuckwad
fuckwaded
fuckwader
fuckwades
fuckwading
fuckwadly
fuckwads
fuckwit
fuckwited
fuckwiter
fuckwites
fuckwiting
fuckwitly
fuckwits
fudgepacker
fudgepackered
fudgepackerer
fudgepackeres
fudgepackering
fudgepackerly
fudgepackers
fuk
fuked
fuker
fukes
fuking
fukly
fuks
fvck
fvcked
fvcker
fvckes
fvcking
fvckly
fvcks
fxck
fxcked
fxcker
fxckes
fxcking
fxckly
fxcks
gae
gaeed
gaeer
gaees
gaeing
gaely
gaes
gai
gaied
gaier
gaies
gaiing
gaily
gais
ganja
ganjaed
ganjaer
ganjaes
ganjaing
ganjaly
ganjas
gayed
gayer
gayes
gaying
gayly
gays
gaysed
gayser
gayses
gaysing
gaysly
gayss
gey
geyed
geyer
geyes
geying
geyly
geys
gfc
gfced
gfcer
gfces
gfcing
gfcly
gfcs
gfy
gfyed
gfyer
gfyes
gfying
gfyly
gfys
ghay
ghayed
ghayer
ghayes
ghaying
ghayly
ghays
ghey
gheyed
gheyer
gheyes
gheying
gheyly
gheys
gigolo
gigoloed
gigoloer
gigoloes
gigoloing
gigololy
gigolos
goatse
goatseed
goatseer
goatsees
goatseing
goatsely
goatses
godamn
godamned
godamner
godamnes
godamning
godamnit
godamnited
godamniter
godamnites
godamniting
godamnitly
godamnits
godamnly
godamns
goddam
goddamed
goddamer
goddames
goddaming
goddamly
goddammit
goddammited
goddammiter
goddammites
goddammiting
goddammitly
goddammits
goddamn
goddamned
goddamner
goddamnes
goddamning
goddamnly
goddamns
goddams
goldenshower
goldenshowered
goldenshowerer
goldenshoweres
goldenshowering
goldenshowerly
goldenshowers
gonad
gonaded
gonader
gonades
gonading
gonadly
gonads
gonadsed
gonadser
gonadses
gonadsing
gonadsly
gonadss
gook
gooked
gooker
gookes
gooking
gookly
gooks
gooksed
gookser
gookses
gooksing
gooksly
gookss
gringo
gringoed
gringoer
gringoes
gringoing
gringoly
gringos
gspot
gspoted
gspoter
gspotes
gspoting
gspotly
gspots
gtfo
gtfoed
gtfoer
gtfoes
gtfoing
gtfoly
gtfos
guido
guidoed
guidoer
guidoes
guidoing
guidoly
guidos
handjob
handjobed
handjober
handjobes
handjobing
handjobly
handjobs
hard on
hard oned
hard oner
hard ones
hard oning
hard only
hard ons
hardknight
hardknighted
hardknighter
hardknightes
hardknighting
hardknightly
hardknights
hebe
hebeed
hebeer
hebees
hebeing
hebely
hebes
heeb
heebed
heeber
heebes
heebing
heebly
heebs
hell
helled
heller
helles
helling
hellly
hells
hemp
hemped
hemper
hempes
hemping
hemply
hemps
heroined
heroiner
heroines
heroining
heroinly
heroins
herp
herped
herper
herpes
herpesed
herpeser
herpeses
herpesing
herpesly
herpess
herping
herply
herps
herpy
herpyed
herpyer
herpyes
herpying
herpyly
herpys
hitler
hitlered
hitlerer
hitleres
hitlering
hitlerly
hitlers
hived
hiver
hives
hiving
hivly
hivs
hobag
hobaged
hobager
hobages
hobaging
hobagly
hobags
homey
homeyed
homeyer
homeyes
homeying
homeyly
homeys
homo
homoed
homoer
homoes
homoey
homoeyed
homoeyer
homoeyes
homoeying
homoeyly
homoeys
homoing
homoly
homos
honky
honkyed
honkyer
honkyes
honkying
honkyly
honkys
hooch
hooched
hoocher
hooches
hooching
hoochly
hoochs
hookah
hookahed
hookaher
hookahes
hookahing
hookahly
hookahs
hooker
hookered
hookerer
hookeres
hookering
hookerly
hookers
hoor
hoored
hoorer
hoores
hooring
hoorly
hoors
hootch
hootched
hootcher
hootches
hootching
hootchly
hootchs
hooter
hootered
hooterer
hooteres
hootering
hooterly
hooters
hootersed
hooterser
hooterses
hootersing
hootersly
hooterss
horny
hornyed
hornyer
hornyes
hornying
hornyly
hornys
houstoned
houstoner
houstones
houstoning
houstonly
houstons
hump
humped
humpeded
humpeder
humpedes
humpeding
humpedly
humpeds
humper
humpes
humping
humpinged
humpinger
humpinges
humpinging
humpingly
humpings
humply
humps
husbanded
husbander
husbandes
husbanding
husbandly
husbands
hussy
hussyed
hussyer
hussyes
hussying
hussyly
hussys
hymened
hymener
hymenes
hymening
hymenly
hymens
inbred
inbreded
inbreder
inbredes
inbreding
inbredly
inbreds
incest
incested
incester
incestes
incesting
incestly
incests
injun
injuned
injuner
injunes
injuning
injunly
injuns
jackass
jackassed
jackasser
jackasses
jackassing
jackassly
jackasss
jackhole
jackholeed
jackholeer
jackholees
jackholeing
jackholely
jackholes
jackoff
jackoffed
jackoffer
jackoffes
jackoffing
jackoffly
jackoffs
jap
japed
japer
japes
japing
japly
japs
japsed
japser
japses
japsing
japsly
japss
jerkoff
jerkoffed
jerkoffer
jerkoffes
jerkoffing
jerkoffly
jerkoffs
jerks
jism
jismed
jismer
jismes
jisming
jismly
jisms
jiz
jized
jizer
jizes
jizing
jizly
jizm
jizmed
jizmer
jizmes
jizming
jizmly
jizms
jizs
jizz
jizzed
jizzeded
jizzeder
jizzedes
jizzeding
jizzedly
jizzeds
jizzer
jizzes
jizzing
jizzly
jizzs
junkie
junkieed
junkieer
junkiees
junkieing
junkiely
junkies
junky
junkyed
junkyer
junkyes
junkying
junkyly
junkys
kike
kikeed
kikeer
kikees
kikeing
kikely
kikes
kikesed
kikeser
kikeses
kikesing
kikesly
kikess
killed
killer
killes
killing
killly
kills
kinky
kinkyed
kinkyer
kinkyes
kinkying
kinkyly
kinkys
kkk
kkked
kkker
kkkes
kkking
kkkly
kkks
klan
klaned
klaner
klanes
klaning
klanly
klans
knobend
knobended
knobender
knobendes
knobending
knobendly
knobends
kooch
kooched
koocher
kooches
koochesed
koocheser
koocheses
koochesing
koochesly
koochess
kooching
koochly
koochs
kootch
kootched
kootcher
kootches
kootching
kootchly
kootchs
kraut
krauted
krauter
krautes
krauting
krautly
krauts
kyke
kykeed
kykeer
kykees
kykeing
kykely
kykes
lech
leched
lecher
leches
leching
lechly
lechs
leper
lepered
leperer
leperes
lepering
leperly
lepers
lesbiansed
lesbianser
lesbianses
lesbiansing
lesbiansly
lesbianss
lesbo
lesboed
lesboer
lesboes
lesboing
lesboly
lesbos
lesbosed
lesboser
lesboses
lesbosing
lesbosly
lesboss
lez
lezbianed
lezbianer
lezbianes
lezbianing
lezbianly
lezbians
lezbiansed
lezbianser
lezbianses
lezbiansing
lezbiansly
lezbianss
lezbo
lezboed
lezboer
lezboes
lezboing
lezboly
lezbos
lezbosed
lezboser
lezboses
lezbosing
lezbosly
lezboss
lezed
lezer
lezes
lezing
lezly
lezs
lezzie
lezzieed
lezzieer
lezziees
lezzieing
lezziely
lezzies
lezziesed
lezzieser
lezzieses
lezziesing
lezziesly
lezziess
lezzy
lezzyed
lezzyer
lezzyes
lezzying
lezzyly
lezzys
lmaoed
lmaoer
lmaoes
lmaoing
lmaoly
lmaos
lmfao
lmfaoed
lmfaoer
lmfaoes
lmfaoing
lmfaoly
lmfaos
loined
loiner
loines
loining
loinly
loins
loinsed
loinser
loinses
loinsing
loinsly
loinss
lubeed
lubeer
lubees
lubeing
lubely
lubes
lusty
lustyed
lustyer
lustyes
lustying
lustyly
lustys
massa
massaed
massaer
massaes
massaing
massaly
massas
masterbate
masterbateed
masterbateer
masterbatees
masterbateing
masterbately
masterbates
masterbating
masterbatinged
masterbatinger
masterbatinges
masterbatinging
masterbatingly
masterbatings
masterbation
masterbationed
masterbationer
masterbationes
masterbationing
masterbationly
masterbations
masturbate
masturbateed
masturbateer
masturbatees
masturbateing
masturbately
masturbates
masturbating
masturbatinged
masturbatinger
masturbatinges
masturbatinging
masturbatingly
masturbatings
masturbation
masturbationed
masturbationer
masturbationes
masturbationing
masturbationly
masturbations
methed
mether
methes
mething
methly
meths
militaryed
militaryer
militaryes
militarying
militaryly
militarys
mofo
mofoed
mofoer
mofoes
mofoing
mofoly
mofos
molest
molested
molester
molestes
molesting
molestly
molests
moolie
moolieed
moolieer
mooliees
moolieing
mooliely
moolies
moron
moroned
moroner
morones
moroning
moronly
morons
motherfucka
motherfuckaed
motherfuckaer
motherfuckaes
motherfuckaing
motherfuckaly
motherfuckas
motherfucker
motherfuckered
motherfuckerer
motherfuckeres
motherfuckering
motherfuckerly
motherfuckers
motherfucking
motherfuckinged
motherfuckinger
motherfuckinges
motherfuckinging
motherfuckingly
motherfuckings
mtherfucker
mtherfuckered
mtherfuckerer
mtherfuckeres
mtherfuckering
mtherfuckerly
mtherfuckers
mthrfucker
mthrfuckered
mthrfuckerer
mthrfuckeres
mthrfuckering
mthrfuckerly
mthrfuckers
mthrfucking
mthrfuckinged
mthrfuckinger
mthrfuckinges
mthrfuckinging
mthrfuckingly
mthrfuckings
muff
muffdiver
muffdivered
muffdiverer
muffdiveres
muffdivering
muffdiverly
muffdivers
muffed
muffer
muffes
muffing
muffly
muffs
murdered
murderer
murderes
murdering
murderly
murders
muthafuckaz
muthafuckazed
muthafuckazer
muthafuckazes
muthafuckazing
muthafuckazly
muthafuckazs
muthafucker
muthafuckered
muthafuckerer
muthafuckeres
muthafuckering
muthafuckerly
muthafuckers
mutherfucker
mutherfuckered
mutherfuckerer
mutherfuckeres
mutherfuckering
mutherfuckerly
mutherfuckers
mutherfucking
mutherfuckinged
mutherfuckinger
mutherfuckinges
mutherfuckinging
mutherfuckingly
mutherfuckings
muthrfucking
muthrfuckinged
muthrfuckinger
muthrfuckinges
muthrfuckinging
muthrfuckingly
muthrfuckings
nad
naded
nader
nades
nading
nadly
nads
nadsed
nadser
nadses
nadsing
nadsly
nadss
nakeded
nakeder
nakedes
nakeding
nakedly
nakeds
napalm
napalmed
napalmer
napalmes
napalming
napalmly
napalms
nappy
nappyed
nappyer
nappyes
nappying
nappyly
nappys
nazi
nazied
nazier
nazies
naziing
nazily
nazis
nazism
nazismed
nazismer
nazismes
nazisming
nazismly
nazisms
negro
negroed
negroer
negroes
negroing
negroly
negros
nigga
niggaed
niggaer
niggaes
niggah
niggahed
niggaher
niggahes
niggahing
niggahly
niggahs
niggaing
niggaly
niggas
niggased
niggaser
niggases
niggasing
niggasly
niggass
niggaz
niggazed
niggazer
niggazes
niggazing
niggazly
niggazs
nigger
niggered
niggerer
niggeres
niggering
niggerly
niggers
niggersed
niggerser
niggerses
niggersing
niggersly
niggerss
niggle
niggleed
niggleer
nigglees
niggleing
nigglely
niggles
niglet
nigleted
nigleter
nigletes
nigleting
nigletly
niglets
nimrod
nimroded
nimroder
nimrodes
nimroding
nimrodly
nimrods
ninny
ninnyed
ninnyer
ninnyes
ninnying
ninnyly
ninnys
nooky
nookyed
nookyer
nookyes
nookying
nookyly
nookys
nuccitelli
nuccitellied
nuccitellier
nuccitellies
nuccitelliing
nuccitellily
nuccitellis
nympho
nymphoed
nymphoer
nymphoes
nymphoing
nympholy
nymphos
opium
opiumed
opiumer
opiumes
opiuming
opiumly
opiums
orgies
orgiesed
orgieser
orgieses
orgiesing
orgiesly
orgiess
orgy
orgyed
orgyer
orgyes
orgying
orgyly
orgys
paddy
paddyed
paddyer
paddyes
paddying
paddyly
paddys
paki
pakied
pakier
pakies
pakiing
pakily
pakis
pantie
pantieed
pantieer
pantiees
pantieing
pantiely
panties
pantiesed
pantieser
pantieses
pantiesing
pantiesly
pantiess
panty
pantyed
pantyer
pantyes
pantying
pantyly
pantys
pastie
pastieed
pastieer
pastiees
pastieing
pastiely
pasties
pasty
pastyed
pastyer
pastyes
pastying
pastyly
pastys
pecker
peckered
peckerer
peckeres
peckering
peckerly
peckers
pedo
pedoed
pedoer
pedoes
pedoing
pedoly
pedophile
pedophileed
pedophileer
pedophilees
pedophileing
pedophilely
pedophiles
pedophilia
pedophiliac
pedophiliaced
pedophiliacer
pedophiliaces
pedophiliacing
pedophiliacly
pedophiliacs
pedophiliaed
pedophiliaer
pedophiliaes
pedophiliaing
pedophilialy
pedophilias
pedos
penial
penialed
penialer
peniales
penialing
penially
penials
penile
penileed
penileer
penilees
penileing
penilely
peniles
penis
penised
peniser
penises
penising
penisly
peniss
perversion
perversioned
perversioner
perversiones
perversioning
perversionly
perversions
peyote
peyoteed
peyoteer
peyotees
peyoteing
peyotely
peyotes
phuck
phucked
phucker
phuckes
phucking
phuckly
phucks
pillowbiter
pillowbitered
pillowbiterer
pillowbiteres
pillowbitering
pillowbiterly
pillowbiters
pimp
pimped
pimper
pimpes
pimping
pimply
pimps
pinko
pinkoed
pinkoer
pinkoes
pinkoing
pinkoly
pinkos
pissed
pisseded
pisseder
pissedes
pisseding
pissedly
pisseds
pisser
pisses
pissing
pissly
pissoff
pissoffed
pissoffer
pissoffes
pissoffing
pissoffly
pissoffs
pisss
polack
polacked
polacker
polackes
polacking
polackly
polacks
pollock
pollocked
pollocker
pollockes
pollocking
pollockly
pollocks
poon
pooned
pooner
poones
pooning
poonly
poons
poontang
poontanged
poontanger
poontanges
poontanging
poontangly
poontangs
porn
porned
porner
pornes
porning
pornly
porno
pornoed
pornoer
pornoes
pornography
pornographyed
pornographyer
pornographyes
pornographying
pornographyly
pornographys
pornoing
pornoly
pornos
porns
prick
pricked
pricker
prickes
pricking
prickly
pricks
prig
priged
priger
priges
priging
prigly
prigs
prostitute
prostituteed
prostituteer
prostitutees
prostituteing
prostitutely
prostitutes
prude
prudeed
prudeer
prudees
prudeing
prudely
prudes
punkass
punkassed
punkasser
punkasses
punkassing
punkassly
punkasss
punky
punkyed
punkyer
punkyes
punkying
punkyly
punkys
puss
pussed
pusser
pusses
pussies
pussiesed
pussieser
pussieses
pussiesing
pussiesly
pussiess
pussing
pussly
pusss
pussy
pussyed
pussyer
pussyes
pussying
pussyly
pussypounder
pussypoundered
pussypounderer
pussypounderes
pussypoundering
pussypounderly
pussypounders
pussys
puto
putoed
putoer
putoes
putoing
putoly
putos
queaf
queafed
queafer
queafes
queafing
queafly
queafs
queef
queefed
queefer
queefes
queefing
queefly
queefs
queer
queered
queerer
queeres
queering
queerly
queero
queeroed
queeroer
queeroes
queeroing
queeroly
queeros
queers
queersed
queerser
queerses
queersing
queersly
queerss
quicky
quickyed
quickyer
quickyes
quickying
quickyly
quickys
quim
quimed
quimer
quimes
quiming
quimly
quims
racy
racyed
racyer
racyes
racying
racyly
racys
rape
raped
rapeded
rapeder
rapedes
rapeding
rapedly
rapeds
rapeed
rapeer
rapees
rapeing
rapely
raper
rapered
raperer
raperes
rapering
raperly
rapers
rapes
rapist
rapisted
rapister
rapistes
rapisting
rapistly
rapists
raunch
raunched
rauncher
raunches
raunching
raunchly
raunchs
rectus
rectused
rectuser
rectuses
rectusing
rectusly
rectuss
reefer
reefered
reeferer
reeferes
reefering
reeferly
reefers
reetard
reetarded
reetarder
reetardes
reetarding
reetardly
reetards
reich
reiched
reicher
reiches
reiching
reichly
reichs
retard
retarded
retardeded
retardeder
retardedes
retardeding
retardedly
retardeds
retarder
retardes
retarding
retardly
retards
rimjob
rimjobed
rimjober
rimjobes
rimjobing
rimjobly
rimjobs
ritard
ritarded
ritarder
ritardes
ritarding
ritardly
ritards
rtard
rtarded
rtarder
rtardes
rtarding
rtardly
rtards
rum
rumed
rumer
rumes
ruming
rumly
rump
rumped
rumper
rumpes
rumping
rumply
rumprammer
rumprammered
rumprammerer
rumprammeres
rumprammering
rumprammerly
rumprammers
rumps
rums
ruski
ruskied
ruskier
ruskies
ruskiing
ruskily
ruskis
sadism
sadismed
sadismer
sadismes
sadisming
sadismly
sadisms
sadist
sadisted
sadister
sadistes
sadisting
sadistly
sadists
scag
scaged
scager
scages
scaging
scagly
scags
scantily
scantilyed
scantilyer
scantilyes
scantilying
scantilyly
scantilys
schlong
schlonged
schlonger
schlonges
schlonging
schlongly
schlongs
scrog
scroged
scroger
scroges
scroging
scrogly
scrogs
scrot
scrote
scroted
scroteed
scroteer
scrotees
scroteing
scrotely
scroter
scrotes
scroting
scrotly
scrots
scrotum
scrotumed
scrotumer
scrotumes
scrotuming
scrotumly
scrotums
scrud
scruded
scruder
scrudes
scruding
scrudly
scruds
scum
scumed
scumer
scumes
scuming
scumly
scums
seaman
seamaned
seamaner
seamanes
seamaning
seamanly
seamans
seamen
seamened
seamener
seamenes
seamening
seamenly
seamens
seduceed
seduceer
seducees
seduceing
seducely
seduces
semen
semened
semener
semenes
semening
semenly
semens
shamedame
shamedameed
shamedameer
shamedamees
shamedameing
shamedamely
shamedames
shit
shite
shiteater
shiteatered
shiteaterer
shiteateres
shiteatering
shiteaterly
shiteaters
shited
shiteed
shiteer
shitees
shiteing
shitely
shiter
shites
shitface
shitfaceed
shitfaceer
shitfacees
shitfaceing
shitfacely
shitfaces
shithead
shitheaded
shitheader
shitheades
shitheading
shitheadly
shitheads
shithole
shitholeed
shitholeer
shitholees
shitholeing
shitholely
shitholes
shithouse
shithouseed
shithouseer
shithousees
shithouseing
shithousely
shithouses
shiting
shitly
shits
shitsed
shitser
shitses
shitsing
shitsly
shitss
shitt
shitted
shitteded
shitteder
shittedes
shitteding
shittedly
shitteds
shitter
shittered
shitterer
shitteres
shittering
shitterly
shitters
shittes
shitting
shittly
shitts
shitty
shittyed
shittyer
shittyes
shittying
shittyly
shittys
shiz
shized
shizer
shizes
shizing
shizly
shizs
shooted
shooter
shootes
shooting
shootly
shoots
sissy
sissyed
sissyer
sissyes
sissying
sissyly
sissys
skag
skaged
skager
skages
skaging
skagly
skags
skank
skanked
skanker
skankes
skanking
skankly
skanks
slave
slaveed
slaveer
slavees
slaveing
slavely
slaves
sleaze
sleazeed
sleazeer
sleazees
sleazeing
sleazely
sleazes
sleazy
sleazyed
sleazyer
sleazyes
sleazying
sleazyly
sleazys
slut
slutdumper
slutdumpered
slutdumperer
slutdumperes
slutdumpering
slutdumperly
slutdumpers
sluted
sluter
slutes
sluting
slutkiss
slutkissed
slutkisser
slutkisses
slutkissing
slutkissly
slutkisss
slutly
sluts
slutsed
slutser
slutses
slutsing
slutsly
slutss
smegma
smegmaed
smegmaer
smegmaes
smegmaing
smegmaly
smegmas
smut
smuted
smuter
smutes
smuting
smutly
smuts
smutty
smuttyed
smuttyer
smuttyes
smuttying
smuttyly
smuttys
snatch
snatched
snatcher
snatches
snatching
snatchly
snatchs
sniper
snipered
sniperer
sniperes
snipering
sniperly
snipers
snort
snorted
snorter
snortes
snorting
snortly
snorts
snuff
snuffed
snuffer
snuffes
snuffing
snuffly
snuffs
sodom
sodomed
sodomer
sodomes
sodoming
sodomly
sodoms
spic
spiced
spicer
spices
spicing
spick
spicked
spicker
spickes
spicking
spickly
spicks
spicly
spics
spik
spoof
spoofed
spoofer
spoofes
spoofing
spoofly
spoofs
spooge
spoogeed
spoogeer
spoogees
spoogeing
spoogely
spooges
spunk
spunked
spunker
spunkes
spunking
spunkly
spunks
steamyed
steamyer
steamyes
steamying
steamyly
steamys
stfu
stfued
stfuer
stfues
stfuing
stfuly
stfus
stiffy
stiffyed
stiffyer
stiffyes
stiffying
stiffyly
stiffys
stoneded
stoneder
stonedes
stoneding
stonedly
stoneds
stupided
stupider
stupides
stupiding
stupidly
stupids
suckeded
suckeder
suckedes
suckeding
suckedly
suckeds
sucker
suckes
sucking
suckinged
suckinger
suckinges
suckinging
suckingly
suckings
suckly
sucks
sumofabiatch
sumofabiatched
sumofabiatcher
sumofabiatches
sumofabiatching
sumofabiatchly
sumofabiatchs
tard
tarded
tarder
tardes
tarding
tardly
tards
tawdry
tawdryed
tawdryer
tawdryes
tawdrying
tawdryly
tawdrys
teabagging
teabagginged
teabagginger
teabagginges
teabagginging
teabaggingly
teabaggings
terd
terded
terder
terdes
terding
terdly
terds
teste
testee
testeed
testeeed
testeeer
testeees
testeeing
testeely
testeer
testees
testeing
testely
testes
testesed
testeser
testeses
testesing
testesly
testess
testicle
testicleed
testicleer
testiclees
testicleing
testiclely
testicles
testis
testised
testiser
testises
testising
testisly
testiss
thrusted
thruster
thrustes
thrusting
thrustly
thrusts
thug
thuged
thuger
thuges
thuging
thugly
thugs
tinkle
tinkleed
tinkleer
tinklees
tinkleing
tinklely
tinkles
tit
tited
titer
tites
titfuck
titfucked
titfucker
titfuckes
titfucking
titfuckly
titfucks
titi
titied
titier
tities
titiing
titily
titing
titis
titly
tits
titsed
titser
titses
titsing
titsly
titss
tittiefucker
tittiefuckered
tittiefuckerer
tittiefuckeres
tittiefuckering
tittiefuckerly
tittiefuckers
titties
tittiesed
tittieser
tittieses
tittiesing
tittiesly
tittiess
titty
tittyed
tittyer
tittyes
tittyfuck
tittyfucked
tittyfucker
tittyfuckered
tittyfuckerer
tittyfuckeres
tittyfuckering
tittyfuckerly
tittyfuckers
tittyfuckes
tittyfucking
tittyfuckly
tittyfucks
tittying
tittyly
tittys
toke
tokeed
tokeer
tokees
tokeing
tokely
tokes
toots
tootsed
tootser
tootses
tootsing
tootsly
tootss
tramp
tramped
tramper
trampes
tramping
tramply
tramps
transsexualed
transsexualer
transsexuales
transsexualing
transsexually
transsexuals
trashy
trashyed
trashyer
trashyes
trashying
trashyly
trashys
tubgirl
tubgirled
tubgirler
tubgirles
tubgirling
tubgirlly
tubgirls
turd
turded
turder
turdes
turding
turdly
turds
tush
tushed
tusher
tushes
tushing
tushly
tushs
twat
twated
twater
twates
twating
twatly
twats
twatsed
twatser
twatses
twatsing
twatsly
twatss
undies
undiesed
undieser
undieses
undiesing
undiesly
undiess
unweded
unweder
unwedes
unweding
unwedly
unweds
uzi
uzied
uzier
uzies
uziing
uzily
uzis
vag
vaged
vager
vages
vaging
vagly
vags
valium
valiumed
valiumer
valiumes
valiuming
valiumly
valiums
venous
virgined
virginer
virgines
virgining
virginly
virgins
vixen
vixened
vixener
vixenes
vixening
vixenly
vixens
vodkaed
vodkaer
vodkaes
vodkaing
vodkaly
vodkas
voyeur
voyeured
voyeurer
voyeures
voyeuring
voyeurly
voyeurs
vulgar
vulgared
vulgarer
vulgares
vulgaring
vulgarly
vulgars
wang
wanged
wanger
wanges
wanging
wangly
wangs
wank
wanked
wanker
wankered
wankerer
wankeres
wankering
wankerly
wankers
wankes
wanking
wankly
wanks
wazoo
wazooed
wazooer
wazooes
wazooing
wazooly
wazoos
wedgie
wedgieed
wedgieer
wedgiees
wedgieing
wedgiely
wedgies
weeded
weeder
weedes
weeding
weedly
weeds
weenie
weenieed
weenieer
weeniees
weenieing
weeniely
weenies
weewee
weeweeed
weeweeer
weeweees
weeweeing
weeweely
weewees
weiner
weinered
weinerer
weineres
weinering
weinerly
weiners
weirdo
weirdoed
weirdoer
weirdoes
weirdoing
weirdoly
weirdos
wench
wenched
wencher
wenches
wenching
wenchly
wenchs
wetback
wetbacked
wetbacker
wetbackes
wetbacking
wetbackly
wetbacks
whitey
whiteyed
whiteyer
whiteyes
whiteying
whiteyly
whiteys
whiz
whized
whizer
whizes
whizing
whizly
whizs
whoralicious
whoralicioused
whoraliciouser
whoraliciouses
whoraliciousing
whoraliciously
whoraliciouss
whore
whorealicious
whorealicioused
whorealiciouser
whorealiciouses
whorealiciousing
whorealiciously
whorealiciouss
whored
whoreded
whoreder
whoredes
whoreding
whoredly
whoreds
whoreed
whoreer
whorees
whoreface
whorefaceed
whorefaceer
whorefacees
whorefaceing
whorefacely
whorefaces
whorehopper
whorehoppered
whorehopperer
whorehopperes
whorehoppering
whorehopperly
whorehoppers
whorehouse
whorehouseed
whorehouseer
whorehousees
whorehouseing
whorehousely
whorehouses
whoreing
whorely
whores
whoresed
whoreser
whoreses
whoresing
whoresly
whoress
whoring
whoringed
whoringer
whoringes
whoringing
whoringly
whorings
wigger
wiggered
wiggerer
wiggeres
wiggering
wiggerly
wiggers
woody
woodyed
woodyer
woodyes
woodying
woodyly
woodys
wop
woped
woper
wopes
woping
woply
wops
wtf
wtfed
wtfer
wtfes
wtfing
wtfly
wtfs
xxx
xxxed
xxxer
xxxes
xxxing
xxxly
xxxs
yeasty
yeastyed
yeastyer
yeastyes
yeastying
yeastyly
yeastys
yobbo
yobboed
yobboer
yobboes
yobboing
yobboly
yobbos
zoophile
zoophileed
zoophileer
zoophilees
zoophileing
zoophilely
zoophiles
anal
ass
ass lick
balls
ballsac
bisexual
bleach
causas
cheap
cost of miracles
cunt
display network stats
fart
fda and death
fda AND warn
fda AND warning
fda AND warns
feom
fuck
gfc
humira AND expensive
illegal
madvocate
masturbation
nuccitelli
overdose
porn
shit
snort
texarkana
direct\-acting antivirals
assistance
ombitasvir
support path
harvoni
abbvie
direct-acting antivirals
paritaprevir
advocacy
ledipasvir
vpak
ritonavir with dasabuvir
program
gilead
greedy
financial
needy
fake-ovir
viekira pak
v pak
sofosbuvir
support
oasis
discount
dasabuvir
protest
ritonavir
Negative Keywords Excluded Elements
header[@id='header']
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
footer[@id='footer']
div[contains(@class, 'pane-pub-article-cleveland-clinic')]
div[contains(@class, 'pane-pub-home-cleveland-clinic')]
div[contains(@class, 'pane-pub-topic-cleveland-clinic')]
div[contains(@class, 'panel-panel-inner')]
div[contains(@class, 'pane-node-field-article-topics')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
Altmetric
DSM Affiliated
Display in offset block
Disqus Exclude
Best Practices
CE/CME
Education Center
Medical Education Library
Enable Disqus
Display Author and Disclosure Link
Publication Type
Society
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Disable Sticky Ads
Disable Ad Block Mitigation
Featured Buckets Admin
LayerRx MD-IQ Id
773
Show Ads on this Publication's Homepage
Consolidated Pub
Show Article Page Numbers on TOC
Use larger logo size
Off
publication_blueconic_enabled
Off
Show More Destinations Menu
Disable Adhesion on Publication
Off
Restore Menu Label on Mobile Navigation
Disable Facebook Pixel from Publication
Exclude this publication from publication selection on articles and quiz

The bittersweet of steroid therapy

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/03/2022 - 15:59
Display Headline
The bittersweet of steroid therapy

Every physician—general internist, subspecialist, or surgeon—has had to deal with complications of glucocorticoid therapy. Infections may be the most worrisome in terms of risk of death, as these drugs can both open the door to opportunistic organisms and delay the diagnosis by blunting the signs and symptoms of infection-associated inflammation. But the metabolic ravages of long-term steroid therapy can also plague patients and their physicians.

For many of those long-term effects, such as osteoporosis, cushingoid features, skin fragility, and cataracts, all we can do is hope that they don’t occur, since there is little we can do to screen for or prevent them. We have previously discussed steroid-associated osteoporosis in the Journal,1 and strategies for preventing it have been proposed by specialty societies.2 For other complications such as hypertension, weight gain, and glucose intolerance, we can offer common-sense protective suggestions, monitor for them, and intervene if they occur.

In this issue, Dr. M. Cecilia Lansang and Ms. Leighanne Kramer Hustak3 discuss the management of steroid-induced adrenal suppression and diabetes. They offer practical management suggestions but also point out that the evidence base for our treatment decisions is surprisingly limited.

Nearly all patients chronically receiving high-dose glucocorticoid therapy develop glucose intolerance, but knowing when that is happening is not always easy. In patients destined to develop type 2 diabetes, the laboratory or clinical signs of hyperglycemia appear only when the pancreas can no longer maintain the insulin production necessary to overcome peripheral insulin resistance. Steroid-induced diabetes is characterized by increased gluconeogenesis, insulin resistance, and excessive postprandial surges, so fasting glucose levels are not sensitive for this clinical syndrome.

The degree and duration of the chronic hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycemia dictates the risk of microvascular complications and thus will be linked to duration of steroid therapy (unless the steroid is unmasking preexisting mild diabetes). Although issues surrounding tight control of blood glucose levels in the acute setting remain unresolved, I believe that even short-term significant steroid-induced hyperglycemia should be prevented when reasonably possible, at the least keeping in mind the additive ill effects of hyperglycemia and steroid therapy on the risk of nuisance infections such as oral and vaginal candidiasis and urinary tract infections that, in the setting of high-dose steroid therapy, can rapidly turn nasty.

References
  1. Dore RK. How to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Cleve Clin J Med 2010; 77:529536.
  2. American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis. Recommendations for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: 2001 update. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44:14961503.
  3. Lansang MC, Hustak LK. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: how to detect and manage them. Cleve Clin J Med 2011; 78:748756.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Brian F. Mandell, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
709
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Brian F. Mandell, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Author and Disclosure Information

Brian F. Mandell, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Every physician—general internist, subspecialist, or surgeon—has had to deal with complications of glucocorticoid therapy. Infections may be the most worrisome in terms of risk of death, as these drugs can both open the door to opportunistic organisms and delay the diagnosis by blunting the signs and symptoms of infection-associated inflammation. But the metabolic ravages of long-term steroid therapy can also plague patients and their physicians.

For many of those long-term effects, such as osteoporosis, cushingoid features, skin fragility, and cataracts, all we can do is hope that they don’t occur, since there is little we can do to screen for or prevent them. We have previously discussed steroid-associated osteoporosis in the Journal,1 and strategies for preventing it have been proposed by specialty societies.2 For other complications such as hypertension, weight gain, and glucose intolerance, we can offer common-sense protective suggestions, monitor for them, and intervene if they occur.

In this issue, Dr. M. Cecilia Lansang and Ms. Leighanne Kramer Hustak3 discuss the management of steroid-induced adrenal suppression and diabetes. They offer practical management suggestions but also point out that the evidence base for our treatment decisions is surprisingly limited.

Nearly all patients chronically receiving high-dose glucocorticoid therapy develop glucose intolerance, but knowing when that is happening is not always easy. In patients destined to develop type 2 diabetes, the laboratory or clinical signs of hyperglycemia appear only when the pancreas can no longer maintain the insulin production necessary to overcome peripheral insulin resistance. Steroid-induced diabetes is characterized by increased gluconeogenesis, insulin resistance, and excessive postprandial surges, so fasting glucose levels are not sensitive for this clinical syndrome.

The degree and duration of the chronic hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycemia dictates the risk of microvascular complications and thus will be linked to duration of steroid therapy (unless the steroid is unmasking preexisting mild diabetes). Although issues surrounding tight control of blood glucose levels in the acute setting remain unresolved, I believe that even short-term significant steroid-induced hyperglycemia should be prevented when reasonably possible, at the least keeping in mind the additive ill effects of hyperglycemia and steroid therapy on the risk of nuisance infections such as oral and vaginal candidiasis and urinary tract infections that, in the setting of high-dose steroid therapy, can rapidly turn nasty.

Every physician—general internist, subspecialist, or surgeon—has had to deal with complications of glucocorticoid therapy. Infections may be the most worrisome in terms of risk of death, as these drugs can both open the door to opportunistic organisms and delay the diagnosis by blunting the signs and symptoms of infection-associated inflammation. But the metabolic ravages of long-term steroid therapy can also plague patients and their physicians.

For many of those long-term effects, such as osteoporosis, cushingoid features, skin fragility, and cataracts, all we can do is hope that they don’t occur, since there is little we can do to screen for or prevent them. We have previously discussed steroid-associated osteoporosis in the Journal,1 and strategies for preventing it have been proposed by specialty societies.2 For other complications such as hypertension, weight gain, and glucose intolerance, we can offer common-sense protective suggestions, monitor for them, and intervene if they occur.

In this issue, Dr. M. Cecilia Lansang and Ms. Leighanne Kramer Hustak3 discuss the management of steroid-induced adrenal suppression and diabetes. They offer practical management suggestions but also point out that the evidence base for our treatment decisions is surprisingly limited.

Nearly all patients chronically receiving high-dose glucocorticoid therapy develop glucose intolerance, but knowing when that is happening is not always easy. In patients destined to develop type 2 diabetes, the laboratory or clinical signs of hyperglycemia appear only when the pancreas can no longer maintain the insulin production necessary to overcome peripheral insulin resistance. Steroid-induced diabetes is characterized by increased gluconeogenesis, insulin resistance, and excessive postprandial surges, so fasting glucose levels are not sensitive for this clinical syndrome.

The degree and duration of the chronic hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycemia dictates the risk of microvascular complications and thus will be linked to duration of steroid therapy (unless the steroid is unmasking preexisting mild diabetes). Although issues surrounding tight control of blood glucose levels in the acute setting remain unresolved, I believe that even short-term significant steroid-induced hyperglycemia should be prevented when reasonably possible, at the least keeping in mind the additive ill effects of hyperglycemia and steroid therapy on the risk of nuisance infections such as oral and vaginal candidiasis and urinary tract infections that, in the setting of high-dose steroid therapy, can rapidly turn nasty.

References
  1. Dore RK. How to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Cleve Clin J Med 2010; 77:529536.
  2. American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis. Recommendations for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: 2001 update. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44:14961503.
  3. Lansang MC, Hustak LK. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: how to detect and manage them. Cleve Clin J Med 2011; 78:748756.
References
  1. Dore RK. How to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Cleve Clin J Med 2010; 77:529536.
  2. American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis. Recommendations for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: 2001 update. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44:14961503.
  3. Lansang MC, Hustak LK. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: how to detect and manage them. Cleve Clin J Med 2011; 78:748756.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Page Number
709
Page Number
709
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
The bittersweet of steroid therapy
Display Headline
The bittersweet of steroid therapy
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: How to detect and manage them

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/03/2022 - 15:59
Display Headline
Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: How to detect and manage them

Glucocorticoids are commonly prescribed by primary care physicians and specialists alike for multiple medical problems, acute as well as chronic.

However, these useful drugs have adverse effects on multiple endocrine systems, effects that include diabetes (or worsening of hyperglycemia in those with known diabetes), Cushing syndrome, adrenal suppression, osteoporosis (reviewed in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine in August 2010),1 and dyslipidemia. In addition, suppression of gonadotropins, growth hormone, and, acutely, thyrotropin can ensue.

The focus of this review is on the diabetogenic and adrenal suppressive effects of glucocorticoids and their management. We describe the rationale for choosing specific drugs to counter hyperglycemia, tests for determining adrenal suppression and systemic glucocorticoid absorption, and how and why to taper these drugs.

WIDELY USED DRUGS

Although glucocorticoids (often simply called steroids or corticosteroids, although not all steroids are corticosteroids, and not all corticosteroids are glucocorticoids) are the core treatment for adrenal insufficiency, in most cases they are prescribed for their anti-inflammatory effects. They act through multiple pathways at the cellular and molecular levels, suppressing the cascades that would otherwise result in inflammation and promoting pathways that produce anti-inflammatory proteins.2

In addition to formulations that are intended to have systemic effects, other, “local” formulations are made for specific conditions, such as intra-articular injections for arthritis, epidural injections for lumbar disk pain, eye drops for uveitis, nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis, inhalers for asthma, and topical ointments and creams for eczema. However, as we will discuss, even these preparations can have systemic effects.

GLUCOCORTICOID-INDUCED DIABETES IS COMMON

Glucocorticoids are the most common cause of drug-induced diabetes. Though the exact prevalence is not known, a few observations suggest that glucocorticoid-induced diabetes or hyperglycemia is common:

  • In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, mean age 62 years, nearly 9% developed diabetes in the 2 years after starting glucocorticoid treatment, which was a higher rate than expected.3
  • In nondiabetic patients with primary renal disease treated with prednisolone 0.75 mg/kg/day, 42% were found to have 2-hour post-lunch plasma glucose concentrations higher than 200 mg/dL but normal fasting glucose levels.4
  • In a case-control study, the odds ratio of starting an oral hypoglycemic agent or insulin was 1.77 for patients receiving a hydrocortisone-equivalent dose of 1 to 39 mg/day, 3.02 for 40 to 79 mg/day, 5.82 for 80 to 119 mg/day, and 10.34 for 120 mg/day or more.5 (For a full discussion of glucocorticoid equivalents, see the section below on Cushing syndrome and adrenal suppression.)
  • In patients with type 1 diabetes, prednisone 60 mg/day raised the blood glucose levels starting 6 hours after the prednisone dose.6
  • Diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar nonketotic syndrome have been reported as a result of glucocorticoid treatment.7–9

GLUCOCORTICOIDS CAUSE DIABETES MAINLY VIA INSULIN RESISTANCE

The mechanism by which glucocorticoids cause diabetes predominantly involves insulin resistance rather than decreased insulin production. In fact, in a study in healthy volunteers, 10 hydrocortisone infusion resulted in higher insulin production than saline infusion did. (In high doses, however, glucocorticoids have been shown to decrease insulin secretion.11)

Normally, in response to insulin, the liver decreases its output of glucose. Glucocorticoids decrease the liver’s sensitivity to insulin, thereby increasing hepatic glucose output.12 They also inhibit glucose uptake in muscle and fat, reducing insulin sensitivity as much as 60% in healthy volunteers. This seems primarily due to a postreceptor effect, ie, inhibition of glucose transport.13–15

THE PEAK EFFECT OCCURS 4 TO 6 HOURS AFTER DOSING

To understand the optimal time for checking plasma glucose and to apply appropriate treatment, we should consider the pharmacokinetic profile of glucocorticoids.

Studied using the whole-blood lymphocyte proliferation technique, prednisone shows a peak effect at about 4 to 6 hours and a duration of action of 13 to 16 hours.16 This closely resembles what we see in terms of glucose excursion with this drug.17 Two studies of intravenous dexamethasone 10 mg showed that glucose levels rose within 4 hours of injection, but did not pursue this beyond that time frame.18,19

 

 

PATIENTS WITHOUT A PREVIOUS DIAGNOSIS OF DIABETES

Be alert for new-onset diabetes

For most diseases treated with glucocorticoids, clinicians can estimate in advance how long the patient will need to take the drug. We can arbitrarily classify the projected exposure as either short-term (3 to 4 weeks or less, such as a 6-day course of methylprednisolone for allergic conditions) or long-term (such as in transplant recipients to prevent rejection or to treat graft-vs-host disease). Hyperglycemia is a potential concern with both short-term and long-term treatment. However, guidelines on checking blood sugar levels, as opposed to relying on symptoms alone, are available only for long-term glucocorticoid treatment.

Patients beginning treatment should be warned of typical diabetes symptoms such as thirst and increased urination and, should these occur, to seek medical attention to have their blood glucose level checked. It is also reasonable to have them return in a week for a random postprandial plasma glucose test in the mid-afternoon.

Why this timing? In most once-daily regimens, glucocorticoids are given in the morning to prevent adrenal suppression (discussed below). In our experience, glucose levels start to rise mid-morning and continue to increase until bedtime. Measuring glucose levels 1 to 2 hours after lunch allows for both the glucocorticoid action and the carbohydrate absorption from lunch to reach their peaks. If hyperglycemia is going to happen, it should be detectable by then. A glucose level of 200 mg/dL or higher should prompt the practitioner to pursue this further.

If glucocorticoid treatment is to continue beyond 3 to 4 weeks, the only population for which there are published guidelines on managing glucocorticoid-related diabetes is transplant recipients. International consensus guidelines, published in 2003, suggest checking the fasting plasma glucose level once a week for the first 4 weeks after transplantation, then at 3 months, at 6 months, and then once a year.20

Though practical, this suggestion does not reflect the fact that glucocorticoids often do not affect fasting plasma glucose, especially if given once daily in the morning at doses of 30 mg or less of prednisone or its equivalent. These guidelines thus may not be applicable to other populations with glucocorticoid-induced diabetes.

The transplant guidelines do mention that an oral glucose tolerance test may be more sensitive, but this is often cumbersome to perform. We believe that checking random postprandial plasma glucose levels is helpful in this regard.

The American Diabetes Association cutoff for diagnosing diabetes when using a random (ie, nonfasting) plasma glucose level is 200 mg/dL or higher in a patient with classic symptoms of hyperglycemia such as polyuria and polydipsia (Table 1).21 In the absence of such symptoms, a hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, or oral glucose tolerance test may be used and the results confirmed with repeat testing.

If the patient was at risk of developing diabetes even before receiving a glucocorticoid (for example, if he or she is overweight, has a family history of diabetes, or had a previous hemoglobin A1c of 5.7% or higher), then a fasting plasma glucose level of 126 mg/dL or higher or a hemoglobin A1c of 6.5% or higher might suffice to diagnose diabetes. Results should be confirmed on a separate day in the absence of unequivocal hyperglycemia. Fasting hyperglycemia can also be seen in patients receiving higher once-daily glucocorticoid doses—in our experience, an equivalent of prednisone 40 mg once a day in the morning— or twice-daily dosing.

A hemoglobin A1c checked less than 2 to 3 months after starting glucocorticoid treatment will not be sensitive in picking up glucocorticoid-induced diabetes if the patient did not have underlying diabetes.

Diet and exercise may not be practical

Though diet and exercise are important in managing diabetes, the condition for which the patient is receiving a glucocorticoid may prevent him or her from exercising, at least in the acute phase of the illness.

In addition, though the exact mechanism is not known, glucocorticoids increase hunger, and so decreasing food intake is not easy either. Nonetheless, patients should be familiarized with what carbohydrates are and should be advised to reduce their intake of them.

For suspected type 1 diabetes, start insulin

If type 1 diabetes is suspected, for example, in patients who are lean, younger than 30 years, or who had presented with diabetic ketoacidosis, then insulin should be started. In equivocal cases, insulin therapy can commence while testing is done for C-peptide, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies, islet cell antibodies, and insulinoma-associated protein antibodies.

For all other patients, keep in mind the characteristics of glucocorticoids (Table 2) that may affect the drug treatment of diabetes.

Starting oral antidiabetic drugs

Some patients may have contraindications to specific drugs. For example, metformin (Glucophage) is contraindicated if the serum creatinine level is elevated, an abnormality that renal transplant patients may continue to have.

If the patient has no such contraindications, we have found the following medications suitable in view of their efficacy, low risk of hypoglycemia, or lack of distressing side effects. They will often lower glucose levels enough to achieve capillary blood glucose or fingerstick goals (discussed below). None of them has been specifically approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, but they are approved for type 2 diabetes.

Guidelines from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists for type 2 diabetes call for starting monotherapy if the hemoglobin A1c is 6.5% to 7.5%, dual therapy if it is 7.6% to 9%, triple therapy if it is higher than 9% and the patient has no symptoms, and insulin if it is higher than 9% and the patient does have symptoms.22

In terms of estimated average glucose levels, these categories correspond to 140 to 169 mg/dL for monotherapy, 171 to 212 mg/dL for dual therapy, and higher than 212 mg/dL for triple therapy or insulin. Since estimated average levels also include fasting glucose levels (which are lower in glucocorticoid-induced diabetes compared with nonfasting levels), and because we use the American Diabetes Association general hemoglobin A1c goal of less than 7%, we believe that our suggestions below are reasonable.

We divide our recommendations according to initial random (ideally, 1- to 2-hour postprandial) plasma glucose levels.

 

 

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is lower than 220 mg/dL

In this situation the choices are:

  • Metformin
  • Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (“gliptins”)
  • Meglitinides (“glinides”). The guidelines on new-onset diabetes after transplantation point out that meglitinides may be the safest agents apart from insulin in the renal transplant population, but does acknowledge that efficacies of different oral agents have not been compared in this group.20
  • Glucagon-like protein-1 (GLP-1) agonists
  • Sulfonylureas. However, the longer-acting forms such as glimepiride (Amaryl) are not suitable if the fasting plasma glucose is not affected.

We have not used thiazolidinediones (“glitazones”) routinely because they can cause weight gain and edema—problems that are already seen with the use of steroids—and have a slower onset of action.

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is 220 to 300 mg/dL

Often, a combination of drugs or insulin (see below) is needed. However, you can start with one agent and add a second agent within 2 or 3 months (as is recommended for type 2 diabetes).22,23 The following combinations of the agents listed above are supported by published guidelines for type 2 diabetes:

  • Metformin plus a sulfonylurea22,23
  • Metformin plus a glinide22
  • Metformin plus a GLP-1 agonist23
  • Metformin plus a DPP-4 inhibitor.22

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is higher than 300 mg/dL

In our experience, if their plasma glucose levels are this high, patients are experiencing frank symptoms of hyperglycemia.

Insulin addresses those symptoms and avoids the prolonged wait that often results from unsuccessfully starting one agent and then adding another. Of all the available drugs, insulin is the only one that can be used despite multiple underlying illnesses; it does not cause a lot of drug interactions, and the dose can be adjusted upward and downward in increments to fit the patient’s needs, especially when a larger glucocorticoid load is given up front and then is tapered either slowly or rapidly. However, it can cause hypoglycemia and weight gain.

The initial total daily dose of insulin can be based on the patient’s weight. A starting total daily dose of 0.15 to 0.3 U/kg is reasonable— on the lower end if only the postprandial glucose levels are elevated, and on the higher end if both fasting and postprandial glucose levels are affected.

If fasting glucose levels are not elevated, then Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin (which is intermediate-acting) or a premixed combination of an intermediate-acting plus a fast- or short-acting insulin can be given once a day before breakfast, or even before lunch if the glucose levels start to rise only after lunch.

If both the fasting and the postprandial glucose levels are elevated, regimens similar to those for type 1 or insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes can be used, except that the ratios of the doses are tilted more toward covering postprandial than fasting hyperglycemia:

  • Long-acting insulin plus prandial insulin, in a ratio of 30:70 to 50:50. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the long-acting insulin may have to be discontinued while the prandial doses are continued, since the fasting glucose level decreases first.
  • Premixed insulins, with one-half to two-thirds of the dose given before breakfast and the rest before the evening meal, with the possibility of a third injection before lunch. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the evening dose is tapered first.
  • Intermediate-acting insulin plus short- or fast-acting insulin in the morning (these two will make up one-half to two-thirds of the total daily dose), short- or fast-acting insulin before the evening meal, and intermediate-acting insulin at bedtime. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the bedtime insulin is tapered first.

Capillary blood glucose (fingerstick) checks

The timing and frequency of fingerstick checks depend on the treatment.

Though postprandial testing is ideal, it is often not practical or convenient. Before lunch, before dinner, and at bedtime are good alternatives since they reflect the pattern of glucose rise throughout the day. For patients on diet and exercise with or without agents other than insulin, testing once or twice a day is reasonable, rotating times before meals (including fasting if this time is affected) and at bedtime.

For patients on insulin, checking two to four times a day initially would help match insulin doses with glucose excursions. For continued care, the American Diabetes Association recommends fingerstick checks three times daily in patients on multiple insulin injections, but it has no specific recommendations for those on once-a-day insulin.21 We have been recommending that our patients on once-daily insulin check at least twice a day.

Goal fingerstick glucose levels that we use are in accordance with the American Diabetes Association guidelines for diabetes in general21:

  • Before meals 70 to 130 mg/dL or
  • 1 to 2 hours after meals < 180 mg/dL.

During steroid taper, if the glucocorticoid dose is in the lower range (eg, a prednisone-equivalent dose of approximately 7.5 mg per day or less), the fingerstick glucose levels are at the lower end of the target range, and the patient is on a single antidiabetic agent that does not often cause hypoglycemia (eg, metformin), then it is reasonable to ask the patient to not take the antidiabetic medication for 3 to 7 days while continuing to check fingersticks to see if it needs to be resumed. Patients on agents that can cause hypoglycemia need to check more often during the 1 to 3 days after the glucocorticoid dose reduction, as it may take this much time for the glycemic effect to diminish and to adjust the diabetes medication to the appropriate dose.

STARTING GLUCOCORTICOIDS IN PATIENTS WITH KNOWN DIABETES

Fingerstick checks more often

Most patients will already have a glucose meter. They should be instructed to check as discussed above if they do not have a previous diagnosis of diabetes, or to continue as they are doing if they are already checking more often. Patients who have been checking only fasting levels should be instructed to check later in the day, either before or 1 to 2 hours after meals, as discussed above. Patients on oral medications may need additional oral agents or insulin.

 

 

Adjust medications if glucose is not at goal

Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with diet and exercise alone can be started on the medications discussed above if their fingerstick readings are not at goal.

If they are already on insulin, we advise them to increase the short- or fast-acting insulins and the morning intermediate-acting insulin by at least 10% to 20% as soon as an elevation in glucose is detected. Long-acting insulin or nighttime intermediate-acting insulin should be increased if fasting glucose levels are affected.

Insulin requirements can double depending on the glucocorticoid dose. In patients with type 1 diabetes who were given prednisone 60 mg orally for 3 days, mean blood glucose levels increased from a baseline of 110 mg/dL at baseline to 149 mg/dL on the days on prednisone.6 The average blood glucose level remained elevated at 141 mg/dL on the day after the last dose of prednisone. The insulin dose increased by 31% to 102% (mean 69%).

CUSHING SYNDROME AND ADRENAL SUPPRESSION

Unlike glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, in which the dilemma is often when to initiate antidiabetic treatment, the question for patients in whom Cushing syndrome or adrenal suppression has developed is when to discontinue glucocorticoids.

Adrenal suppression for the most part goes hand in hand with exogenous Cushing syndrome. If cushingoid features develop, we can infer that the dose of exogenous glucocorticoid exceeds the physiologic needs. This supraphysiologic dosing also leads to suppression of endogenous cortisol production. The suppression occurs at the level of the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, with subsequent atrophy of the part of the adrenal cortex that produces endogenous glucocorticoids.

To understand further the concept of supraphysiologic dosing, the following interconversion of systemic glucocorticoid effects is helpful24,25:

However, there is not much information on interconversion for the local preparations (intra-articular, epidural, inhaled, topical).

Moreover, the definition of supraphysiologic dosing seems to be evolving. Though a total hydrocortisone-equivalent dose of 30 mg/day is still often touted as physiologic replacement, many patients require less. Several studies in the early 1990s, mostly in children and adolescents, showed the mean daily cortisol production rate to be 4.8 to 6.8 mg/m2/day, or closer to 10 to 15 mg/day.26–28 For purposes of this discussion, a physiologic dose will be defined as up to 30 mg hydrocortisone per day or its equivalent.

Adrenal suppression vs insufficiency

Adrenal suppression is often confused with adrenal insufficiency.

Adrenal suppression occurs when cortisol production is decreased because of the presence of exogenous glucocorticoids or other drugs, such as megestrol acetate (Megace), that act on the glucocorticoid receptor. Another situation beyond the scope of this review is excess endogenous cortisol production by an adrenal adenoma or adrenal carcinoma that causes suppression of the contralateral adrenal gland.29

In contrast, adrenal insufficiency is caused by failure of the adrenal gland to produce cortisol as a result of an innate disorder of the adrenal gland (eg, Addison disease) or pituitary gland (eg, pituitary surgery).

Hence, endogenous cortisol production in a patient taking supraphysiologic doses of exogenous glucocorticoids may be suppressed. Recovery of endogenous cortisol production is expected after stopping the exogenous glucocorticoid, though the time to recovery can vary and the patient can be adrenally insufficient if the glucocorticoid is stopped abruptly.

In addition, during times of intercurrent illness, a patient with adrenal suppression may be relatively adrenally insufficient and may need larger doses (“stress doses”) of glucocorticoids, since the adrenal glands may be unable to mount a stress response.29

Local steroids can suppress the adrenal glands

Glucocorticoids are the most common cause of Cushing syndrome. Oral formulations such as dexamethasone, prednisone, and hydrocortisone taken in supraphysiologic doses and for prolonged durations are easily recognized as obvious causes of Cushing syndrome. However, intra-articular, epidural, inhaled, nasal, ocular, and topical steroids—so-called local preparations—have also been linked to Cushing syndrome, and physicians are less likely to recognize them as causes.30–38

In a study in 16 pediatric patients with asthma and 48 controls, inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate (Qvar) 300 to 500 μg daily resulted in adrenal suppression in 100% of patients after 6 to 42 months, as determined by an insulin tolerance test.30

The topical steroid betamethasone (Diprosone) carries a warning that systemic absorption of topical steroids can cause adrenal suppression.39 Intra-articular, intranasal, epidural, and ocular routes are also reported to cause adrenal suppression.32–38

When is adrenal suppression more likely?

Adrenal suppression is more likely in the following situations:

  • Longer duration of treatment. Studies have shown that exposure to supraphysiologic steroid doses for 2 weeks or less might already suppress the adrenal glands, but the clinical significance of this is unclear since some recovery already occurs a few days after the glucocorticoids are discontinued.31,40
  • Supraphysiologic doses, stronger formulations, longer-acting formulations.41

When is adrenal suppression less likely?

Adrenal suppression is less likely in the following situations:

  • Regimens that mimic the diurnal rhythm of cortisol (higher dose in the morning, lower dose in the afternoon)42
  • Alternate-day dosing of steroids.43

 

 

Steroid withdrawal vs adrenal insufficiency

Another phenomenon that can be confused with adrenal insufficiency or glucocorticoid insufficiency is steroid withdrawal, in which patients experience lethargy, muscle aches, nausea, vomiting, and postural hypotension as glucocorticoids are tapered and their effects wane.42 Increasing the glucocorticoid dose for presumed adrenal insufficiency may delay recovery of the adrenal function and would have to be weighed against the patient’s symptoms.

The following may help distinguish the two: if the patient is on supraphysiologic glucocorticoid doses, then he or she is not glucocorticoid-deficient and is likely suffering from steroid withdrawal. At this point, patients may just need reassurance, symptomatic treatment, or if necessary, a brief (1-week) increase of the previous lowest dose, followed by reevaluation.

With local glucocorticoid preparations that may be systemically absorbed, however, there is no good way of estimating dose equivalence. In these situations, the decision to simply reassure the patient or give symptomatic treatment—as opposed to giving low-dose oral glucocorticoids such as hydrocortisone 5 to 10 mg daily for a week followed by reevaluation— depends on the severity of symptoms and whether the patient has quick access to medical attention should he or she develop an intercurrent illness.

Identifying patients at risk of adrenal suppression

Patients presenting with weight gain or symptoms suggesting Cushing syndrome should be asked about steroid intake and should be prompted to recall possible nonoral routes. In addition, patients presenting with muscle aches and fatigue—symptoms of steroid withdrawal— may have received unrecognized local glucocorticoids that were systemically absorbed, now with diminishing effects.

The ACTH stimulation test for adrenal recovery

Testing can be done to see if the adrenal glands have recovered and glucocorticoid therapy can be discontinued (see Tapering from glucocorticoids, below).

The test most often used is the corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test. Since the suppression is at the level of the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, the ACTH stimulation test is an indirect method of assessing hypothalamic and pituitary function in the context of glucocorticoid-induced adrenal suppression. It has good correlation with the insulin tolerance test, the gold-standard test for an intact hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

The synthetic ACTH cosyntropin (Cortrosyn) 250 μg is injected intravenously or intramuscularly, and a cortisol level is drawn at baseline and 30 and 60 minutes later. Other doses such as 1 μg or 10 μg have been reported but are not yet widely accepted. A cortisol level of greater than 18 to 20 μg/dL at any time point shows that the adrenals have regained function and the steroids may be discontinued.42 If adrenal suppression persists, weaning from steroids should continue.

In reality, it may not be possible or practical to do an ACTH stimulation test, as not all physicians’ offices have a supply of cosyntropin or the manpower to perform the test correctly. In these cases, weaning can progress with monitoring of symptoms.

Testing for synthetic glucocorticoids in the urine and serum can demonstrate systemic absorption and may be helpful in patients who do not recall receiving steroids.33

Tapering from glucocorticoids

Several tapering schedules have been suggested (although not necessarily validated). Whether and how to taper depend on how long the glucocorticoid has been taken.

If taken for less than 1 week, glucocorticoids can be stopped without tapering, regardless of the dose.

If taken for 1 to 3 weeks, the decision to taper depends on the clinician’s assessment of the patient’s general health or constitution and the illness for which the glucocorticoid was prescribed. For example, if the underlying disease is less likely to flare with a gradual dose reduction, then tapering would be suitable.44

If taken for more than 3 weeks, the practice has been a more rapid taper at the beginning until a physiologic dose is reached. How quickly to reduce the dose depends on whether the underlying illness is expected to flare up, or if the patient might experience steroid withdrawal symptoms.

One schedule is to lower the glucocorticoid dose by an amount equivalent to prednisolone 2.5 mg every 3 to 4 days when above the physiologic dose, then to taper more slowly by 1 mg every 2 to 4 weeks.44 Once the physiologic dose is reached, one can switch to the equivalent dose of hydrocortisone and decrease the dose by 2.5 mg a week until a daily dose of 10 mg a day is reached and maintained for 2 to 3 months, and then perform a test of adrenal function (see above).44 Passing the test implies that the adrenal glands have recovered and the glucocorticoid can be stopped.

Another option is to switch to alternate-day therapy once a physiologic dose is reached and to test 8:00 am cortisol levels, continuing the glucocorticoid and retesting in 4 to 6 weeks if the value is less than 3 μg/dL; stopping the glucocorticoid if the value is higher than 20 μg/dL; and performing an ACTH stimulation test for values in between.45

A review of other tapering regimens for chronic diseases, mostly pulmonary, did not find enough evidence to recommend one particular schedule over another.46 The tapering schedule may have to be adjusted to prevent disease flare and symptoms of steroid withdrawal.

Locally administered steroids. Since the equivalence of systemically absorbed local glucocorticoids is not known, these patients are likely to present when they have symptoms of steroid withdrawal. In this situation, testing adrenal function will help.

References
  1. Dore RK. How to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Cleve Clin J Med 2010; 77:529536.
  2. Rhen T, Cidlowski JA. Antiinflammatory action of glucocorticoids—new mechanisms for old drugs. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:17111723.
  3. Panthakalam S, Bhatnagar D, Klimiuk P. The prevalence and management of hyperglycaemia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis on corticosteroid therapy. Scott Med J 2004; 49:139141.
  4. Uzu T, Harada T, Sakaguchi M, et al. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes mellitus: prevalence and risk factors in primary renal diseases. Nephron Clin Pract 2007; 105:c54c57.
  5. Gurwitz JH, Bohn RL, Glynn RJ, Monane M, Mogun H, Avorn J. Glucocorticoids and the risk for initiation of hypoglycemic therapy. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154:97101.
  6. Bevier WC, Zisser HC, Jovanovic L, et al. Use of continuous glucose monitoring to estimate insulin requirements in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus during a short course of prednisone. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2008; 2:578583.
  7. Cagdas DN, Paç FA, Cakal E. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetic ketoacidosis in acute rheumatic fever. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 2008; 13:298300.
  8. Bedalov A, Balasubramanyam A. Glucocorticoid-induced ketoacidosis in gestational diabetes: sequela of the acute treatment of preterm labor. A case report. Diabetes Care 1997; 20:922924.
  9. Yang JY, Cui XL, He XJ. Non-ketotic hyperosmolar coma complicating steroid treatment in childhood nephrosis. Pediatr Nephrol 1995; 9:621622.
  10. Nielsen MF, Caumo A, Chandramouli V, et al. Impaired basal glucose effectiveness but unaltered fasting glucose release and gluconeogenesis during short-term hypercortisolemia in healthy subjects. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2004; 286:E102E110.
  11. Matsumoto K, Yamasaki H, Akazawa S, et al. High-dose but not low-dose dexamethasone impairs glucose tolerance by inducing compensatory failure of pancreatic beta-cells in normal men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81:26212626.
  12. Rizza RA, Mandarino LJ, Gerich JE. Cortisol-induced insulin resistance in man: impaired suppression of glucose production and stimulation of glucose utilization due to a postreceptor detect of insulin action. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1982; 54:131138.
  13. Meyuhas O, Reshef L, Gunn JM, Hanson RW, Ballard FJ. Regulation of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (GTP) in adipose tissue in vivo by glucocorticoids and insulin. Biochem J 1976; 158:17.
  14. Tappy L, Randin D, Vollenweider P, et al. Mechanisms of dexamethasone-induced insulin resistance in healthy humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1994; 79:10631069.
  15. Pagano G, Cavallo-Perin P, Cassader M, et al. An in vivo and in vitro study of the mechanism of prednisone-induced insulin resistance in healthy subjects. J Clin Invest 1983; 72:18141820.
  16. Magee MH, Blum RA, Lates CD, Jusko WJ. Pharmacokinetic/pharmaco-dynamic model for prednisolone inhibition of whole blood lymphocyte proliferation. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 53:474484.
  17. Burt MG, Roberts GW, Aguilar-Loza NR, Frith P, Stranks SN. Continuous monitoring of circadian glycemic patterns in patients receiving prednisolone for COPD. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 96:17891796.
  18. Hans P, Vanthuyne A, Dewandre PY, Brichant JF, Bonhomme V. Blood glucose concentration profile after 10 mg dexamethasone in non-diabetic and type 2 diabetic patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth 2006; 97:164170.
  19. Pasternak JJ, McGregor DG, Lanier WL. Effect of single-dose dexamethasone on blood glucose concentration in patients undergoing craniotomy. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2004; 16:122125.
  20. Davidson J, Wilkinson A, Dantal J, et al; International Expert Panel. New-onset diabetes after transplantation: 2003 international consensus guidelines. Proceedings of an international expert panel meeting. Barcelona, Spain, 19 February 2003. Transplantation 2003; 75(suppl 10):SS3SS24.
  21. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes— 2011. Diabetes Care 2011; 34(suppl 1):S11S61.
  22. Rodbard HW, Jellinger PS, Davidson JA, et al. Statement by an American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology consensus panel on type 2 diabetes mellitus: an algorithm for glycemic control. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:540559.
  23. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al; American Diabetes Association; European Association for Study of Diabetes. Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32:193203.
  24. Axelrod L. Corticosteroid therapy. In:Becker KL, editor. Principles and Practice of Endocrinology and Metabolism. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2000:752763.
  25. Ferri FF, editor. Practical Guide to the Care of the Medical Patient. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby/Elsevier; 2011.
  26. Kerrigan JR, Veldhuis JD, Leyo SA, Iranmanesh A, Rogol AD. Estimation of daily cortisol production and clearance rates in normal pubertal males by deconvolution analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1993; 76:15051510.
  27. Linder BL, Esteban NV, Yergey AL, Winterer JC, Loriaux DL, Cassorla F. Cortisol production rate in childhood and adolescence. J Pediatr 1990; 117:892896.
  28. Esteban NV, Loughlin T, Yergey AL, et al. Daily cortisol production rate in man determined by stable isotope dilution/mass spectrometry. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1991; 72:3945.
  29. Lansang MC, Quinn SL. Adrenal suppression. BMJ BestPractice 2010. http://bestpractice.bmj.com/best-practice/monograph/863/diagnosis/stepby-step.html. Accessed August 19, 2011.
  30. Zöllner EW. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression in asthmatic children on inhaled corticosteroids (part 2)—the risk as determined by gold standard adrenal function tests: a systematic review. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2007; 18:469474.
  31. Schuetz P, Christ-Crain M, Schild U, et al. Effect of a 14-day course of systemic corticosteroids on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMC Pulm Med 2008; 8:1.
  32. Kay J, Findling JW, Raff H. Epidural triamcinolone suppresses the pituitary-adrenal axis in human subjects. Anesth Analg 1994; 79:501505.
  33. Lansang MC, Farmer T, Kennedy L. Diagnosing the unrecognized systemic absorption of intra-articular and epidural steroid injections. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:225228.
  34. Duclos M, Guinot M, Colsy M, et al. High risk of adrenal insufficiency after a single articular steroid injection in athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007; 39:10361043.
  35. Bong JL, Connell JM, Lever R. Intranasal betamethasone induced acne and adrenal suppression. Br J Dermatol 2000; 142:579580.
  36. Atabek ME, Pirgon O, Unal E. Pituitary-adrenal axis suppression due to topical steroid administration in an infant. Pediatr Int 2007; 49:242244.
  37. Ozerdem U, Levi L, Cheng L, Song MK, Scher C, Freeman WR. Systemic toxicity of topical and periocular corticosteroid therapy in an 11-year-old male with posterior uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 2000; 130:240241.
  38. Chiang MY, Sarkar M, Koppens JM, Milles J, Shah P. Exogenous Cushing’s syndrome and topical ocular steroids. Eye (Lond) 2006; 20:725727.
  39. Diprolene prescribing information. Schering Corp 2005. www.theodora.com/drugs/diprolene_gel_005_schering.html. Accessed September 27, 2011.
  40. Villabona CV, Koh C, Panergo J, Reddy A, Fogelfeld L. Adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation test during high-dose glucocorticoid therapy. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:122127.
  41. Ortega E, Rodriguez C, Strand LJ, Segre E. Effects of cloprednol and other corticosteroids on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function. J Int Med Res 1976; 4:326337.
  42. Axelrod L. Glucocorticoid therapy. Medicine (Baltimore) 1976; 55:3965.
  43. Schürmeyer TH, Tsokos GC, Avgerinos PC, et al. Pituitary-adrenal responsiveness to corticotropin-releasing hormone in patients receiving chronic, alternate day glucocorticoid therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985; 61:2227.
  44. Stewart PM. The adrenal cortex. In:Kronenberg HM, editor. Williams Textbook of Endocrinology. 11th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier; 2008.
  45. Hopkins RL, Leinung MC. Exogenous Cushing’s syndrome and glucocorticoid withdrawal. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2005; 34:371384.
  46. Richter B, Neises G, Clar C. Glucocorticoid withdrawal schemes in chronic medical disorders. A systematic review. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2002; 31:751778.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

M. Cecilia Lansang, MD, MPH
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic

Leighanne Kramer Hustak, DNP, BC-FNP, CDE
Department of Internal Medicine, Independence Family Health Center, Cleveland Clinic

Address: M. Cecilia Lansang, MD, MPH, Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, F20, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail Lansanm@ccf.org

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
748-756
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

M. Cecilia Lansang, MD, MPH
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic

Leighanne Kramer Hustak, DNP, BC-FNP, CDE
Department of Internal Medicine, Independence Family Health Center, Cleveland Clinic

Address: M. Cecilia Lansang, MD, MPH, Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, F20, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail Lansanm@ccf.org

Author and Disclosure Information

M. Cecilia Lansang, MD, MPH
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic

Leighanne Kramer Hustak, DNP, BC-FNP, CDE
Department of Internal Medicine, Independence Family Health Center, Cleveland Clinic

Address: M. Cecilia Lansang, MD, MPH, Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, F20, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail Lansanm@ccf.org

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Glucocorticoids are commonly prescribed by primary care physicians and specialists alike for multiple medical problems, acute as well as chronic.

However, these useful drugs have adverse effects on multiple endocrine systems, effects that include diabetes (or worsening of hyperglycemia in those with known diabetes), Cushing syndrome, adrenal suppression, osteoporosis (reviewed in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine in August 2010),1 and dyslipidemia. In addition, suppression of gonadotropins, growth hormone, and, acutely, thyrotropin can ensue.

The focus of this review is on the diabetogenic and adrenal suppressive effects of glucocorticoids and their management. We describe the rationale for choosing specific drugs to counter hyperglycemia, tests for determining adrenal suppression and systemic glucocorticoid absorption, and how and why to taper these drugs.

WIDELY USED DRUGS

Although glucocorticoids (often simply called steroids or corticosteroids, although not all steroids are corticosteroids, and not all corticosteroids are glucocorticoids) are the core treatment for adrenal insufficiency, in most cases they are prescribed for their anti-inflammatory effects. They act through multiple pathways at the cellular and molecular levels, suppressing the cascades that would otherwise result in inflammation and promoting pathways that produce anti-inflammatory proteins.2

In addition to formulations that are intended to have systemic effects, other, “local” formulations are made for specific conditions, such as intra-articular injections for arthritis, epidural injections for lumbar disk pain, eye drops for uveitis, nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis, inhalers for asthma, and topical ointments and creams for eczema. However, as we will discuss, even these preparations can have systemic effects.

GLUCOCORTICOID-INDUCED DIABETES IS COMMON

Glucocorticoids are the most common cause of drug-induced diabetes. Though the exact prevalence is not known, a few observations suggest that glucocorticoid-induced diabetes or hyperglycemia is common:

  • In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, mean age 62 years, nearly 9% developed diabetes in the 2 years after starting glucocorticoid treatment, which was a higher rate than expected.3
  • In nondiabetic patients with primary renal disease treated with prednisolone 0.75 mg/kg/day, 42% were found to have 2-hour post-lunch plasma glucose concentrations higher than 200 mg/dL but normal fasting glucose levels.4
  • In a case-control study, the odds ratio of starting an oral hypoglycemic agent or insulin was 1.77 for patients receiving a hydrocortisone-equivalent dose of 1 to 39 mg/day, 3.02 for 40 to 79 mg/day, 5.82 for 80 to 119 mg/day, and 10.34 for 120 mg/day or more.5 (For a full discussion of glucocorticoid equivalents, see the section below on Cushing syndrome and adrenal suppression.)
  • In patients with type 1 diabetes, prednisone 60 mg/day raised the blood glucose levels starting 6 hours after the prednisone dose.6
  • Diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar nonketotic syndrome have been reported as a result of glucocorticoid treatment.7–9

GLUCOCORTICOIDS CAUSE DIABETES MAINLY VIA INSULIN RESISTANCE

The mechanism by which glucocorticoids cause diabetes predominantly involves insulin resistance rather than decreased insulin production. In fact, in a study in healthy volunteers, 10 hydrocortisone infusion resulted in higher insulin production than saline infusion did. (In high doses, however, glucocorticoids have been shown to decrease insulin secretion.11)

Normally, in response to insulin, the liver decreases its output of glucose. Glucocorticoids decrease the liver’s sensitivity to insulin, thereby increasing hepatic glucose output.12 They also inhibit glucose uptake in muscle and fat, reducing insulin sensitivity as much as 60% in healthy volunteers. This seems primarily due to a postreceptor effect, ie, inhibition of glucose transport.13–15

THE PEAK EFFECT OCCURS 4 TO 6 HOURS AFTER DOSING

To understand the optimal time for checking plasma glucose and to apply appropriate treatment, we should consider the pharmacokinetic profile of glucocorticoids.

Studied using the whole-blood lymphocyte proliferation technique, prednisone shows a peak effect at about 4 to 6 hours and a duration of action of 13 to 16 hours.16 This closely resembles what we see in terms of glucose excursion with this drug.17 Two studies of intravenous dexamethasone 10 mg showed that glucose levels rose within 4 hours of injection, but did not pursue this beyond that time frame.18,19

 

 

PATIENTS WITHOUT A PREVIOUS DIAGNOSIS OF DIABETES

Be alert for new-onset diabetes

For most diseases treated with glucocorticoids, clinicians can estimate in advance how long the patient will need to take the drug. We can arbitrarily classify the projected exposure as either short-term (3 to 4 weeks or less, such as a 6-day course of methylprednisolone for allergic conditions) or long-term (such as in transplant recipients to prevent rejection or to treat graft-vs-host disease). Hyperglycemia is a potential concern with both short-term and long-term treatment. However, guidelines on checking blood sugar levels, as opposed to relying on symptoms alone, are available only for long-term glucocorticoid treatment.

Patients beginning treatment should be warned of typical diabetes symptoms such as thirst and increased urination and, should these occur, to seek medical attention to have their blood glucose level checked. It is also reasonable to have them return in a week for a random postprandial plasma glucose test in the mid-afternoon.

Why this timing? In most once-daily regimens, glucocorticoids are given in the morning to prevent adrenal suppression (discussed below). In our experience, glucose levels start to rise mid-morning and continue to increase until bedtime. Measuring glucose levels 1 to 2 hours after lunch allows for both the glucocorticoid action and the carbohydrate absorption from lunch to reach their peaks. If hyperglycemia is going to happen, it should be detectable by then. A glucose level of 200 mg/dL or higher should prompt the practitioner to pursue this further.

If glucocorticoid treatment is to continue beyond 3 to 4 weeks, the only population for which there are published guidelines on managing glucocorticoid-related diabetes is transplant recipients. International consensus guidelines, published in 2003, suggest checking the fasting plasma glucose level once a week for the first 4 weeks after transplantation, then at 3 months, at 6 months, and then once a year.20

Though practical, this suggestion does not reflect the fact that glucocorticoids often do not affect fasting plasma glucose, especially if given once daily in the morning at doses of 30 mg or less of prednisone or its equivalent. These guidelines thus may not be applicable to other populations with glucocorticoid-induced diabetes.

The transplant guidelines do mention that an oral glucose tolerance test may be more sensitive, but this is often cumbersome to perform. We believe that checking random postprandial plasma glucose levels is helpful in this regard.

The American Diabetes Association cutoff for diagnosing diabetes when using a random (ie, nonfasting) plasma glucose level is 200 mg/dL or higher in a patient with classic symptoms of hyperglycemia such as polyuria and polydipsia (Table 1).21 In the absence of such symptoms, a hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, or oral glucose tolerance test may be used and the results confirmed with repeat testing.

If the patient was at risk of developing diabetes even before receiving a glucocorticoid (for example, if he or she is overweight, has a family history of diabetes, or had a previous hemoglobin A1c of 5.7% or higher), then a fasting plasma glucose level of 126 mg/dL or higher or a hemoglobin A1c of 6.5% or higher might suffice to diagnose diabetes. Results should be confirmed on a separate day in the absence of unequivocal hyperglycemia. Fasting hyperglycemia can also be seen in patients receiving higher once-daily glucocorticoid doses—in our experience, an equivalent of prednisone 40 mg once a day in the morning— or twice-daily dosing.

A hemoglobin A1c checked less than 2 to 3 months after starting glucocorticoid treatment will not be sensitive in picking up glucocorticoid-induced diabetes if the patient did not have underlying diabetes.

Diet and exercise may not be practical

Though diet and exercise are important in managing diabetes, the condition for which the patient is receiving a glucocorticoid may prevent him or her from exercising, at least in the acute phase of the illness.

In addition, though the exact mechanism is not known, glucocorticoids increase hunger, and so decreasing food intake is not easy either. Nonetheless, patients should be familiarized with what carbohydrates are and should be advised to reduce their intake of them.

For suspected type 1 diabetes, start insulin

If type 1 diabetes is suspected, for example, in patients who are lean, younger than 30 years, or who had presented with diabetic ketoacidosis, then insulin should be started. In equivocal cases, insulin therapy can commence while testing is done for C-peptide, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies, islet cell antibodies, and insulinoma-associated protein antibodies.

For all other patients, keep in mind the characteristics of glucocorticoids (Table 2) that may affect the drug treatment of diabetes.

Starting oral antidiabetic drugs

Some patients may have contraindications to specific drugs. For example, metformin (Glucophage) is contraindicated if the serum creatinine level is elevated, an abnormality that renal transplant patients may continue to have.

If the patient has no such contraindications, we have found the following medications suitable in view of their efficacy, low risk of hypoglycemia, or lack of distressing side effects. They will often lower glucose levels enough to achieve capillary blood glucose or fingerstick goals (discussed below). None of them has been specifically approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, but they are approved for type 2 diabetes.

Guidelines from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists for type 2 diabetes call for starting monotherapy if the hemoglobin A1c is 6.5% to 7.5%, dual therapy if it is 7.6% to 9%, triple therapy if it is higher than 9% and the patient has no symptoms, and insulin if it is higher than 9% and the patient does have symptoms.22

In terms of estimated average glucose levels, these categories correspond to 140 to 169 mg/dL for monotherapy, 171 to 212 mg/dL for dual therapy, and higher than 212 mg/dL for triple therapy or insulin. Since estimated average levels also include fasting glucose levels (which are lower in glucocorticoid-induced diabetes compared with nonfasting levels), and because we use the American Diabetes Association general hemoglobin A1c goal of less than 7%, we believe that our suggestions below are reasonable.

We divide our recommendations according to initial random (ideally, 1- to 2-hour postprandial) plasma glucose levels.

 

 

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is lower than 220 mg/dL

In this situation the choices are:

  • Metformin
  • Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (“gliptins”)
  • Meglitinides (“glinides”). The guidelines on new-onset diabetes after transplantation point out that meglitinides may be the safest agents apart from insulin in the renal transplant population, but does acknowledge that efficacies of different oral agents have not been compared in this group.20
  • Glucagon-like protein-1 (GLP-1) agonists
  • Sulfonylureas. However, the longer-acting forms such as glimepiride (Amaryl) are not suitable if the fasting plasma glucose is not affected.

We have not used thiazolidinediones (“glitazones”) routinely because they can cause weight gain and edema—problems that are already seen with the use of steroids—and have a slower onset of action.

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is 220 to 300 mg/dL

Often, a combination of drugs or insulin (see below) is needed. However, you can start with one agent and add a second agent within 2 or 3 months (as is recommended for type 2 diabetes).22,23 The following combinations of the agents listed above are supported by published guidelines for type 2 diabetes:

  • Metformin plus a sulfonylurea22,23
  • Metformin plus a glinide22
  • Metformin plus a GLP-1 agonist23
  • Metformin plus a DPP-4 inhibitor.22

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is higher than 300 mg/dL

In our experience, if their plasma glucose levels are this high, patients are experiencing frank symptoms of hyperglycemia.

Insulin addresses those symptoms and avoids the prolonged wait that often results from unsuccessfully starting one agent and then adding another. Of all the available drugs, insulin is the only one that can be used despite multiple underlying illnesses; it does not cause a lot of drug interactions, and the dose can be adjusted upward and downward in increments to fit the patient’s needs, especially when a larger glucocorticoid load is given up front and then is tapered either slowly or rapidly. However, it can cause hypoglycemia and weight gain.

The initial total daily dose of insulin can be based on the patient’s weight. A starting total daily dose of 0.15 to 0.3 U/kg is reasonable— on the lower end if only the postprandial glucose levels are elevated, and on the higher end if both fasting and postprandial glucose levels are affected.

If fasting glucose levels are not elevated, then Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin (which is intermediate-acting) or a premixed combination of an intermediate-acting plus a fast- or short-acting insulin can be given once a day before breakfast, or even before lunch if the glucose levels start to rise only after lunch.

If both the fasting and the postprandial glucose levels are elevated, regimens similar to those for type 1 or insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes can be used, except that the ratios of the doses are tilted more toward covering postprandial than fasting hyperglycemia:

  • Long-acting insulin plus prandial insulin, in a ratio of 30:70 to 50:50. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the long-acting insulin may have to be discontinued while the prandial doses are continued, since the fasting glucose level decreases first.
  • Premixed insulins, with one-half to two-thirds of the dose given before breakfast and the rest before the evening meal, with the possibility of a third injection before lunch. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the evening dose is tapered first.
  • Intermediate-acting insulin plus short- or fast-acting insulin in the morning (these two will make up one-half to two-thirds of the total daily dose), short- or fast-acting insulin before the evening meal, and intermediate-acting insulin at bedtime. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the bedtime insulin is tapered first.

Capillary blood glucose (fingerstick) checks

The timing and frequency of fingerstick checks depend on the treatment.

Though postprandial testing is ideal, it is often not practical or convenient. Before lunch, before dinner, and at bedtime are good alternatives since they reflect the pattern of glucose rise throughout the day. For patients on diet and exercise with or without agents other than insulin, testing once or twice a day is reasonable, rotating times before meals (including fasting if this time is affected) and at bedtime.

For patients on insulin, checking two to four times a day initially would help match insulin doses with glucose excursions. For continued care, the American Diabetes Association recommends fingerstick checks three times daily in patients on multiple insulin injections, but it has no specific recommendations for those on once-a-day insulin.21 We have been recommending that our patients on once-daily insulin check at least twice a day.

Goal fingerstick glucose levels that we use are in accordance with the American Diabetes Association guidelines for diabetes in general21:

  • Before meals 70 to 130 mg/dL or
  • 1 to 2 hours after meals < 180 mg/dL.

During steroid taper, if the glucocorticoid dose is in the lower range (eg, a prednisone-equivalent dose of approximately 7.5 mg per day or less), the fingerstick glucose levels are at the lower end of the target range, and the patient is on a single antidiabetic agent that does not often cause hypoglycemia (eg, metformin), then it is reasonable to ask the patient to not take the antidiabetic medication for 3 to 7 days while continuing to check fingersticks to see if it needs to be resumed. Patients on agents that can cause hypoglycemia need to check more often during the 1 to 3 days after the glucocorticoid dose reduction, as it may take this much time for the glycemic effect to diminish and to adjust the diabetes medication to the appropriate dose.

STARTING GLUCOCORTICOIDS IN PATIENTS WITH KNOWN DIABETES

Fingerstick checks more often

Most patients will already have a glucose meter. They should be instructed to check as discussed above if they do not have a previous diagnosis of diabetes, or to continue as they are doing if they are already checking more often. Patients who have been checking only fasting levels should be instructed to check later in the day, either before or 1 to 2 hours after meals, as discussed above. Patients on oral medications may need additional oral agents or insulin.

 

 

Adjust medications if glucose is not at goal

Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with diet and exercise alone can be started on the medications discussed above if their fingerstick readings are not at goal.

If they are already on insulin, we advise them to increase the short- or fast-acting insulins and the morning intermediate-acting insulin by at least 10% to 20% as soon as an elevation in glucose is detected. Long-acting insulin or nighttime intermediate-acting insulin should be increased if fasting glucose levels are affected.

Insulin requirements can double depending on the glucocorticoid dose. In patients with type 1 diabetes who were given prednisone 60 mg orally for 3 days, mean blood glucose levels increased from a baseline of 110 mg/dL at baseline to 149 mg/dL on the days on prednisone.6 The average blood glucose level remained elevated at 141 mg/dL on the day after the last dose of prednisone. The insulin dose increased by 31% to 102% (mean 69%).

CUSHING SYNDROME AND ADRENAL SUPPRESSION

Unlike glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, in which the dilemma is often when to initiate antidiabetic treatment, the question for patients in whom Cushing syndrome or adrenal suppression has developed is when to discontinue glucocorticoids.

Adrenal suppression for the most part goes hand in hand with exogenous Cushing syndrome. If cushingoid features develop, we can infer that the dose of exogenous glucocorticoid exceeds the physiologic needs. This supraphysiologic dosing also leads to suppression of endogenous cortisol production. The suppression occurs at the level of the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, with subsequent atrophy of the part of the adrenal cortex that produces endogenous glucocorticoids.

To understand further the concept of supraphysiologic dosing, the following interconversion of systemic glucocorticoid effects is helpful24,25:

However, there is not much information on interconversion for the local preparations (intra-articular, epidural, inhaled, topical).

Moreover, the definition of supraphysiologic dosing seems to be evolving. Though a total hydrocortisone-equivalent dose of 30 mg/day is still often touted as physiologic replacement, many patients require less. Several studies in the early 1990s, mostly in children and adolescents, showed the mean daily cortisol production rate to be 4.8 to 6.8 mg/m2/day, or closer to 10 to 15 mg/day.26–28 For purposes of this discussion, a physiologic dose will be defined as up to 30 mg hydrocortisone per day or its equivalent.

Adrenal suppression vs insufficiency

Adrenal suppression is often confused with adrenal insufficiency.

Adrenal suppression occurs when cortisol production is decreased because of the presence of exogenous glucocorticoids or other drugs, such as megestrol acetate (Megace), that act on the glucocorticoid receptor. Another situation beyond the scope of this review is excess endogenous cortisol production by an adrenal adenoma or adrenal carcinoma that causes suppression of the contralateral adrenal gland.29

In contrast, adrenal insufficiency is caused by failure of the adrenal gland to produce cortisol as a result of an innate disorder of the adrenal gland (eg, Addison disease) or pituitary gland (eg, pituitary surgery).

Hence, endogenous cortisol production in a patient taking supraphysiologic doses of exogenous glucocorticoids may be suppressed. Recovery of endogenous cortisol production is expected after stopping the exogenous glucocorticoid, though the time to recovery can vary and the patient can be adrenally insufficient if the glucocorticoid is stopped abruptly.

In addition, during times of intercurrent illness, a patient with adrenal suppression may be relatively adrenally insufficient and may need larger doses (“stress doses”) of glucocorticoids, since the adrenal glands may be unable to mount a stress response.29

Local steroids can suppress the adrenal glands

Glucocorticoids are the most common cause of Cushing syndrome. Oral formulations such as dexamethasone, prednisone, and hydrocortisone taken in supraphysiologic doses and for prolonged durations are easily recognized as obvious causes of Cushing syndrome. However, intra-articular, epidural, inhaled, nasal, ocular, and topical steroids—so-called local preparations—have also been linked to Cushing syndrome, and physicians are less likely to recognize them as causes.30–38

In a study in 16 pediatric patients with asthma and 48 controls, inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate (Qvar) 300 to 500 μg daily resulted in adrenal suppression in 100% of patients after 6 to 42 months, as determined by an insulin tolerance test.30

The topical steroid betamethasone (Diprosone) carries a warning that systemic absorption of topical steroids can cause adrenal suppression.39 Intra-articular, intranasal, epidural, and ocular routes are also reported to cause adrenal suppression.32–38

When is adrenal suppression more likely?

Adrenal suppression is more likely in the following situations:

  • Longer duration of treatment. Studies have shown that exposure to supraphysiologic steroid doses for 2 weeks or less might already suppress the adrenal glands, but the clinical significance of this is unclear since some recovery already occurs a few days after the glucocorticoids are discontinued.31,40
  • Supraphysiologic doses, stronger formulations, longer-acting formulations.41

When is adrenal suppression less likely?

Adrenal suppression is less likely in the following situations:

  • Regimens that mimic the diurnal rhythm of cortisol (higher dose in the morning, lower dose in the afternoon)42
  • Alternate-day dosing of steroids.43

 

 

Steroid withdrawal vs adrenal insufficiency

Another phenomenon that can be confused with adrenal insufficiency or glucocorticoid insufficiency is steroid withdrawal, in which patients experience lethargy, muscle aches, nausea, vomiting, and postural hypotension as glucocorticoids are tapered and their effects wane.42 Increasing the glucocorticoid dose for presumed adrenal insufficiency may delay recovery of the adrenal function and would have to be weighed against the patient’s symptoms.

The following may help distinguish the two: if the patient is on supraphysiologic glucocorticoid doses, then he or she is not glucocorticoid-deficient and is likely suffering from steroid withdrawal. At this point, patients may just need reassurance, symptomatic treatment, or if necessary, a brief (1-week) increase of the previous lowest dose, followed by reevaluation.

With local glucocorticoid preparations that may be systemically absorbed, however, there is no good way of estimating dose equivalence. In these situations, the decision to simply reassure the patient or give symptomatic treatment—as opposed to giving low-dose oral glucocorticoids such as hydrocortisone 5 to 10 mg daily for a week followed by reevaluation— depends on the severity of symptoms and whether the patient has quick access to medical attention should he or she develop an intercurrent illness.

Identifying patients at risk of adrenal suppression

Patients presenting with weight gain or symptoms suggesting Cushing syndrome should be asked about steroid intake and should be prompted to recall possible nonoral routes. In addition, patients presenting with muscle aches and fatigue—symptoms of steroid withdrawal— may have received unrecognized local glucocorticoids that were systemically absorbed, now with diminishing effects.

The ACTH stimulation test for adrenal recovery

Testing can be done to see if the adrenal glands have recovered and glucocorticoid therapy can be discontinued (see Tapering from glucocorticoids, below).

The test most often used is the corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test. Since the suppression is at the level of the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, the ACTH stimulation test is an indirect method of assessing hypothalamic and pituitary function in the context of glucocorticoid-induced adrenal suppression. It has good correlation with the insulin tolerance test, the gold-standard test for an intact hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

The synthetic ACTH cosyntropin (Cortrosyn) 250 μg is injected intravenously or intramuscularly, and a cortisol level is drawn at baseline and 30 and 60 minutes later. Other doses such as 1 μg or 10 μg have been reported but are not yet widely accepted. A cortisol level of greater than 18 to 20 μg/dL at any time point shows that the adrenals have regained function and the steroids may be discontinued.42 If adrenal suppression persists, weaning from steroids should continue.

In reality, it may not be possible or practical to do an ACTH stimulation test, as not all physicians’ offices have a supply of cosyntropin or the manpower to perform the test correctly. In these cases, weaning can progress with monitoring of symptoms.

Testing for synthetic glucocorticoids in the urine and serum can demonstrate systemic absorption and may be helpful in patients who do not recall receiving steroids.33

Tapering from glucocorticoids

Several tapering schedules have been suggested (although not necessarily validated). Whether and how to taper depend on how long the glucocorticoid has been taken.

If taken for less than 1 week, glucocorticoids can be stopped without tapering, regardless of the dose.

If taken for 1 to 3 weeks, the decision to taper depends on the clinician’s assessment of the patient’s general health or constitution and the illness for which the glucocorticoid was prescribed. For example, if the underlying disease is less likely to flare with a gradual dose reduction, then tapering would be suitable.44

If taken for more than 3 weeks, the practice has been a more rapid taper at the beginning until a physiologic dose is reached. How quickly to reduce the dose depends on whether the underlying illness is expected to flare up, or if the patient might experience steroid withdrawal symptoms.

One schedule is to lower the glucocorticoid dose by an amount equivalent to prednisolone 2.5 mg every 3 to 4 days when above the physiologic dose, then to taper more slowly by 1 mg every 2 to 4 weeks.44 Once the physiologic dose is reached, one can switch to the equivalent dose of hydrocortisone and decrease the dose by 2.5 mg a week until a daily dose of 10 mg a day is reached and maintained for 2 to 3 months, and then perform a test of adrenal function (see above).44 Passing the test implies that the adrenal glands have recovered and the glucocorticoid can be stopped.

Another option is to switch to alternate-day therapy once a physiologic dose is reached and to test 8:00 am cortisol levels, continuing the glucocorticoid and retesting in 4 to 6 weeks if the value is less than 3 μg/dL; stopping the glucocorticoid if the value is higher than 20 μg/dL; and performing an ACTH stimulation test for values in between.45

A review of other tapering regimens for chronic diseases, mostly pulmonary, did not find enough evidence to recommend one particular schedule over another.46 The tapering schedule may have to be adjusted to prevent disease flare and symptoms of steroid withdrawal.

Locally administered steroids. Since the equivalence of systemically absorbed local glucocorticoids is not known, these patients are likely to present when they have symptoms of steroid withdrawal. In this situation, testing adrenal function will help.

Glucocorticoids are commonly prescribed by primary care physicians and specialists alike for multiple medical problems, acute as well as chronic.

However, these useful drugs have adverse effects on multiple endocrine systems, effects that include diabetes (or worsening of hyperglycemia in those with known diabetes), Cushing syndrome, adrenal suppression, osteoporosis (reviewed in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine in August 2010),1 and dyslipidemia. In addition, suppression of gonadotropins, growth hormone, and, acutely, thyrotropin can ensue.

The focus of this review is on the diabetogenic and adrenal suppressive effects of glucocorticoids and their management. We describe the rationale for choosing specific drugs to counter hyperglycemia, tests for determining adrenal suppression and systemic glucocorticoid absorption, and how and why to taper these drugs.

WIDELY USED DRUGS

Although glucocorticoids (often simply called steroids or corticosteroids, although not all steroids are corticosteroids, and not all corticosteroids are glucocorticoids) are the core treatment for adrenal insufficiency, in most cases they are prescribed for their anti-inflammatory effects. They act through multiple pathways at the cellular and molecular levels, suppressing the cascades that would otherwise result in inflammation and promoting pathways that produce anti-inflammatory proteins.2

In addition to formulations that are intended to have systemic effects, other, “local” formulations are made for specific conditions, such as intra-articular injections for arthritis, epidural injections for lumbar disk pain, eye drops for uveitis, nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis, inhalers for asthma, and topical ointments and creams for eczema. However, as we will discuss, even these preparations can have systemic effects.

GLUCOCORTICOID-INDUCED DIABETES IS COMMON

Glucocorticoids are the most common cause of drug-induced diabetes. Though the exact prevalence is not known, a few observations suggest that glucocorticoid-induced diabetes or hyperglycemia is common:

  • In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, mean age 62 years, nearly 9% developed diabetes in the 2 years after starting glucocorticoid treatment, which was a higher rate than expected.3
  • In nondiabetic patients with primary renal disease treated with prednisolone 0.75 mg/kg/day, 42% were found to have 2-hour post-lunch plasma glucose concentrations higher than 200 mg/dL but normal fasting glucose levels.4
  • In a case-control study, the odds ratio of starting an oral hypoglycemic agent or insulin was 1.77 for patients receiving a hydrocortisone-equivalent dose of 1 to 39 mg/day, 3.02 for 40 to 79 mg/day, 5.82 for 80 to 119 mg/day, and 10.34 for 120 mg/day or more.5 (For a full discussion of glucocorticoid equivalents, see the section below on Cushing syndrome and adrenal suppression.)
  • In patients with type 1 diabetes, prednisone 60 mg/day raised the blood glucose levels starting 6 hours after the prednisone dose.6
  • Diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar nonketotic syndrome have been reported as a result of glucocorticoid treatment.7–9

GLUCOCORTICOIDS CAUSE DIABETES MAINLY VIA INSULIN RESISTANCE

The mechanism by which glucocorticoids cause diabetes predominantly involves insulin resistance rather than decreased insulin production. In fact, in a study in healthy volunteers, 10 hydrocortisone infusion resulted in higher insulin production than saline infusion did. (In high doses, however, glucocorticoids have been shown to decrease insulin secretion.11)

Normally, in response to insulin, the liver decreases its output of glucose. Glucocorticoids decrease the liver’s sensitivity to insulin, thereby increasing hepatic glucose output.12 They also inhibit glucose uptake in muscle and fat, reducing insulin sensitivity as much as 60% in healthy volunteers. This seems primarily due to a postreceptor effect, ie, inhibition of glucose transport.13–15

THE PEAK EFFECT OCCURS 4 TO 6 HOURS AFTER DOSING

To understand the optimal time for checking plasma glucose and to apply appropriate treatment, we should consider the pharmacokinetic profile of glucocorticoids.

Studied using the whole-blood lymphocyte proliferation technique, prednisone shows a peak effect at about 4 to 6 hours and a duration of action of 13 to 16 hours.16 This closely resembles what we see in terms of glucose excursion with this drug.17 Two studies of intravenous dexamethasone 10 mg showed that glucose levels rose within 4 hours of injection, but did not pursue this beyond that time frame.18,19

 

 

PATIENTS WITHOUT A PREVIOUS DIAGNOSIS OF DIABETES

Be alert for new-onset diabetes

For most diseases treated with glucocorticoids, clinicians can estimate in advance how long the patient will need to take the drug. We can arbitrarily classify the projected exposure as either short-term (3 to 4 weeks or less, such as a 6-day course of methylprednisolone for allergic conditions) or long-term (such as in transplant recipients to prevent rejection or to treat graft-vs-host disease). Hyperglycemia is a potential concern with both short-term and long-term treatment. However, guidelines on checking blood sugar levels, as opposed to relying on symptoms alone, are available only for long-term glucocorticoid treatment.

Patients beginning treatment should be warned of typical diabetes symptoms such as thirst and increased urination and, should these occur, to seek medical attention to have their blood glucose level checked. It is also reasonable to have them return in a week for a random postprandial plasma glucose test in the mid-afternoon.

Why this timing? In most once-daily regimens, glucocorticoids are given in the morning to prevent adrenal suppression (discussed below). In our experience, glucose levels start to rise mid-morning and continue to increase until bedtime. Measuring glucose levels 1 to 2 hours after lunch allows for both the glucocorticoid action and the carbohydrate absorption from lunch to reach their peaks. If hyperglycemia is going to happen, it should be detectable by then. A glucose level of 200 mg/dL or higher should prompt the practitioner to pursue this further.

If glucocorticoid treatment is to continue beyond 3 to 4 weeks, the only population for which there are published guidelines on managing glucocorticoid-related diabetes is transplant recipients. International consensus guidelines, published in 2003, suggest checking the fasting plasma glucose level once a week for the first 4 weeks after transplantation, then at 3 months, at 6 months, and then once a year.20

Though practical, this suggestion does not reflect the fact that glucocorticoids often do not affect fasting plasma glucose, especially if given once daily in the morning at doses of 30 mg or less of prednisone or its equivalent. These guidelines thus may not be applicable to other populations with glucocorticoid-induced diabetes.

The transplant guidelines do mention that an oral glucose tolerance test may be more sensitive, but this is often cumbersome to perform. We believe that checking random postprandial plasma glucose levels is helpful in this regard.

The American Diabetes Association cutoff for diagnosing diabetes when using a random (ie, nonfasting) plasma glucose level is 200 mg/dL or higher in a patient with classic symptoms of hyperglycemia such as polyuria and polydipsia (Table 1).21 In the absence of such symptoms, a hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, or oral glucose tolerance test may be used and the results confirmed with repeat testing.

If the patient was at risk of developing diabetes even before receiving a glucocorticoid (for example, if he or she is overweight, has a family history of diabetes, or had a previous hemoglobin A1c of 5.7% or higher), then a fasting plasma glucose level of 126 mg/dL or higher or a hemoglobin A1c of 6.5% or higher might suffice to diagnose diabetes. Results should be confirmed on a separate day in the absence of unequivocal hyperglycemia. Fasting hyperglycemia can also be seen in patients receiving higher once-daily glucocorticoid doses—in our experience, an equivalent of prednisone 40 mg once a day in the morning— or twice-daily dosing.

A hemoglobin A1c checked less than 2 to 3 months after starting glucocorticoid treatment will not be sensitive in picking up glucocorticoid-induced diabetes if the patient did not have underlying diabetes.

Diet and exercise may not be practical

Though diet and exercise are important in managing diabetes, the condition for which the patient is receiving a glucocorticoid may prevent him or her from exercising, at least in the acute phase of the illness.

In addition, though the exact mechanism is not known, glucocorticoids increase hunger, and so decreasing food intake is not easy either. Nonetheless, patients should be familiarized with what carbohydrates are and should be advised to reduce their intake of them.

For suspected type 1 diabetes, start insulin

If type 1 diabetes is suspected, for example, in patients who are lean, younger than 30 years, or who had presented with diabetic ketoacidosis, then insulin should be started. In equivocal cases, insulin therapy can commence while testing is done for C-peptide, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies, islet cell antibodies, and insulinoma-associated protein antibodies.

For all other patients, keep in mind the characteristics of glucocorticoids (Table 2) that may affect the drug treatment of diabetes.

Starting oral antidiabetic drugs

Some patients may have contraindications to specific drugs. For example, metformin (Glucophage) is contraindicated if the serum creatinine level is elevated, an abnormality that renal transplant patients may continue to have.

If the patient has no such contraindications, we have found the following medications suitable in view of their efficacy, low risk of hypoglycemia, or lack of distressing side effects. They will often lower glucose levels enough to achieve capillary blood glucose or fingerstick goals (discussed below). None of them has been specifically approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, but they are approved for type 2 diabetes.

Guidelines from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists for type 2 diabetes call for starting monotherapy if the hemoglobin A1c is 6.5% to 7.5%, dual therapy if it is 7.6% to 9%, triple therapy if it is higher than 9% and the patient has no symptoms, and insulin if it is higher than 9% and the patient does have symptoms.22

In terms of estimated average glucose levels, these categories correspond to 140 to 169 mg/dL for monotherapy, 171 to 212 mg/dL for dual therapy, and higher than 212 mg/dL for triple therapy or insulin. Since estimated average levels also include fasting glucose levels (which are lower in glucocorticoid-induced diabetes compared with nonfasting levels), and because we use the American Diabetes Association general hemoglobin A1c goal of less than 7%, we believe that our suggestions below are reasonable.

We divide our recommendations according to initial random (ideally, 1- to 2-hour postprandial) plasma glucose levels.

 

 

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is lower than 220 mg/dL

In this situation the choices are:

  • Metformin
  • Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (“gliptins”)
  • Meglitinides (“glinides”). The guidelines on new-onset diabetes after transplantation point out that meglitinides may be the safest agents apart from insulin in the renal transplant population, but does acknowledge that efficacies of different oral agents have not been compared in this group.20
  • Glucagon-like protein-1 (GLP-1) agonists
  • Sulfonylureas. However, the longer-acting forms such as glimepiride (Amaryl) are not suitable if the fasting plasma glucose is not affected.

We have not used thiazolidinediones (“glitazones”) routinely because they can cause weight gain and edema—problems that are already seen with the use of steroids—and have a slower onset of action.

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is 220 to 300 mg/dL

Often, a combination of drugs or insulin (see below) is needed. However, you can start with one agent and add a second agent within 2 or 3 months (as is recommended for type 2 diabetes).22,23 The following combinations of the agents listed above are supported by published guidelines for type 2 diabetes:

  • Metformin plus a sulfonylurea22,23
  • Metformin plus a glinide22
  • Metformin plus a GLP-1 agonist23
  • Metformin plus a DPP-4 inhibitor.22

If the random or 1- to 2-hour post-meal plasma glucose is higher than 300 mg/dL

In our experience, if their plasma glucose levels are this high, patients are experiencing frank symptoms of hyperglycemia.

Insulin addresses those symptoms and avoids the prolonged wait that often results from unsuccessfully starting one agent and then adding another. Of all the available drugs, insulin is the only one that can be used despite multiple underlying illnesses; it does not cause a lot of drug interactions, and the dose can be adjusted upward and downward in increments to fit the patient’s needs, especially when a larger glucocorticoid load is given up front and then is tapered either slowly or rapidly. However, it can cause hypoglycemia and weight gain.

The initial total daily dose of insulin can be based on the patient’s weight. A starting total daily dose of 0.15 to 0.3 U/kg is reasonable— on the lower end if only the postprandial glucose levels are elevated, and on the higher end if both fasting and postprandial glucose levels are affected.

If fasting glucose levels are not elevated, then Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin (which is intermediate-acting) or a premixed combination of an intermediate-acting plus a fast- or short-acting insulin can be given once a day before breakfast, or even before lunch if the glucose levels start to rise only after lunch.

If both the fasting and the postprandial glucose levels are elevated, regimens similar to those for type 1 or insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes can be used, except that the ratios of the doses are tilted more toward covering postprandial than fasting hyperglycemia:

  • Long-acting insulin plus prandial insulin, in a ratio of 30:70 to 50:50. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the long-acting insulin may have to be discontinued while the prandial doses are continued, since the fasting glucose level decreases first.
  • Premixed insulins, with one-half to two-thirds of the dose given before breakfast and the rest before the evening meal, with the possibility of a third injection before lunch. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the evening dose is tapered first.
  • Intermediate-acting insulin plus short- or fast-acting insulin in the morning (these two will make up one-half to two-thirds of the total daily dose), short- or fast-acting insulin before the evening meal, and intermediate-acting insulin at bedtime. As glucocorticoids are tapered, the bedtime insulin is tapered first.

Capillary blood glucose (fingerstick) checks

The timing and frequency of fingerstick checks depend on the treatment.

Though postprandial testing is ideal, it is often not practical or convenient. Before lunch, before dinner, and at bedtime are good alternatives since they reflect the pattern of glucose rise throughout the day. For patients on diet and exercise with or without agents other than insulin, testing once or twice a day is reasonable, rotating times before meals (including fasting if this time is affected) and at bedtime.

For patients on insulin, checking two to four times a day initially would help match insulin doses with glucose excursions. For continued care, the American Diabetes Association recommends fingerstick checks three times daily in patients on multiple insulin injections, but it has no specific recommendations for those on once-a-day insulin.21 We have been recommending that our patients on once-daily insulin check at least twice a day.

Goal fingerstick glucose levels that we use are in accordance with the American Diabetes Association guidelines for diabetes in general21:

  • Before meals 70 to 130 mg/dL or
  • 1 to 2 hours after meals < 180 mg/dL.

During steroid taper, if the glucocorticoid dose is in the lower range (eg, a prednisone-equivalent dose of approximately 7.5 mg per day or less), the fingerstick glucose levels are at the lower end of the target range, and the patient is on a single antidiabetic agent that does not often cause hypoglycemia (eg, metformin), then it is reasonable to ask the patient to not take the antidiabetic medication for 3 to 7 days while continuing to check fingersticks to see if it needs to be resumed. Patients on agents that can cause hypoglycemia need to check more often during the 1 to 3 days after the glucocorticoid dose reduction, as it may take this much time for the glycemic effect to diminish and to adjust the diabetes medication to the appropriate dose.

STARTING GLUCOCORTICOIDS IN PATIENTS WITH KNOWN DIABETES

Fingerstick checks more often

Most patients will already have a glucose meter. They should be instructed to check as discussed above if they do not have a previous diagnosis of diabetes, or to continue as they are doing if they are already checking more often. Patients who have been checking only fasting levels should be instructed to check later in the day, either before or 1 to 2 hours after meals, as discussed above. Patients on oral medications may need additional oral agents or insulin.

 

 

Adjust medications if glucose is not at goal

Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with diet and exercise alone can be started on the medications discussed above if their fingerstick readings are not at goal.

If they are already on insulin, we advise them to increase the short- or fast-acting insulins and the morning intermediate-acting insulin by at least 10% to 20% as soon as an elevation in glucose is detected. Long-acting insulin or nighttime intermediate-acting insulin should be increased if fasting glucose levels are affected.

Insulin requirements can double depending on the glucocorticoid dose. In patients with type 1 diabetes who were given prednisone 60 mg orally for 3 days, mean blood glucose levels increased from a baseline of 110 mg/dL at baseline to 149 mg/dL on the days on prednisone.6 The average blood glucose level remained elevated at 141 mg/dL on the day after the last dose of prednisone. The insulin dose increased by 31% to 102% (mean 69%).

CUSHING SYNDROME AND ADRENAL SUPPRESSION

Unlike glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, in which the dilemma is often when to initiate antidiabetic treatment, the question for patients in whom Cushing syndrome or adrenal suppression has developed is when to discontinue glucocorticoids.

Adrenal suppression for the most part goes hand in hand with exogenous Cushing syndrome. If cushingoid features develop, we can infer that the dose of exogenous glucocorticoid exceeds the physiologic needs. This supraphysiologic dosing also leads to suppression of endogenous cortisol production. The suppression occurs at the level of the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, with subsequent atrophy of the part of the adrenal cortex that produces endogenous glucocorticoids.

To understand further the concept of supraphysiologic dosing, the following interconversion of systemic glucocorticoid effects is helpful24,25:

However, there is not much information on interconversion for the local preparations (intra-articular, epidural, inhaled, topical).

Moreover, the definition of supraphysiologic dosing seems to be evolving. Though a total hydrocortisone-equivalent dose of 30 mg/day is still often touted as physiologic replacement, many patients require less. Several studies in the early 1990s, mostly in children and adolescents, showed the mean daily cortisol production rate to be 4.8 to 6.8 mg/m2/day, or closer to 10 to 15 mg/day.26–28 For purposes of this discussion, a physiologic dose will be defined as up to 30 mg hydrocortisone per day or its equivalent.

Adrenal suppression vs insufficiency

Adrenal suppression is often confused with adrenal insufficiency.

Adrenal suppression occurs when cortisol production is decreased because of the presence of exogenous glucocorticoids or other drugs, such as megestrol acetate (Megace), that act on the glucocorticoid receptor. Another situation beyond the scope of this review is excess endogenous cortisol production by an adrenal adenoma or adrenal carcinoma that causes suppression of the contralateral adrenal gland.29

In contrast, adrenal insufficiency is caused by failure of the adrenal gland to produce cortisol as a result of an innate disorder of the adrenal gland (eg, Addison disease) or pituitary gland (eg, pituitary surgery).

Hence, endogenous cortisol production in a patient taking supraphysiologic doses of exogenous glucocorticoids may be suppressed. Recovery of endogenous cortisol production is expected after stopping the exogenous glucocorticoid, though the time to recovery can vary and the patient can be adrenally insufficient if the glucocorticoid is stopped abruptly.

In addition, during times of intercurrent illness, a patient with adrenal suppression may be relatively adrenally insufficient and may need larger doses (“stress doses”) of glucocorticoids, since the adrenal glands may be unable to mount a stress response.29

Local steroids can suppress the adrenal glands

Glucocorticoids are the most common cause of Cushing syndrome. Oral formulations such as dexamethasone, prednisone, and hydrocortisone taken in supraphysiologic doses and for prolonged durations are easily recognized as obvious causes of Cushing syndrome. However, intra-articular, epidural, inhaled, nasal, ocular, and topical steroids—so-called local preparations—have also been linked to Cushing syndrome, and physicians are less likely to recognize them as causes.30–38

In a study in 16 pediatric patients with asthma and 48 controls, inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate (Qvar) 300 to 500 μg daily resulted in adrenal suppression in 100% of patients after 6 to 42 months, as determined by an insulin tolerance test.30

The topical steroid betamethasone (Diprosone) carries a warning that systemic absorption of topical steroids can cause adrenal suppression.39 Intra-articular, intranasal, epidural, and ocular routes are also reported to cause adrenal suppression.32–38

When is adrenal suppression more likely?

Adrenal suppression is more likely in the following situations:

  • Longer duration of treatment. Studies have shown that exposure to supraphysiologic steroid doses for 2 weeks or less might already suppress the adrenal glands, but the clinical significance of this is unclear since some recovery already occurs a few days after the glucocorticoids are discontinued.31,40
  • Supraphysiologic doses, stronger formulations, longer-acting formulations.41

When is adrenal suppression less likely?

Adrenal suppression is less likely in the following situations:

  • Regimens that mimic the diurnal rhythm of cortisol (higher dose in the morning, lower dose in the afternoon)42
  • Alternate-day dosing of steroids.43

 

 

Steroid withdrawal vs adrenal insufficiency

Another phenomenon that can be confused with adrenal insufficiency or glucocorticoid insufficiency is steroid withdrawal, in which patients experience lethargy, muscle aches, nausea, vomiting, and postural hypotension as glucocorticoids are tapered and their effects wane.42 Increasing the glucocorticoid dose for presumed adrenal insufficiency may delay recovery of the adrenal function and would have to be weighed against the patient’s symptoms.

The following may help distinguish the two: if the patient is on supraphysiologic glucocorticoid doses, then he or she is not glucocorticoid-deficient and is likely suffering from steroid withdrawal. At this point, patients may just need reassurance, symptomatic treatment, or if necessary, a brief (1-week) increase of the previous lowest dose, followed by reevaluation.

With local glucocorticoid preparations that may be systemically absorbed, however, there is no good way of estimating dose equivalence. In these situations, the decision to simply reassure the patient or give symptomatic treatment—as opposed to giving low-dose oral glucocorticoids such as hydrocortisone 5 to 10 mg daily for a week followed by reevaluation— depends on the severity of symptoms and whether the patient has quick access to medical attention should he or she develop an intercurrent illness.

Identifying patients at risk of adrenal suppression

Patients presenting with weight gain or symptoms suggesting Cushing syndrome should be asked about steroid intake and should be prompted to recall possible nonoral routes. In addition, patients presenting with muscle aches and fatigue—symptoms of steroid withdrawal— may have received unrecognized local glucocorticoids that were systemically absorbed, now with diminishing effects.

The ACTH stimulation test for adrenal recovery

Testing can be done to see if the adrenal glands have recovered and glucocorticoid therapy can be discontinued (see Tapering from glucocorticoids, below).

The test most often used is the corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test. Since the suppression is at the level of the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, the ACTH stimulation test is an indirect method of assessing hypothalamic and pituitary function in the context of glucocorticoid-induced adrenal suppression. It has good correlation with the insulin tolerance test, the gold-standard test for an intact hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

The synthetic ACTH cosyntropin (Cortrosyn) 250 μg is injected intravenously or intramuscularly, and a cortisol level is drawn at baseline and 30 and 60 minutes later. Other doses such as 1 μg or 10 μg have been reported but are not yet widely accepted. A cortisol level of greater than 18 to 20 μg/dL at any time point shows that the adrenals have regained function and the steroids may be discontinued.42 If adrenal suppression persists, weaning from steroids should continue.

In reality, it may not be possible or practical to do an ACTH stimulation test, as not all physicians’ offices have a supply of cosyntropin or the manpower to perform the test correctly. In these cases, weaning can progress with monitoring of symptoms.

Testing for synthetic glucocorticoids in the urine and serum can demonstrate systemic absorption and may be helpful in patients who do not recall receiving steroids.33

Tapering from glucocorticoids

Several tapering schedules have been suggested (although not necessarily validated). Whether and how to taper depend on how long the glucocorticoid has been taken.

If taken for less than 1 week, glucocorticoids can be stopped without tapering, regardless of the dose.

If taken for 1 to 3 weeks, the decision to taper depends on the clinician’s assessment of the patient’s general health or constitution and the illness for which the glucocorticoid was prescribed. For example, if the underlying disease is less likely to flare with a gradual dose reduction, then tapering would be suitable.44

If taken for more than 3 weeks, the practice has been a more rapid taper at the beginning until a physiologic dose is reached. How quickly to reduce the dose depends on whether the underlying illness is expected to flare up, or if the patient might experience steroid withdrawal symptoms.

One schedule is to lower the glucocorticoid dose by an amount equivalent to prednisolone 2.5 mg every 3 to 4 days when above the physiologic dose, then to taper more slowly by 1 mg every 2 to 4 weeks.44 Once the physiologic dose is reached, one can switch to the equivalent dose of hydrocortisone and decrease the dose by 2.5 mg a week until a daily dose of 10 mg a day is reached and maintained for 2 to 3 months, and then perform a test of adrenal function (see above).44 Passing the test implies that the adrenal glands have recovered and the glucocorticoid can be stopped.

Another option is to switch to alternate-day therapy once a physiologic dose is reached and to test 8:00 am cortisol levels, continuing the glucocorticoid and retesting in 4 to 6 weeks if the value is less than 3 μg/dL; stopping the glucocorticoid if the value is higher than 20 μg/dL; and performing an ACTH stimulation test for values in between.45

A review of other tapering regimens for chronic diseases, mostly pulmonary, did not find enough evidence to recommend one particular schedule over another.46 The tapering schedule may have to be adjusted to prevent disease flare and symptoms of steroid withdrawal.

Locally administered steroids. Since the equivalence of systemically absorbed local glucocorticoids is not known, these patients are likely to present when they have symptoms of steroid withdrawal. In this situation, testing adrenal function will help.

References
  1. Dore RK. How to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Cleve Clin J Med 2010; 77:529536.
  2. Rhen T, Cidlowski JA. Antiinflammatory action of glucocorticoids—new mechanisms for old drugs. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:17111723.
  3. Panthakalam S, Bhatnagar D, Klimiuk P. The prevalence and management of hyperglycaemia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis on corticosteroid therapy. Scott Med J 2004; 49:139141.
  4. Uzu T, Harada T, Sakaguchi M, et al. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes mellitus: prevalence and risk factors in primary renal diseases. Nephron Clin Pract 2007; 105:c54c57.
  5. Gurwitz JH, Bohn RL, Glynn RJ, Monane M, Mogun H, Avorn J. Glucocorticoids and the risk for initiation of hypoglycemic therapy. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154:97101.
  6. Bevier WC, Zisser HC, Jovanovic L, et al. Use of continuous glucose monitoring to estimate insulin requirements in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus during a short course of prednisone. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2008; 2:578583.
  7. Cagdas DN, Paç FA, Cakal E. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetic ketoacidosis in acute rheumatic fever. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 2008; 13:298300.
  8. Bedalov A, Balasubramanyam A. Glucocorticoid-induced ketoacidosis in gestational diabetes: sequela of the acute treatment of preterm labor. A case report. Diabetes Care 1997; 20:922924.
  9. Yang JY, Cui XL, He XJ. Non-ketotic hyperosmolar coma complicating steroid treatment in childhood nephrosis. Pediatr Nephrol 1995; 9:621622.
  10. Nielsen MF, Caumo A, Chandramouli V, et al. Impaired basal glucose effectiveness but unaltered fasting glucose release and gluconeogenesis during short-term hypercortisolemia in healthy subjects. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2004; 286:E102E110.
  11. Matsumoto K, Yamasaki H, Akazawa S, et al. High-dose but not low-dose dexamethasone impairs glucose tolerance by inducing compensatory failure of pancreatic beta-cells in normal men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81:26212626.
  12. Rizza RA, Mandarino LJ, Gerich JE. Cortisol-induced insulin resistance in man: impaired suppression of glucose production and stimulation of glucose utilization due to a postreceptor detect of insulin action. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1982; 54:131138.
  13. Meyuhas O, Reshef L, Gunn JM, Hanson RW, Ballard FJ. Regulation of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (GTP) in adipose tissue in vivo by glucocorticoids and insulin. Biochem J 1976; 158:17.
  14. Tappy L, Randin D, Vollenweider P, et al. Mechanisms of dexamethasone-induced insulin resistance in healthy humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1994; 79:10631069.
  15. Pagano G, Cavallo-Perin P, Cassader M, et al. An in vivo and in vitro study of the mechanism of prednisone-induced insulin resistance in healthy subjects. J Clin Invest 1983; 72:18141820.
  16. Magee MH, Blum RA, Lates CD, Jusko WJ. Pharmacokinetic/pharmaco-dynamic model for prednisolone inhibition of whole blood lymphocyte proliferation. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 53:474484.
  17. Burt MG, Roberts GW, Aguilar-Loza NR, Frith P, Stranks SN. Continuous monitoring of circadian glycemic patterns in patients receiving prednisolone for COPD. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 96:17891796.
  18. Hans P, Vanthuyne A, Dewandre PY, Brichant JF, Bonhomme V. Blood glucose concentration profile after 10 mg dexamethasone in non-diabetic and type 2 diabetic patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth 2006; 97:164170.
  19. Pasternak JJ, McGregor DG, Lanier WL. Effect of single-dose dexamethasone on blood glucose concentration in patients undergoing craniotomy. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2004; 16:122125.
  20. Davidson J, Wilkinson A, Dantal J, et al; International Expert Panel. New-onset diabetes after transplantation: 2003 international consensus guidelines. Proceedings of an international expert panel meeting. Barcelona, Spain, 19 February 2003. Transplantation 2003; 75(suppl 10):SS3SS24.
  21. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes— 2011. Diabetes Care 2011; 34(suppl 1):S11S61.
  22. Rodbard HW, Jellinger PS, Davidson JA, et al. Statement by an American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology consensus panel on type 2 diabetes mellitus: an algorithm for glycemic control. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:540559.
  23. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al; American Diabetes Association; European Association for Study of Diabetes. Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32:193203.
  24. Axelrod L. Corticosteroid therapy. In:Becker KL, editor. Principles and Practice of Endocrinology and Metabolism. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2000:752763.
  25. Ferri FF, editor. Practical Guide to the Care of the Medical Patient. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby/Elsevier; 2011.
  26. Kerrigan JR, Veldhuis JD, Leyo SA, Iranmanesh A, Rogol AD. Estimation of daily cortisol production and clearance rates in normal pubertal males by deconvolution analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1993; 76:15051510.
  27. Linder BL, Esteban NV, Yergey AL, Winterer JC, Loriaux DL, Cassorla F. Cortisol production rate in childhood and adolescence. J Pediatr 1990; 117:892896.
  28. Esteban NV, Loughlin T, Yergey AL, et al. Daily cortisol production rate in man determined by stable isotope dilution/mass spectrometry. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1991; 72:3945.
  29. Lansang MC, Quinn SL. Adrenal suppression. BMJ BestPractice 2010. http://bestpractice.bmj.com/best-practice/monograph/863/diagnosis/stepby-step.html. Accessed August 19, 2011.
  30. Zöllner EW. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression in asthmatic children on inhaled corticosteroids (part 2)—the risk as determined by gold standard adrenal function tests: a systematic review. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2007; 18:469474.
  31. Schuetz P, Christ-Crain M, Schild U, et al. Effect of a 14-day course of systemic corticosteroids on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMC Pulm Med 2008; 8:1.
  32. Kay J, Findling JW, Raff H. Epidural triamcinolone suppresses the pituitary-adrenal axis in human subjects. Anesth Analg 1994; 79:501505.
  33. Lansang MC, Farmer T, Kennedy L. Diagnosing the unrecognized systemic absorption of intra-articular and epidural steroid injections. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:225228.
  34. Duclos M, Guinot M, Colsy M, et al. High risk of adrenal insufficiency after a single articular steroid injection in athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007; 39:10361043.
  35. Bong JL, Connell JM, Lever R. Intranasal betamethasone induced acne and adrenal suppression. Br J Dermatol 2000; 142:579580.
  36. Atabek ME, Pirgon O, Unal E. Pituitary-adrenal axis suppression due to topical steroid administration in an infant. Pediatr Int 2007; 49:242244.
  37. Ozerdem U, Levi L, Cheng L, Song MK, Scher C, Freeman WR. Systemic toxicity of topical and periocular corticosteroid therapy in an 11-year-old male with posterior uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 2000; 130:240241.
  38. Chiang MY, Sarkar M, Koppens JM, Milles J, Shah P. Exogenous Cushing’s syndrome and topical ocular steroids. Eye (Lond) 2006; 20:725727.
  39. Diprolene prescribing information. Schering Corp 2005. www.theodora.com/drugs/diprolene_gel_005_schering.html. Accessed September 27, 2011.
  40. Villabona CV, Koh C, Panergo J, Reddy A, Fogelfeld L. Adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation test during high-dose glucocorticoid therapy. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:122127.
  41. Ortega E, Rodriguez C, Strand LJ, Segre E. Effects of cloprednol and other corticosteroids on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function. J Int Med Res 1976; 4:326337.
  42. Axelrod L. Glucocorticoid therapy. Medicine (Baltimore) 1976; 55:3965.
  43. Schürmeyer TH, Tsokos GC, Avgerinos PC, et al. Pituitary-adrenal responsiveness to corticotropin-releasing hormone in patients receiving chronic, alternate day glucocorticoid therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985; 61:2227.
  44. Stewart PM. The adrenal cortex. In:Kronenberg HM, editor. Williams Textbook of Endocrinology. 11th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier; 2008.
  45. Hopkins RL, Leinung MC. Exogenous Cushing’s syndrome and glucocorticoid withdrawal. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2005; 34:371384.
  46. Richter B, Neises G, Clar C. Glucocorticoid withdrawal schemes in chronic medical disorders. A systematic review. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2002; 31:751778.
References
  1. Dore RK. How to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Cleve Clin J Med 2010; 77:529536.
  2. Rhen T, Cidlowski JA. Antiinflammatory action of glucocorticoids—new mechanisms for old drugs. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:17111723.
  3. Panthakalam S, Bhatnagar D, Klimiuk P. The prevalence and management of hyperglycaemia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis on corticosteroid therapy. Scott Med J 2004; 49:139141.
  4. Uzu T, Harada T, Sakaguchi M, et al. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes mellitus: prevalence and risk factors in primary renal diseases. Nephron Clin Pract 2007; 105:c54c57.
  5. Gurwitz JH, Bohn RL, Glynn RJ, Monane M, Mogun H, Avorn J. Glucocorticoids and the risk for initiation of hypoglycemic therapy. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154:97101.
  6. Bevier WC, Zisser HC, Jovanovic L, et al. Use of continuous glucose monitoring to estimate insulin requirements in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus during a short course of prednisone. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2008; 2:578583.
  7. Cagdas DN, Paç FA, Cakal E. Glucocorticoid-induced diabetic ketoacidosis in acute rheumatic fever. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 2008; 13:298300.
  8. Bedalov A, Balasubramanyam A. Glucocorticoid-induced ketoacidosis in gestational diabetes: sequela of the acute treatment of preterm labor. A case report. Diabetes Care 1997; 20:922924.
  9. Yang JY, Cui XL, He XJ. Non-ketotic hyperosmolar coma complicating steroid treatment in childhood nephrosis. Pediatr Nephrol 1995; 9:621622.
  10. Nielsen MF, Caumo A, Chandramouli V, et al. Impaired basal glucose effectiveness but unaltered fasting glucose release and gluconeogenesis during short-term hypercortisolemia in healthy subjects. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2004; 286:E102E110.
  11. Matsumoto K, Yamasaki H, Akazawa S, et al. High-dose but not low-dose dexamethasone impairs glucose tolerance by inducing compensatory failure of pancreatic beta-cells in normal men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81:26212626.
  12. Rizza RA, Mandarino LJ, Gerich JE. Cortisol-induced insulin resistance in man: impaired suppression of glucose production and stimulation of glucose utilization due to a postreceptor detect of insulin action. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1982; 54:131138.
  13. Meyuhas O, Reshef L, Gunn JM, Hanson RW, Ballard FJ. Regulation of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (GTP) in adipose tissue in vivo by glucocorticoids and insulin. Biochem J 1976; 158:17.
  14. Tappy L, Randin D, Vollenweider P, et al. Mechanisms of dexamethasone-induced insulin resistance in healthy humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1994; 79:10631069.
  15. Pagano G, Cavallo-Perin P, Cassader M, et al. An in vivo and in vitro study of the mechanism of prednisone-induced insulin resistance in healthy subjects. J Clin Invest 1983; 72:18141820.
  16. Magee MH, Blum RA, Lates CD, Jusko WJ. Pharmacokinetic/pharmaco-dynamic model for prednisolone inhibition of whole blood lymphocyte proliferation. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 53:474484.
  17. Burt MG, Roberts GW, Aguilar-Loza NR, Frith P, Stranks SN. Continuous monitoring of circadian glycemic patterns in patients receiving prednisolone for COPD. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 96:17891796.
  18. Hans P, Vanthuyne A, Dewandre PY, Brichant JF, Bonhomme V. Blood glucose concentration profile after 10 mg dexamethasone in non-diabetic and type 2 diabetic patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth 2006; 97:164170.
  19. Pasternak JJ, McGregor DG, Lanier WL. Effect of single-dose dexamethasone on blood glucose concentration in patients undergoing craniotomy. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2004; 16:122125.
  20. Davidson J, Wilkinson A, Dantal J, et al; International Expert Panel. New-onset diabetes after transplantation: 2003 international consensus guidelines. Proceedings of an international expert panel meeting. Barcelona, Spain, 19 February 2003. Transplantation 2003; 75(suppl 10):SS3SS24.
  21. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes— 2011. Diabetes Care 2011; 34(suppl 1):S11S61.
  22. Rodbard HW, Jellinger PS, Davidson JA, et al. Statement by an American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology consensus panel on type 2 diabetes mellitus: an algorithm for glycemic control. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:540559.
  23. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al; American Diabetes Association; European Association for Study of Diabetes. Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32:193203.
  24. Axelrod L. Corticosteroid therapy. In:Becker KL, editor. Principles and Practice of Endocrinology and Metabolism. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2000:752763.
  25. Ferri FF, editor. Practical Guide to the Care of the Medical Patient. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby/Elsevier; 2011.
  26. Kerrigan JR, Veldhuis JD, Leyo SA, Iranmanesh A, Rogol AD. Estimation of daily cortisol production and clearance rates in normal pubertal males by deconvolution analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1993; 76:15051510.
  27. Linder BL, Esteban NV, Yergey AL, Winterer JC, Loriaux DL, Cassorla F. Cortisol production rate in childhood and adolescence. J Pediatr 1990; 117:892896.
  28. Esteban NV, Loughlin T, Yergey AL, et al. Daily cortisol production rate in man determined by stable isotope dilution/mass spectrometry. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1991; 72:3945.
  29. Lansang MC, Quinn SL. Adrenal suppression. BMJ BestPractice 2010. http://bestpractice.bmj.com/best-practice/monograph/863/diagnosis/stepby-step.html. Accessed August 19, 2011.
  30. Zöllner EW. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression in asthmatic children on inhaled corticosteroids (part 2)—the risk as determined by gold standard adrenal function tests: a systematic review. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2007; 18:469474.
  31. Schuetz P, Christ-Crain M, Schild U, et al. Effect of a 14-day course of systemic corticosteroids on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMC Pulm Med 2008; 8:1.
  32. Kay J, Findling JW, Raff H. Epidural triamcinolone suppresses the pituitary-adrenal axis in human subjects. Anesth Analg 1994; 79:501505.
  33. Lansang MC, Farmer T, Kennedy L. Diagnosing the unrecognized systemic absorption of intra-articular and epidural steroid injections. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:225228.
  34. Duclos M, Guinot M, Colsy M, et al. High risk of adrenal insufficiency after a single articular steroid injection in athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007; 39:10361043.
  35. Bong JL, Connell JM, Lever R. Intranasal betamethasone induced acne and adrenal suppression. Br J Dermatol 2000; 142:579580.
  36. Atabek ME, Pirgon O, Unal E. Pituitary-adrenal axis suppression due to topical steroid administration in an infant. Pediatr Int 2007; 49:242244.
  37. Ozerdem U, Levi L, Cheng L, Song MK, Scher C, Freeman WR. Systemic toxicity of topical and periocular corticosteroid therapy in an 11-year-old male with posterior uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 2000; 130:240241.
  38. Chiang MY, Sarkar M, Koppens JM, Milles J, Shah P. Exogenous Cushing’s syndrome and topical ocular steroids. Eye (Lond) 2006; 20:725727.
  39. Diprolene prescribing information. Schering Corp 2005. www.theodora.com/drugs/diprolene_gel_005_schering.html. Accessed September 27, 2011.
  40. Villabona CV, Koh C, Panergo J, Reddy A, Fogelfeld L. Adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation test during high-dose glucocorticoid therapy. Endocr Pract 2009; 15:122127.
  41. Ortega E, Rodriguez C, Strand LJ, Segre E. Effects of cloprednol and other corticosteroids on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function. J Int Med Res 1976; 4:326337.
  42. Axelrod L. Glucocorticoid therapy. Medicine (Baltimore) 1976; 55:3965.
  43. Schürmeyer TH, Tsokos GC, Avgerinos PC, et al. Pituitary-adrenal responsiveness to corticotropin-releasing hormone in patients receiving chronic, alternate day glucocorticoid therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985; 61:2227.
  44. Stewart PM. The adrenal cortex. In:Kronenberg HM, editor. Williams Textbook of Endocrinology. 11th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier; 2008.
  45. Hopkins RL, Leinung MC. Exogenous Cushing’s syndrome and glucocorticoid withdrawal. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2005; 34:371384.
  46. Richter B, Neises G, Clar C. Glucocorticoid withdrawal schemes in chronic medical disorders. A systematic review. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2002; 31:751778.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Page Number
748-756
Page Number
748-756
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: How to detect and manage them
Display Headline
Glucocorticoid-induced diabetes and adrenal suppression: How to detect and manage them
Sections
Inside the Article

KEY POINTS

  • Nonfasting plasma glucose levels are more sensitive than fasting levels for detecting glucocorticoid-induced diabetes, and antidiabetic agents that have greater effects on random postprandial plasma glucose levels are more suitable than those that mostly affect fasting levels.
  • Even those glucocorticoid formulations that are not intended to have systemic effects (eg, eye drops, inhaled corticosteroids, creams, intra-articular injections) can cause adrenal suppression and, therefore, if they are discontinued, steroid withdrawal and adrenal insufficiency.
  • Needed are studies comparing antidiabetic regimens for glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia and studies comparing glucocorticoid tapering schedules for adrenal suppression to determine the best way to manage these adverse effects.
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Nocturia in the elderly: A wake-up call

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 11/13/2017 - 09:42
Display Headline
Nocturia in the elderly: A wake-up call

Nocturia is common, but elderly patients infrequently volunteer this complaint, and even when they do, some clinicians may dismiss it as simply a part of aging. Nevertheless, nocturia causes significant distress and impairment of quality of life. It is associated with very serious consequences such as depression, social isolation, and a higher risk of death.

In this article, we review the concepts behind frequent nighttime voiding in older adults. We will start with two case scenarios to aid in understanding these concepts; near the end of the article, we will discuss the most appropriate management strategies for these two patients.

CASE SCENARIOS

Case 1: An 82-year-old man with fatigue

An 82-year-old obese white man with a history of hypertension, diabetes, and benign prostatic hyperplasia comes in to see his primary care provider, complaining of fatigue. He wakes up tired and has difficulty completing his daytime tasks. He gets up every 1 to 2 hours at night to urinate and has slow urinary flow and a feeling of incomplete bladder emptying.

See related patient education material

He says his wife has been increasingly bothered by his loud snoring. Recently, he had a car accident when he fell asleep while driving.

Case 2: An 85-year-old woman with incontinence

An 85-year-old white woman is in her family physician’s office with a primary complaint of waking up at least four times at night to urinate, and often ends up soaking her bed or adult diapers. She is bothered by urinary urgency and frequency during the day as well. She denies dysuria and hematuria.

She has a history of hypertension and urinary incontinence, and she has seven children. Her current medications are diltiazem (Cardizem), metoprolol (Toprol), and oxybutynin (Ditropan).

In these two cases, what would account for the nocturia? What would be the best way to help these patients?

THE NORM, NOT THE EXCEPTION

Although nocturia is defined as an awakening by the need to urinate even once in a night, many experts consider that it begins to be clinically significant only when the patient voids at least twice during the night.1

In older adults, nocturia is the norm rather than the exception. Studies done between 1990 and 2009 found that 68.9% to 93% of men age 70 and older get up at least once a night to void. The prevalence in women is somewhat lower, at 74.1% to 77.1%.2 Clinically significant nocturia is present in a majority of the elderly: more than 60% of both men and women.3

An Austrian study4 reported that elderly men got up to urinate a mean of 2.8 times per night, while women got up significantly more often—3.1 times. Women were also bothered more by this symptom, and their quality of life was significantly more decreased.

In another study,5 whites had a significantly higher nocturia ratio (ratio of nighttime urine volume to the 24-hour urine volume) than Asians. Asians, on the other hand, had a significantly higher nocturnal bladder capacity index than whites. (See below for definitions of the various indices of nocturia.) This information implies that nocturia may be a more prominent problem for elderly whites than for other racial groups.

In an epidemiologic study in Sweden,6 the death rate was as much as twice as high in both men and women who had three or more nocturnal voids, even after taking into account the influence of cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, and stroke.

If nocturia is not addressed in the physician-patient encounter, patients may try to “self-manage” it by restricting their fluid intake or by limiting their social exposure,7 with limited success and with unwanted social isolation.

WHAT CAUSES NOCTURIA?

In almost all cases of nocturia in elderly people, the cause is multifactorial (Table 1).

Advancing age is primary among these factors. Age-related structural changes in the urinary system include decreased functional bladder capacity, a decreased maximum urinary flow rate,6 a decreased ability to postpone urination,8 and an age-related increase in postvoiding residual urine volume.9 The aging kidney is also less able to concentrate urine. Also implicated are histologic changes in the detrusor muscle10 that lead to diminished bladder compliance and, together with detrusor overactivity, result in increased urinary frequency.

Nocturnal polyuria or nocturnal urine overproduction is common in patients with nocturia.11

Although the pathophysiology of nocturnal polyuria is still unclear, some investigators believe that low levels of antidiuretic hormone (ADH) at night are involved, reflecting an alteration in the circadian rhythm seen in diurnal plasma arginine vasopressin levels.12 In patients with nocturnal polyuria, ADH levels drop to very low or undetectable levels at night, which increases nocturnal urine output. In some extreme cases, the low to absent levels of ADH increase nocturnal voiding to 85% of the total 24-hour urine volume.13

Other causes of nocturnal polyuria include mobilization of fluids in patients with edema,14 and autonomic dysfunction. Other biochemical changes that contribute to nocturia include a decrease in nighttime plasma melatonin levels, an increase in nighttime plasma catecholamine levels, an increase in nighttime plasma natriuretic peptide levels, an increase in blood pressure, and an increase in total urine volume.15

A decreased ability to store urine also leads to nocturia. This is caused by decreased nocturnal bladder capacity, more irritative symptoms, and comorbid conditions such as overactive bladder, pelvic floor laxity resulting in pelvic organ prolapse, and, in men, benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Neural inputs to the bladder can also be impaired, as in patients who have diabetes mellitus or spinal stenosis, leading to chronic urinary retention, detrusor dysfunction, nocturia, and incontinence.

 

 

WHICH PATIENTS ARE AT RISK?

Nocturia is associated with a number of risk factors (Table 2).

Obesity is associated with a higher incidence of moderate to severe nocturia.15 Studies have shown that the higher the body mass index, the greater the number of nighttime voids, especially in women.16

Habitually eating at night, with poor daytime appetite, is shown to be associated with increased nighttime diuresis.

Obstructive sleep apnea17 and untreated depressive symptoms such as frequent napping18 are also associated with moderate to severe nocturia.19

Higher systolic blood pressures are associated with more urine production at night. Plasma ADH regulation is also altered, which contributes to nocturnal polyuria.21

Other comorbid conditions associated with nocturia include recurrent cystitis, lung disease, congestive heart failure, neurodegenerative conditions (eg, Alzheimer disease and parkinsonism), and chronic kidney disease.21

Drugs associated with nocturia include cholinesterase inhibitors (for dementia),22 beta-blockers,23 and calcium channel blockers.24

Lifestyle factors. Alcohol and coffee have shown either no or only a mild diuretic effect. Smoking has not been shown to be associated with nocturia.15

Seasonal differences also exist, with increased frequency of nocturia in the winter.25

WHAT ARE THE CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF NOCTURIA?

Nocturia’s effects are varied and are very important to address (Table 3).

Quality of life can be profoundly affected, and if nocturia is left untreated, it may lead to morbidity and even death. Elderly patients may feel simultaneously debilitated, frustrated, distressed, and puzzled. Nocturia may also increase their fear of falling and may negatively affect personal relationships.26

Falls, injuries. Nocturia exposes elderly patients to injuries such as hip fractures due to falling, significantly increasing the incidence of this injury.26 This occurs as elderly patients get up from bed and walk to the bathroom to void.27 In addition, during the day, superficial and fragmented sleep leads to daytime sleepiness and impaired perception and balance, also increasing the risk of falls.28 The complications of immobility and the need for surgery in many cases lead to debility, increased risk of infections, decubitus ulcers, and death. The risk of hip fractures can lead elderly patients with nocturia to associate this symptom with a fear of falling and can alter their concept of their own age (“Nocturia makes me feel old”),29 further diminishing quality of life.

The estimated medical cost of nocturia-associated falls in the elderly is about $1.5 billion per year, part of the $61 billion in lost productivity due to nocturia in adults.30

Long-term complications (eg, debilitation, poor sleep, obesity, decreased energy), increase the overall mortality rate, especially in patients who report voiding more than three times per night.29 Elderly patients with nocturia also have a greater need for emergency care.31

Nocturia also complicates other comorbid conditions, such as dementia, which increases the risk of urinary incontinence.32 In patients who have had a stroke, nocturia is the most frequent lower urinary tract symptom, and represents a major impact on daily life.33

Sleep disturbance is another important consequence. In one survey,34 nocturia was cited as a cause of poor sleep four times more often than the cause cited next most often, ie, pain. Because the elderly patient is awakened from sleep numerous times throughout the night, nocturia leads to more fatigue,35 lower energy levels, and poorer quality of sleep.36 Depression may be linked to poor sleep, as men with two or more nocturnal episodes were shown to be six times more likely to experience depression.

The patient is not the only person who loses sleep: so do the patient’s family members or sleeping partner.7 It is therefore not surprising that sleep disruption caused by nocturia has been cited as a principal reason for admitting older relatives to care homes.37

The risk of death is higher for elderly patients with coronary heart disease if they have nocturia. The causative link is the hemodynamic changes (increases in blood pressure and heart rate) that accompany awakening and arising, which may cause cardiovascular strain and lead to cardiovascular events. The 12-year survival rate has been shown to be significantly lower in patients with nighttime voiding, making nocturia a highly significant independent predictor of death in coronary heart disease patients.38

HOW TO EVALUATE AN OLDER ADULT WHO PRESENTS WITH NOCTURIA

A thorough history and physical examination are crucial in diagnosing nocturia. The goal is to identify any treatable underlying condition, such as diabetes mellitus, obstructive sleep apnea, diabetes insipidus, overactive bladder, benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary tract infection, and congestive heart failure. Laboratory tests and imaging studies can help rule out these underlying conditions.

Other important facets in the history that must be elicited are medication use, patterns of fluid intake, and a history of other urinary complaints.39

A voiding diary and indices of nocturia

A voiding diary is extremely useful and should be used whenever possible. Episodes of incontinence, time of voids, volume voided, and frequency and volume of fluid intake are recorded. From the raw data, one can determine the following:

Total nocturnal urine volume, ie, the sum volume of the nighttime voids

Maximum voided volume, ie, the largest single recorded volume voided in a 24-hour period

Nocturia index, ie, the total nocturnal urine volume divided by the maximum voided volume. A nocturia index greater than 1 shows that nocturnal urine production is greater than the functional bladder capacity. Clinically significant nocturia is observed in patients with a nocturia index of 2.1 or greater.

Nocturnal polyuria index, ie, total nocturnal urine volume divided by the 24-hour urine output. A nocturnal polyuria index higher than 33% implies nocturnal polyuria.40

Nocturnal bladder capacity index, ie, the actual number of nightly voids minus the predicted number of nightly voids, which in turn is calculated as the nocturia index minus 1.

It is especially important to encourage patients to make a voiding diary, as some patients may find this cumbersome, and compliance can be low unless its importance is emphasized. A diary over 7 days usually gives meaningful data. The results from the diary typically confirm the presence of nocturnal polyuria or a decrease in bladder capacity, influencing management.41

 

 

WHAT ARE THE TREATMENT OPTIONS?

Therapy must be directed at the primary cause, addressing any underlying conditions that can contribute to nocturia. Examples39:

  • Tight control of blood sugar for patients with diabetes mellitus
  • Treatment of diabetes insipidus
  • Referral for patients with primary polydipsia
  • Management of hypercalcemia and hypokalemia
  • A survey of medications
  • Treatment of infections.

Nonpharmacologic measures

Tailored behavioral therapy can also be instituted, but the patient needs to have realistic expectations, as these measures are rarely effective alone.

Avoiding nighttime fluid intake, including alcohol and caffeine, has shown promise.

Wearing compression stockings and elevating the legs in the afternoon decrease the retention of fluid that otherwise would return to the circulation at night.

Identifying and eliminating nighttime influences that disturb sleep has variable efficacy. The use of continuous positive airway pressure helps to treat sleep apnea. Moderate exercise, reducing nonsleep time spent in bed,42 and sleeping in a warm bed43 to decrease cold diuresis have also been shown to improve sleep quality.44 Patients with nocturia may have a disrupted circadian rhythm, and phototherapy may help resynchronize the diurnal rhythm and melatonin secretion.

Pharmacotherapy

Pharmacotherapy of nocturia includes desmopressin (DDAVP) to manage nocturnal polyuria and antimuscarinic agents to manage the patient’s decreased ability to store urine. Alpha-blockers such as tamsulosin (Flomax) and 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors such as finasteride (Proscar) are used for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Novel and second-line therapies include diuretics such as furosemide (Lasix), cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, as well as botulinum toxin injected directly into the detrusor muscle for overactive bladder.45

Desmopressin in a low oral dose (0.1–0.4 mg) at bedtime can be initiated and the response assessed. Patients with nocturnal polyuria and disorders of the vasopressin system have been found to be more sensitive to desmopressin therapy.46 Fluid retention and hyponatremia can complicate therapy, and desmopressin must be avoided in patients with liver cirrhosis, renal failure, or congestive heart failure.47

Antimuscarinic agents are effective for patients who have lower urinary tract symptoms and for those with a diminished ability to store urine. They act by decreasing both voluntary and involuntary bladder contractions by blocking muscarinic receptors on the detrusor muscle. This reduces the bladder’s ability to contract and the urge to urinate, thereby increasing bladder capacity.48 These agents include oxybutynin (Ditropan), tolterodine (Detrol), solifenacin (Vesicare), and propiverine (not available in the United States).

Diuretics are being used as second-line agents or for patients who cannot tolerate desmopressin.49 Hydrochlorothiazide is taken 8 hours before bedtime to prevent water accumulation before the early sleeping hours.50 Furosemide has also led to a reduction in the mean number of nocturnal voids.51 The effect of these drugs on nocturia are especially beneficial to patients with concomitant hypertension or cardiovascular disease.

Cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib (Celebrex)52 and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as diclofenac (Voltaren, others)53 and loxoprofen (not available in the United States)54 have been shown to decrease urine production, detrusor muscle tone, and inflammation, especially in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Botulinum toxin has been used, usually in patients refractory to first-line treatment.44

Referral to specialists is guided by underlying causes. Referral to a pulmonologist or sleep specialist may be helpful if the patient has obstructive sleep apnea. Referral to a urologist may be prudent if the patient has benign prostatic hyperplasia, and a gynecologist can address issues such as pelvic relaxation.

Table 4 summarizes the treatment strategies for nocturia.

CASES REVISITED

The first patient described above has nocturia caused by several concomitant diseases, ie, hypertension, diabetes, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and obstructive sleep apnea. In addition to controlling his blood pressure and blood sugar, his primary care provider referred him to a pulmonologist, who confirmed obstructive sleep apnea with polysomnography and prescribed nightly use of a continuous positive airway pressure apparatus. A few weeks later, the patient’s nocturia had improved significantly, and his level of fatigue had decreased.

Apart from hypertension, the second patient’s nocturia was mostly attributed to her existing urinary incontinence. Recognizing that her current antihypertensive regimen may worsen nocturia, her family physician changed it to enalapril (Vasotec) and doxazosin (Cardura) and counseled her to restrict her fluid intake 2 hours before bedtime. She was also referred to a gynecologist, who found a moderate degree of cystocele and treated her with a collagen injection. Her nocturia improved significantly.

References
  1. Abrams P. Nocturia: the major problem in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO). Eur Urol Suppl 2005; 3(6):816.
  2. Bosch JL, Weiss J. The prevalence and causes of nocturia. J Urol 2010; 184:440446.
  3. Tikkinen KA, Johnson TM, Tammela TL, et al. Nocturia frequency, bother, and quality of life: how often is too often? A population-based study in Finland. Eur Urol 2010; 57:488496.
  4. Klingler HG, Heidler H, Madersbacher H, Primus G. Nocturia: an Austrian study on the multifactorial etiology of this symptom. Neurourol Urodyn 2009; 28:427431.
  5. Mariappan P, Turner KJ, Sothilingam S, Rajan P, Sundram M, Steward LH. Nocturia, nocturia indices and variables from frequency-volume charts are significantly different in Asian and Caucasian men with lower urinary tract symptoms: a prospective comparison study. BJU Int 2007; 100:332336.
  6. Asplund R. Mortality in the elderly in relation to nocturnal micturition. BJU Int 1999; 84:297301.
  7. Booth J, O’Neil K, Lawrence M, et al. Advancing community nursing practice: detecting and managing nocturia in community-living older people. Final report. 2008. Queens Nursing Institute, Scotland. http://www.qnis.co.uk/documents/Item3.2-finalreportnocturiav2.doc. Accessed 8/22/11
  8. Kawauchi A, Tanaka Y, Soh J, Ukimura O, Kojima M, Miki T. Causes of nocturnal urinary frequency and reasons for its increase with age in healthy older men. J Urol 2000; 163:8184.
  9. Madersbacher S, Pycha A, Schatzl G, Mian C, Klingler CH, Marberger M. The aging lower urinary tract: a comparative urodynamics study of men and women. Urology 1998; 51:206212.
  10. Elbedawi A, Yalla SV, Resnick NM. Structural basis of geriatric voiding dysfunction. I: methods of a prospective ultra structural/urodynamics study and an overview of the findings. J Urol 1993; 150:16501656.
  11. Weiss JP, Blaivas JG, Jones M, Wang JT, Guan Z; 037 Study Group. Age related pathogenesis of nocturia in patients with overactive bladder. J Urol 2007; 178:548551.
  12. Natsume O, Kaneko Y, Hirayama A, Fujimoto K, Hirao Y. Fluid control in elderly patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2009; 16:307313.
  13. Asplund R. Pharmacotherapy for nocturia in the elderly patient. Drugs Aging 2007; 24:325343.
  14. Sugaya K, Nishijima S, Oda M, Owan T, Miyazato M, Ogawa Y. Biochemical and body composition analysis of nocturia in the elderly. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:205211.
  15. Shiri R, Hakama M, Häkkinen J, et al. The effects of lifestyle factors on the incidence of nocturia. J Urol 2008; 180:20592062.
  16. Asplund R. Obesity in elderly people with nocturia: cause or consequence? Can J Urol 2007; 14:34243428.
  17. Hardin-Fanning F, Gross JC. The effects of sleep-disordered breathing symptoms on voiding patterns in stroke patients. Urol Nurs 2007; 27:221229.
  18. Foley DJ, Vitiello MV, Bliwise DL, Ancoli-Israel S, Monjan AA, Walsh JK. Frequent napping is associated with excessive daytime sleepiness, depression, pain, and nocturia in older adults: findings from the National Sleep Foundation ‘2003 Sleep in America’ Poll. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007; 15:344350.
  19. Häkkinen JT, Shiri R, Koskimäki J, Tammela TL, Auvinen A, Hakama M. Depressive symptoms increase the incidence of nocturia: Tampere Aging Male Urologic Study (TAMUS). J Urol 2008; 179:18971901.
  20. Natsume O, Kaneko Y, Hirayama A, Fujimoto K, Hirao Y. Fluid control in elderly patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2009; 16:307313.
  21. Kujubu DA, Aboseif SR. An overview of nocturia and the syndrome of nocturnal polyuria in the elderly. Nat Clin Pract Nephrol 2008; 4:426435.
  22. Hashimoto M, Imamura T, Tanimukai S, Kazui H, Mori E. Urinary incontinence: an unrecognized adverse effect with donepezil (letter). Lancet 2000; 356:568.
  23. Wagg A, Cohen M. Medical therapy for the overactive bladder in the elderly. Age Ageing 2002; 31:241246.
  24. Williams G, Donaldson RM. Nifedipine and nocturia. Lancet 1986: 1:738.
  25. Yoshimura K, Kamoto T, Tsukamoto T, Oshiro K, Kinukawa N, Ogawa O. Seasonal alterations in nocturia and other storage symptoms in three Japanese communities. Urology 2007; 69:864870.
  26. Asplund R. Hip fractures, nocturia, and nocturnal polyuria in the elderly. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2006; 43:319326.
  27. Stewart RB, Moore MT, May FE, Marks RG, Hale WE. Nocturia: a risk factor for falls in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40:12171220.
  28. van Balen R, Steyerberg EW, Polder JJ, Ribbers TL, Habbema JD, Cools HJ. Hip fracture in elderly patients: outcomes for function, quality of life, and type of residence. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; 390:232243.
  29. Mock LL, Parmelee PA, Kutner N, Scott J, Johnson TM. Content validation of symptom-specific nocturia quality-of-life instrument developed in men: issues expressed by women, as well as men. Urology 2008; 72:736742.
  30. Holm-Larsen T, Weiss J, Langkilde LK. Economic burden of nocturia in the US adult population. J Urol Suppl 2010; 100:332336.
  31. Ali A, Snape J. Nocturia in older people: a review of causes, consequences, assessment, and management. Int J Clin Pract 2004; 58:366373.
  32. Miu DK, Lau S, Szeto SS. Etiology and predictors of urinary incontinence and its effect on quality of life. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2010; 10:177182.
  33. Tibaek S, Gard G, Klarskov P, Iversen HK, Dehlendorff C, Jensen R. Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in stroke patients: a cross-sectional, clinical survey. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:763771.
  34. Bliwise DL, Foley DJ, Vitiello MV, Ansari FP, Ancoli-Israel S, Walsh JK. Nocturia and disturbed sleep in the elderly. Sleep Med 2009; 10:540548.
  35. Asplund R. Nocturia: consequences for sleep and daytime activities and associated risks. Eur Urol Suppl 2005; 3(6):2432.
  36. Hernández C, Estivill E, Prieto M, Badia X. Nocturia in Spanish patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24:10331038.
  37. Pollak CP, Perlick D, Linsner JP, Wenston J, Hsieh F. Sleep problems in the community elderly as predictors of death and nursing home placement. J Community Health 1990; 15:123135.
  38. Bursztyn M, Jacob J, Stessman J. Usefulness of nocturia as a mortality risk factor for coronary heart disease among persons born in 1920 or 1921. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98:13111315.
  39. Appell RA, Sand PK. Nocturia: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:3439.
  40. Weiss JP, Blaivas JG, Stember DS, Chaikin DC. Evaluation of the etiology of nocturia in men: the nocturia and nocturnal bladder capacity indices. Neurourol Urodyn 1999; 18:559565.
  41. Jaffe JS, Ginsberg PC, Silverberg DM, Harkaway RC. The need for voiding diaries in the evaluation of men with nocturia. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2002; 102:261265.
  42. Yoshimura K, Terai A. Classification and distribution of symptomatic nocturia with special attention to duration of time in bed: a patient-based study. BJU Int 2005; 95:12591262.
  43. Polderman KH. Mechanisms of action, physiological effects, and complications of hypothermia. Crit Care Med 2009; 37:S186S202.
  44. Soda T, Masui K, Okuno H, Terai A, Ogawa O, Yoshimura K. Efficacy of nondrug lifestyle measures for the treatment of nocturia. J Urol 2010; 184:10001004.
  45. Flynn MK, Amundsen CL, Perevich M, Liu F, Webster GD. Outcome of a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial of botulinum A toxin for refractory overactive bladder. J Urol 2009; 181:26082615.
  46. Asplund R, Sundberg B, Bengtsson P. Desmopressin for the treatment of nocturnal polyuria in the elderly: a dose titration study. Br J Urol 1998; 82:642646.
  47. Abrams P, Mattiasson A, Lose GR, Robertson GL. The role of desmopressin treatment in adult nocturia. BJU Int 2002; 90:3236.
  48. Andersson K. Treatment of the overactive bladder syndrome and detrusor overactivity with antimuscarinic drugs. Continence 2005; 1:18.
  49. Reynard JM, Cannon A, Yang Q, Abrams P. A novel therapy for nocturnal polyuria: a double-blind randomized trial of frusemide against placebo. Br J Urol 1998; 81:215218.
  50. Cho MC, Ku JH, Paick JS. Alpha-blocker plus diuretic combination therapy as second-line treatment for nocturia in men with LUTS: a pilot study. Urology 2009; 73:549553.
  51. Fu FG, Lavery HJ, Wu DL. Reducing nocturia in the elderly: a randomized placebo-controlled trial of staggered furosemide and desmopressin. Neurourol Urodyn 2011; 30:312316.
  52. Falahatkar S, Mokhtari G, Pourezza F, Asgari SA, Kamran AN. Celecoxib for treatment of nocturia caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Urology 2008; 72:813816.
  53. Addla SK, Adeyoju AB, Neilson D, O’Reilly P. Diclofenac for treatment of nocturia caused by nocturnal polyuria: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Eur Urol 2006; 49:720725.
  54. Saito M, Kawatani M, Kinoshita Y, Satoh K, Miyagawa I. Effectiveness of an anti-inflammatory drug, loxoprofen, for patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2005; 12:779782.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Vicent Varilla, MD
Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington

Renato V. Samala, MD, FACP
Department Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Diana Galindo, MD, FACP, AGSF
Department of Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Jerry Ciocon, MD, FACP, AGSF
Department of Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Address: Jerry Ciocon, MD, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 3250 Meridian Parkway, Weston, FL 33331; e-mail cioconj@ccf.org and jocjay@aol.com

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
757-764
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Vicent Varilla, MD
Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington

Renato V. Samala, MD, FACP
Department Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Diana Galindo, MD, FACP, AGSF
Department of Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Jerry Ciocon, MD, FACP, AGSF
Department of Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Address: Jerry Ciocon, MD, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 3250 Meridian Parkway, Weston, FL 33331; e-mail cioconj@ccf.org and jocjay@aol.com

Author and Disclosure Information

Vicent Varilla, MD
Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington

Renato V. Samala, MD, FACP
Department Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Diana Galindo, MD, FACP, AGSF
Department of Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Jerry Ciocon, MD, FACP, AGSF
Department of Geriatrics, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston

Address: Jerry Ciocon, MD, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 3250 Meridian Parkway, Weston, FL 33331; e-mail cioconj@ccf.org and jocjay@aol.com

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Nocturia is common, but elderly patients infrequently volunteer this complaint, and even when they do, some clinicians may dismiss it as simply a part of aging. Nevertheless, nocturia causes significant distress and impairment of quality of life. It is associated with very serious consequences such as depression, social isolation, and a higher risk of death.

In this article, we review the concepts behind frequent nighttime voiding in older adults. We will start with two case scenarios to aid in understanding these concepts; near the end of the article, we will discuss the most appropriate management strategies for these two patients.

CASE SCENARIOS

Case 1: An 82-year-old man with fatigue

An 82-year-old obese white man with a history of hypertension, diabetes, and benign prostatic hyperplasia comes in to see his primary care provider, complaining of fatigue. He wakes up tired and has difficulty completing his daytime tasks. He gets up every 1 to 2 hours at night to urinate and has slow urinary flow and a feeling of incomplete bladder emptying.

See related patient education material

He says his wife has been increasingly bothered by his loud snoring. Recently, he had a car accident when he fell asleep while driving.

Case 2: An 85-year-old woman with incontinence

An 85-year-old white woman is in her family physician’s office with a primary complaint of waking up at least four times at night to urinate, and often ends up soaking her bed or adult diapers. She is bothered by urinary urgency and frequency during the day as well. She denies dysuria and hematuria.

She has a history of hypertension and urinary incontinence, and she has seven children. Her current medications are diltiazem (Cardizem), metoprolol (Toprol), and oxybutynin (Ditropan).

In these two cases, what would account for the nocturia? What would be the best way to help these patients?

THE NORM, NOT THE EXCEPTION

Although nocturia is defined as an awakening by the need to urinate even once in a night, many experts consider that it begins to be clinically significant only when the patient voids at least twice during the night.1

In older adults, nocturia is the norm rather than the exception. Studies done between 1990 and 2009 found that 68.9% to 93% of men age 70 and older get up at least once a night to void. The prevalence in women is somewhat lower, at 74.1% to 77.1%.2 Clinically significant nocturia is present in a majority of the elderly: more than 60% of both men and women.3

An Austrian study4 reported that elderly men got up to urinate a mean of 2.8 times per night, while women got up significantly more often—3.1 times. Women were also bothered more by this symptom, and their quality of life was significantly more decreased.

In another study,5 whites had a significantly higher nocturia ratio (ratio of nighttime urine volume to the 24-hour urine volume) than Asians. Asians, on the other hand, had a significantly higher nocturnal bladder capacity index than whites. (See below for definitions of the various indices of nocturia.) This information implies that nocturia may be a more prominent problem for elderly whites than for other racial groups.

In an epidemiologic study in Sweden,6 the death rate was as much as twice as high in both men and women who had three or more nocturnal voids, even after taking into account the influence of cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, and stroke.

If nocturia is not addressed in the physician-patient encounter, patients may try to “self-manage” it by restricting their fluid intake or by limiting their social exposure,7 with limited success and with unwanted social isolation.

WHAT CAUSES NOCTURIA?

In almost all cases of nocturia in elderly people, the cause is multifactorial (Table 1).

Advancing age is primary among these factors. Age-related structural changes in the urinary system include decreased functional bladder capacity, a decreased maximum urinary flow rate,6 a decreased ability to postpone urination,8 and an age-related increase in postvoiding residual urine volume.9 The aging kidney is also less able to concentrate urine. Also implicated are histologic changes in the detrusor muscle10 that lead to diminished bladder compliance and, together with detrusor overactivity, result in increased urinary frequency.

Nocturnal polyuria or nocturnal urine overproduction is common in patients with nocturia.11

Although the pathophysiology of nocturnal polyuria is still unclear, some investigators believe that low levels of antidiuretic hormone (ADH) at night are involved, reflecting an alteration in the circadian rhythm seen in diurnal plasma arginine vasopressin levels.12 In patients with nocturnal polyuria, ADH levels drop to very low or undetectable levels at night, which increases nocturnal urine output. In some extreme cases, the low to absent levels of ADH increase nocturnal voiding to 85% of the total 24-hour urine volume.13

Other causes of nocturnal polyuria include mobilization of fluids in patients with edema,14 and autonomic dysfunction. Other biochemical changes that contribute to nocturia include a decrease in nighttime plasma melatonin levels, an increase in nighttime plasma catecholamine levels, an increase in nighttime plasma natriuretic peptide levels, an increase in blood pressure, and an increase in total urine volume.15

A decreased ability to store urine also leads to nocturia. This is caused by decreased nocturnal bladder capacity, more irritative symptoms, and comorbid conditions such as overactive bladder, pelvic floor laxity resulting in pelvic organ prolapse, and, in men, benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Neural inputs to the bladder can also be impaired, as in patients who have diabetes mellitus or spinal stenosis, leading to chronic urinary retention, detrusor dysfunction, nocturia, and incontinence.

 

 

WHICH PATIENTS ARE AT RISK?

Nocturia is associated with a number of risk factors (Table 2).

Obesity is associated with a higher incidence of moderate to severe nocturia.15 Studies have shown that the higher the body mass index, the greater the number of nighttime voids, especially in women.16

Habitually eating at night, with poor daytime appetite, is shown to be associated with increased nighttime diuresis.

Obstructive sleep apnea17 and untreated depressive symptoms such as frequent napping18 are also associated with moderate to severe nocturia.19

Higher systolic blood pressures are associated with more urine production at night. Plasma ADH regulation is also altered, which contributes to nocturnal polyuria.21

Other comorbid conditions associated with nocturia include recurrent cystitis, lung disease, congestive heart failure, neurodegenerative conditions (eg, Alzheimer disease and parkinsonism), and chronic kidney disease.21

Drugs associated with nocturia include cholinesterase inhibitors (for dementia),22 beta-blockers,23 and calcium channel blockers.24

Lifestyle factors. Alcohol and coffee have shown either no or only a mild diuretic effect. Smoking has not been shown to be associated with nocturia.15

Seasonal differences also exist, with increased frequency of nocturia in the winter.25

WHAT ARE THE CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF NOCTURIA?

Nocturia’s effects are varied and are very important to address (Table 3).

Quality of life can be profoundly affected, and if nocturia is left untreated, it may lead to morbidity and even death. Elderly patients may feel simultaneously debilitated, frustrated, distressed, and puzzled. Nocturia may also increase their fear of falling and may negatively affect personal relationships.26

Falls, injuries. Nocturia exposes elderly patients to injuries such as hip fractures due to falling, significantly increasing the incidence of this injury.26 This occurs as elderly patients get up from bed and walk to the bathroom to void.27 In addition, during the day, superficial and fragmented sleep leads to daytime sleepiness and impaired perception and balance, also increasing the risk of falls.28 The complications of immobility and the need for surgery in many cases lead to debility, increased risk of infections, decubitus ulcers, and death. The risk of hip fractures can lead elderly patients with nocturia to associate this symptom with a fear of falling and can alter their concept of their own age (“Nocturia makes me feel old”),29 further diminishing quality of life.

The estimated medical cost of nocturia-associated falls in the elderly is about $1.5 billion per year, part of the $61 billion in lost productivity due to nocturia in adults.30

Long-term complications (eg, debilitation, poor sleep, obesity, decreased energy), increase the overall mortality rate, especially in patients who report voiding more than three times per night.29 Elderly patients with nocturia also have a greater need for emergency care.31

Nocturia also complicates other comorbid conditions, such as dementia, which increases the risk of urinary incontinence.32 In patients who have had a stroke, nocturia is the most frequent lower urinary tract symptom, and represents a major impact on daily life.33

Sleep disturbance is another important consequence. In one survey,34 nocturia was cited as a cause of poor sleep four times more often than the cause cited next most often, ie, pain. Because the elderly patient is awakened from sleep numerous times throughout the night, nocturia leads to more fatigue,35 lower energy levels, and poorer quality of sleep.36 Depression may be linked to poor sleep, as men with two or more nocturnal episodes were shown to be six times more likely to experience depression.

The patient is not the only person who loses sleep: so do the patient’s family members or sleeping partner.7 It is therefore not surprising that sleep disruption caused by nocturia has been cited as a principal reason for admitting older relatives to care homes.37

The risk of death is higher for elderly patients with coronary heart disease if they have nocturia. The causative link is the hemodynamic changes (increases in blood pressure and heart rate) that accompany awakening and arising, which may cause cardiovascular strain and lead to cardiovascular events. The 12-year survival rate has been shown to be significantly lower in patients with nighttime voiding, making nocturia a highly significant independent predictor of death in coronary heart disease patients.38

HOW TO EVALUATE AN OLDER ADULT WHO PRESENTS WITH NOCTURIA

A thorough history and physical examination are crucial in diagnosing nocturia. The goal is to identify any treatable underlying condition, such as diabetes mellitus, obstructive sleep apnea, diabetes insipidus, overactive bladder, benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary tract infection, and congestive heart failure. Laboratory tests and imaging studies can help rule out these underlying conditions.

Other important facets in the history that must be elicited are medication use, patterns of fluid intake, and a history of other urinary complaints.39

A voiding diary and indices of nocturia

A voiding diary is extremely useful and should be used whenever possible. Episodes of incontinence, time of voids, volume voided, and frequency and volume of fluid intake are recorded. From the raw data, one can determine the following:

Total nocturnal urine volume, ie, the sum volume of the nighttime voids

Maximum voided volume, ie, the largest single recorded volume voided in a 24-hour period

Nocturia index, ie, the total nocturnal urine volume divided by the maximum voided volume. A nocturia index greater than 1 shows that nocturnal urine production is greater than the functional bladder capacity. Clinically significant nocturia is observed in patients with a nocturia index of 2.1 or greater.

Nocturnal polyuria index, ie, total nocturnal urine volume divided by the 24-hour urine output. A nocturnal polyuria index higher than 33% implies nocturnal polyuria.40

Nocturnal bladder capacity index, ie, the actual number of nightly voids minus the predicted number of nightly voids, which in turn is calculated as the nocturia index minus 1.

It is especially important to encourage patients to make a voiding diary, as some patients may find this cumbersome, and compliance can be low unless its importance is emphasized. A diary over 7 days usually gives meaningful data. The results from the diary typically confirm the presence of nocturnal polyuria or a decrease in bladder capacity, influencing management.41

 

 

WHAT ARE THE TREATMENT OPTIONS?

Therapy must be directed at the primary cause, addressing any underlying conditions that can contribute to nocturia. Examples39:

  • Tight control of blood sugar for patients with diabetes mellitus
  • Treatment of diabetes insipidus
  • Referral for patients with primary polydipsia
  • Management of hypercalcemia and hypokalemia
  • A survey of medications
  • Treatment of infections.

Nonpharmacologic measures

Tailored behavioral therapy can also be instituted, but the patient needs to have realistic expectations, as these measures are rarely effective alone.

Avoiding nighttime fluid intake, including alcohol and caffeine, has shown promise.

Wearing compression stockings and elevating the legs in the afternoon decrease the retention of fluid that otherwise would return to the circulation at night.

Identifying and eliminating nighttime influences that disturb sleep has variable efficacy. The use of continuous positive airway pressure helps to treat sleep apnea. Moderate exercise, reducing nonsleep time spent in bed,42 and sleeping in a warm bed43 to decrease cold diuresis have also been shown to improve sleep quality.44 Patients with nocturia may have a disrupted circadian rhythm, and phototherapy may help resynchronize the diurnal rhythm and melatonin secretion.

Pharmacotherapy

Pharmacotherapy of nocturia includes desmopressin (DDAVP) to manage nocturnal polyuria and antimuscarinic agents to manage the patient’s decreased ability to store urine. Alpha-blockers such as tamsulosin (Flomax) and 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors such as finasteride (Proscar) are used for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Novel and second-line therapies include diuretics such as furosemide (Lasix), cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, as well as botulinum toxin injected directly into the detrusor muscle for overactive bladder.45

Desmopressin in a low oral dose (0.1–0.4 mg) at bedtime can be initiated and the response assessed. Patients with nocturnal polyuria and disorders of the vasopressin system have been found to be more sensitive to desmopressin therapy.46 Fluid retention and hyponatremia can complicate therapy, and desmopressin must be avoided in patients with liver cirrhosis, renal failure, or congestive heart failure.47

Antimuscarinic agents are effective for patients who have lower urinary tract symptoms and for those with a diminished ability to store urine. They act by decreasing both voluntary and involuntary bladder contractions by blocking muscarinic receptors on the detrusor muscle. This reduces the bladder’s ability to contract and the urge to urinate, thereby increasing bladder capacity.48 These agents include oxybutynin (Ditropan), tolterodine (Detrol), solifenacin (Vesicare), and propiverine (not available in the United States).

Diuretics are being used as second-line agents or for patients who cannot tolerate desmopressin.49 Hydrochlorothiazide is taken 8 hours before bedtime to prevent water accumulation before the early sleeping hours.50 Furosemide has also led to a reduction in the mean number of nocturnal voids.51 The effect of these drugs on nocturia are especially beneficial to patients with concomitant hypertension or cardiovascular disease.

Cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib (Celebrex)52 and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as diclofenac (Voltaren, others)53 and loxoprofen (not available in the United States)54 have been shown to decrease urine production, detrusor muscle tone, and inflammation, especially in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Botulinum toxin has been used, usually in patients refractory to first-line treatment.44

Referral to specialists is guided by underlying causes. Referral to a pulmonologist or sleep specialist may be helpful if the patient has obstructive sleep apnea. Referral to a urologist may be prudent if the patient has benign prostatic hyperplasia, and a gynecologist can address issues such as pelvic relaxation.

Table 4 summarizes the treatment strategies for nocturia.

CASES REVISITED

The first patient described above has nocturia caused by several concomitant diseases, ie, hypertension, diabetes, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and obstructive sleep apnea. In addition to controlling his blood pressure and blood sugar, his primary care provider referred him to a pulmonologist, who confirmed obstructive sleep apnea with polysomnography and prescribed nightly use of a continuous positive airway pressure apparatus. A few weeks later, the patient’s nocturia had improved significantly, and his level of fatigue had decreased.

Apart from hypertension, the second patient’s nocturia was mostly attributed to her existing urinary incontinence. Recognizing that her current antihypertensive regimen may worsen nocturia, her family physician changed it to enalapril (Vasotec) and doxazosin (Cardura) and counseled her to restrict her fluid intake 2 hours before bedtime. She was also referred to a gynecologist, who found a moderate degree of cystocele and treated her with a collagen injection. Her nocturia improved significantly.

Nocturia is common, but elderly patients infrequently volunteer this complaint, and even when they do, some clinicians may dismiss it as simply a part of aging. Nevertheless, nocturia causes significant distress and impairment of quality of life. It is associated with very serious consequences such as depression, social isolation, and a higher risk of death.

In this article, we review the concepts behind frequent nighttime voiding in older adults. We will start with two case scenarios to aid in understanding these concepts; near the end of the article, we will discuss the most appropriate management strategies for these two patients.

CASE SCENARIOS

Case 1: An 82-year-old man with fatigue

An 82-year-old obese white man with a history of hypertension, diabetes, and benign prostatic hyperplasia comes in to see his primary care provider, complaining of fatigue. He wakes up tired and has difficulty completing his daytime tasks. He gets up every 1 to 2 hours at night to urinate and has slow urinary flow and a feeling of incomplete bladder emptying.

See related patient education material

He says his wife has been increasingly bothered by his loud snoring. Recently, he had a car accident when he fell asleep while driving.

Case 2: An 85-year-old woman with incontinence

An 85-year-old white woman is in her family physician’s office with a primary complaint of waking up at least four times at night to urinate, and often ends up soaking her bed or adult diapers. She is bothered by urinary urgency and frequency during the day as well. She denies dysuria and hematuria.

She has a history of hypertension and urinary incontinence, and she has seven children. Her current medications are diltiazem (Cardizem), metoprolol (Toprol), and oxybutynin (Ditropan).

In these two cases, what would account for the nocturia? What would be the best way to help these patients?

THE NORM, NOT THE EXCEPTION

Although nocturia is defined as an awakening by the need to urinate even once in a night, many experts consider that it begins to be clinically significant only when the patient voids at least twice during the night.1

In older adults, nocturia is the norm rather than the exception. Studies done between 1990 and 2009 found that 68.9% to 93% of men age 70 and older get up at least once a night to void. The prevalence in women is somewhat lower, at 74.1% to 77.1%.2 Clinically significant nocturia is present in a majority of the elderly: more than 60% of both men and women.3

An Austrian study4 reported that elderly men got up to urinate a mean of 2.8 times per night, while women got up significantly more often—3.1 times. Women were also bothered more by this symptom, and their quality of life was significantly more decreased.

In another study,5 whites had a significantly higher nocturia ratio (ratio of nighttime urine volume to the 24-hour urine volume) than Asians. Asians, on the other hand, had a significantly higher nocturnal bladder capacity index than whites. (See below for definitions of the various indices of nocturia.) This information implies that nocturia may be a more prominent problem for elderly whites than for other racial groups.

In an epidemiologic study in Sweden,6 the death rate was as much as twice as high in both men and women who had three or more nocturnal voids, even after taking into account the influence of cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, and stroke.

If nocturia is not addressed in the physician-patient encounter, patients may try to “self-manage” it by restricting their fluid intake or by limiting their social exposure,7 with limited success and with unwanted social isolation.

WHAT CAUSES NOCTURIA?

In almost all cases of nocturia in elderly people, the cause is multifactorial (Table 1).

Advancing age is primary among these factors. Age-related structural changes in the urinary system include decreased functional bladder capacity, a decreased maximum urinary flow rate,6 a decreased ability to postpone urination,8 and an age-related increase in postvoiding residual urine volume.9 The aging kidney is also less able to concentrate urine. Also implicated are histologic changes in the detrusor muscle10 that lead to diminished bladder compliance and, together with detrusor overactivity, result in increased urinary frequency.

Nocturnal polyuria or nocturnal urine overproduction is common in patients with nocturia.11

Although the pathophysiology of nocturnal polyuria is still unclear, some investigators believe that low levels of antidiuretic hormone (ADH) at night are involved, reflecting an alteration in the circadian rhythm seen in diurnal plasma arginine vasopressin levels.12 In patients with nocturnal polyuria, ADH levels drop to very low or undetectable levels at night, which increases nocturnal urine output. In some extreme cases, the low to absent levels of ADH increase nocturnal voiding to 85% of the total 24-hour urine volume.13

Other causes of nocturnal polyuria include mobilization of fluids in patients with edema,14 and autonomic dysfunction. Other biochemical changes that contribute to nocturia include a decrease in nighttime plasma melatonin levels, an increase in nighttime plasma catecholamine levels, an increase in nighttime plasma natriuretic peptide levels, an increase in blood pressure, and an increase in total urine volume.15

A decreased ability to store urine also leads to nocturia. This is caused by decreased nocturnal bladder capacity, more irritative symptoms, and comorbid conditions such as overactive bladder, pelvic floor laxity resulting in pelvic organ prolapse, and, in men, benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Neural inputs to the bladder can also be impaired, as in patients who have diabetes mellitus or spinal stenosis, leading to chronic urinary retention, detrusor dysfunction, nocturia, and incontinence.

 

 

WHICH PATIENTS ARE AT RISK?

Nocturia is associated with a number of risk factors (Table 2).

Obesity is associated with a higher incidence of moderate to severe nocturia.15 Studies have shown that the higher the body mass index, the greater the number of nighttime voids, especially in women.16

Habitually eating at night, with poor daytime appetite, is shown to be associated with increased nighttime diuresis.

Obstructive sleep apnea17 and untreated depressive symptoms such as frequent napping18 are also associated with moderate to severe nocturia.19

Higher systolic blood pressures are associated with more urine production at night. Plasma ADH regulation is also altered, which contributes to nocturnal polyuria.21

Other comorbid conditions associated with nocturia include recurrent cystitis, lung disease, congestive heart failure, neurodegenerative conditions (eg, Alzheimer disease and parkinsonism), and chronic kidney disease.21

Drugs associated with nocturia include cholinesterase inhibitors (for dementia),22 beta-blockers,23 and calcium channel blockers.24

Lifestyle factors. Alcohol and coffee have shown either no or only a mild diuretic effect. Smoking has not been shown to be associated with nocturia.15

Seasonal differences also exist, with increased frequency of nocturia in the winter.25

WHAT ARE THE CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF NOCTURIA?

Nocturia’s effects are varied and are very important to address (Table 3).

Quality of life can be profoundly affected, and if nocturia is left untreated, it may lead to morbidity and even death. Elderly patients may feel simultaneously debilitated, frustrated, distressed, and puzzled. Nocturia may also increase their fear of falling and may negatively affect personal relationships.26

Falls, injuries. Nocturia exposes elderly patients to injuries such as hip fractures due to falling, significantly increasing the incidence of this injury.26 This occurs as elderly patients get up from bed and walk to the bathroom to void.27 In addition, during the day, superficial and fragmented sleep leads to daytime sleepiness and impaired perception and balance, also increasing the risk of falls.28 The complications of immobility and the need for surgery in many cases lead to debility, increased risk of infections, decubitus ulcers, and death. The risk of hip fractures can lead elderly patients with nocturia to associate this symptom with a fear of falling and can alter their concept of their own age (“Nocturia makes me feel old”),29 further diminishing quality of life.

The estimated medical cost of nocturia-associated falls in the elderly is about $1.5 billion per year, part of the $61 billion in lost productivity due to nocturia in adults.30

Long-term complications (eg, debilitation, poor sleep, obesity, decreased energy), increase the overall mortality rate, especially in patients who report voiding more than three times per night.29 Elderly patients with nocturia also have a greater need for emergency care.31

Nocturia also complicates other comorbid conditions, such as dementia, which increases the risk of urinary incontinence.32 In patients who have had a stroke, nocturia is the most frequent lower urinary tract symptom, and represents a major impact on daily life.33

Sleep disturbance is another important consequence. In one survey,34 nocturia was cited as a cause of poor sleep four times more often than the cause cited next most often, ie, pain. Because the elderly patient is awakened from sleep numerous times throughout the night, nocturia leads to more fatigue,35 lower energy levels, and poorer quality of sleep.36 Depression may be linked to poor sleep, as men with two or more nocturnal episodes were shown to be six times more likely to experience depression.

The patient is not the only person who loses sleep: so do the patient’s family members or sleeping partner.7 It is therefore not surprising that sleep disruption caused by nocturia has been cited as a principal reason for admitting older relatives to care homes.37

The risk of death is higher for elderly patients with coronary heart disease if they have nocturia. The causative link is the hemodynamic changes (increases in blood pressure and heart rate) that accompany awakening and arising, which may cause cardiovascular strain and lead to cardiovascular events. The 12-year survival rate has been shown to be significantly lower in patients with nighttime voiding, making nocturia a highly significant independent predictor of death in coronary heart disease patients.38

HOW TO EVALUATE AN OLDER ADULT WHO PRESENTS WITH NOCTURIA

A thorough history and physical examination are crucial in diagnosing nocturia. The goal is to identify any treatable underlying condition, such as diabetes mellitus, obstructive sleep apnea, diabetes insipidus, overactive bladder, benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary tract infection, and congestive heart failure. Laboratory tests and imaging studies can help rule out these underlying conditions.

Other important facets in the history that must be elicited are medication use, patterns of fluid intake, and a history of other urinary complaints.39

A voiding diary and indices of nocturia

A voiding diary is extremely useful and should be used whenever possible. Episodes of incontinence, time of voids, volume voided, and frequency and volume of fluid intake are recorded. From the raw data, one can determine the following:

Total nocturnal urine volume, ie, the sum volume of the nighttime voids

Maximum voided volume, ie, the largest single recorded volume voided in a 24-hour period

Nocturia index, ie, the total nocturnal urine volume divided by the maximum voided volume. A nocturia index greater than 1 shows that nocturnal urine production is greater than the functional bladder capacity. Clinically significant nocturia is observed in patients with a nocturia index of 2.1 or greater.

Nocturnal polyuria index, ie, total nocturnal urine volume divided by the 24-hour urine output. A nocturnal polyuria index higher than 33% implies nocturnal polyuria.40

Nocturnal bladder capacity index, ie, the actual number of nightly voids minus the predicted number of nightly voids, which in turn is calculated as the nocturia index minus 1.

It is especially important to encourage patients to make a voiding diary, as some patients may find this cumbersome, and compliance can be low unless its importance is emphasized. A diary over 7 days usually gives meaningful data. The results from the diary typically confirm the presence of nocturnal polyuria or a decrease in bladder capacity, influencing management.41

 

 

WHAT ARE THE TREATMENT OPTIONS?

Therapy must be directed at the primary cause, addressing any underlying conditions that can contribute to nocturia. Examples39:

  • Tight control of blood sugar for patients with diabetes mellitus
  • Treatment of diabetes insipidus
  • Referral for patients with primary polydipsia
  • Management of hypercalcemia and hypokalemia
  • A survey of medications
  • Treatment of infections.

Nonpharmacologic measures

Tailored behavioral therapy can also be instituted, but the patient needs to have realistic expectations, as these measures are rarely effective alone.

Avoiding nighttime fluid intake, including alcohol and caffeine, has shown promise.

Wearing compression stockings and elevating the legs in the afternoon decrease the retention of fluid that otherwise would return to the circulation at night.

Identifying and eliminating nighttime influences that disturb sleep has variable efficacy. The use of continuous positive airway pressure helps to treat sleep apnea. Moderate exercise, reducing nonsleep time spent in bed,42 and sleeping in a warm bed43 to decrease cold diuresis have also been shown to improve sleep quality.44 Patients with nocturia may have a disrupted circadian rhythm, and phototherapy may help resynchronize the diurnal rhythm and melatonin secretion.

Pharmacotherapy

Pharmacotherapy of nocturia includes desmopressin (DDAVP) to manage nocturnal polyuria and antimuscarinic agents to manage the patient’s decreased ability to store urine. Alpha-blockers such as tamsulosin (Flomax) and 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors such as finasteride (Proscar) are used for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Novel and second-line therapies include diuretics such as furosemide (Lasix), cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, as well as botulinum toxin injected directly into the detrusor muscle for overactive bladder.45

Desmopressin in a low oral dose (0.1–0.4 mg) at bedtime can be initiated and the response assessed. Patients with nocturnal polyuria and disorders of the vasopressin system have been found to be more sensitive to desmopressin therapy.46 Fluid retention and hyponatremia can complicate therapy, and desmopressin must be avoided in patients with liver cirrhosis, renal failure, or congestive heart failure.47

Antimuscarinic agents are effective for patients who have lower urinary tract symptoms and for those with a diminished ability to store urine. They act by decreasing both voluntary and involuntary bladder contractions by blocking muscarinic receptors on the detrusor muscle. This reduces the bladder’s ability to contract and the urge to urinate, thereby increasing bladder capacity.48 These agents include oxybutynin (Ditropan), tolterodine (Detrol), solifenacin (Vesicare), and propiverine (not available in the United States).

Diuretics are being used as second-line agents or for patients who cannot tolerate desmopressin.49 Hydrochlorothiazide is taken 8 hours before bedtime to prevent water accumulation before the early sleeping hours.50 Furosemide has also led to a reduction in the mean number of nocturnal voids.51 The effect of these drugs on nocturia are especially beneficial to patients with concomitant hypertension or cardiovascular disease.

Cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib (Celebrex)52 and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as diclofenac (Voltaren, others)53 and loxoprofen (not available in the United States)54 have been shown to decrease urine production, detrusor muscle tone, and inflammation, especially in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Botulinum toxin has been used, usually in patients refractory to first-line treatment.44

Referral to specialists is guided by underlying causes. Referral to a pulmonologist or sleep specialist may be helpful if the patient has obstructive sleep apnea. Referral to a urologist may be prudent if the patient has benign prostatic hyperplasia, and a gynecologist can address issues such as pelvic relaxation.

Table 4 summarizes the treatment strategies for nocturia.

CASES REVISITED

The first patient described above has nocturia caused by several concomitant diseases, ie, hypertension, diabetes, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and obstructive sleep apnea. In addition to controlling his blood pressure and blood sugar, his primary care provider referred him to a pulmonologist, who confirmed obstructive sleep apnea with polysomnography and prescribed nightly use of a continuous positive airway pressure apparatus. A few weeks later, the patient’s nocturia had improved significantly, and his level of fatigue had decreased.

Apart from hypertension, the second patient’s nocturia was mostly attributed to her existing urinary incontinence. Recognizing that her current antihypertensive regimen may worsen nocturia, her family physician changed it to enalapril (Vasotec) and doxazosin (Cardura) and counseled her to restrict her fluid intake 2 hours before bedtime. She was also referred to a gynecologist, who found a moderate degree of cystocele and treated her with a collagen injection. Her nocturia improved significantly.

References
  1. Abrams P. Nocturia: the major problem in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO). Eur Urol Suppl 2005; 3(6):816.
  2. Bosch JL, Weiss J. The prevalence and causes of nocturia. J Urol 2010; 184:440446.
  3. Tikkinen KA, Johnson TM, Tammela TL, et al. Nocturia frequency, bother, and quality of life: how often is too often? A population-based study in Finland. Eur Urol 2010; 57:488496.
  4. Klingler HG, Heidler H, Madersbacher H, Primus G. Nocturia: an Austrian study on the multifactorial etiology of this symptom. Neurourol Urodyn 2009; 28:427431.
  5. Mariappan P, Turner KJ, Sothilingam S, Rajan P, Sundram M, Steward LH. Nocturia, nocturia indices and variables from frequency-volume charts are significantly different in Asian and Caucasian men with lower urinary tract symptoms: a prospective comparison study. BJU Int 2007; 100:332336.
  6. Asplund R. Mortality in the elderly in relation to nocturnal micturition. BJU Int 1999; 84:297301.
  7. Booth J, O’Neil K, Lawrence M, et al. Advancing community nursing practice: detecting and managing nocturia in community-living older people. Final report. 2008. Queens Nursing Institute, Scotland. http://www.qnis.co.uk/documents/Item3.2-finalreportnocturiav2.doc. Accessed 8/22/11
  8. Kawauchi A, Tanaka Y, Soh J, Ukimura O, Kojima M, Miki T. Causes of nocturnal urinary frequency and reasons for its increase with age in healthy older men. J Urol 2000; 163:8184.
  9. Madersbacher S, Pycha A, Schatzl G, Mian C, Klingler CH, Marberger M. The aging lower urinary tract: a comparative urodynamics study of men and women. Urology 1998; 51:206212.
  10. Elbedawi A, Yalla SV, Resnick NM. Structural basis of geriatric voiding dysfunction. I: methods of a prospective ultra structural/urodynamics study and an overview of the findings. J Urol 1993; 150:16501656.
  11. Weiss JP, Blaivas JG, Jones M, Wang JT, Guan Z; 037 Study Group. Age related pathogenesis of nocturia in patients with overactive bladder. J Urol 2007; 178:548551.
  12. Natsume O, Kaneko Y, Hirayama A, Fujimoto K, Hirao Y. Fluid control in elderly patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2009; 16:307313.
  13. Asplund R. Pharmacotherapy for nocturia in the elderly patient. Drugs Aging 2007; 24:325343.
  14. Sugaya K, Nishijima S, Oda M, Owan T, Miyazato M, Ogawa Y. Biochemical and body composition analysis of nocturia in the elderly. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:205211.
  15. Shiri R, Hakama M, Häkkinen J, et al. The effects of lifestyle factors on the incidence of nocturia. J Urol 2008; 180:20592062.
  16. Asplund R. Obesity in elderly people with nocturia: cause or consequence? Can J Urol 2007; 14:34243428.
  17. Hardin-Fanning F, Gross JC. The effects of sleep-disordered breathing symptoms on voiding patterns in stroke patients. Urol Nurs 2007; 27:221229.
  18. Foley DJ, Vitiello MV, Bliwise DL, Ancoli-Israel S, Monjan AA, Walsh JK. Frequent napping is associated with excessive daytime sleepiness, depression, pain, and nocturia in older adults: findings from the National Sleep Foundation ‘2003 Sleep in America’ Poll. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007; 15:344350.
  19. Häkkinen JT, Shiri R, Koskimäki J, Tammela TL, Auvinen A, Hakama M. Depressive symptoms increase the incidence of nocturia: Tampere Aging Male Urologic Study (TAMUS). J Urol 2008; 179:18971901.
  20. Natsume O, Kaneko Y, Hirayama A, Fujimoto K, Hirao Y. Fluid control in elderly patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2009; 16:307313.
  21. Kujubu DA, Aboseif SR. An overview of nocturia and the syndrome of nocturnal polyuria in the elderly. Nat Clin Pract Nephrol 2008; 4:426435.
  22. Hashimoto M, Imamura T, Tanimukai S, Kazui H, Mori E. Urinary incontinence: an unrecognized adverse effect with donepezil (letter). Lancet 2000; 356:568.
  23. Wagg A, Cohen M. Medical therapy for the overactive bladder in the elderly. Age Ageing 2002; 31:241246.
  24. Williams G, Donaldson RM. Nifedipine and nocturia. Lancet 1986: 1:738.
  25. Yoshimura K, Kamoto T, Tsukamoto T, Oshiro K, Kinukawa N, Ogawa O. Seasonal alterations in nocturia and other storage symptoms in three Japanese communities. Urology 2007; 69:864870.
  26. Asplund R. Hip fractures, nocturia, and nocturnal polyuria in the elderly. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2006; 43:319326.
  27. Stewart RB, Moore MT, May FE, Marks RG, Hale WE. Nocturia: a risk factor for falls in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40:12171220.
  28. van Balen R, Steyerberg EW, Polder JJ, Ribbers TL, Habbema JD, Cools HJ. Hip fracture in elderly patients: outcomes for function, quality of life, and type of residence. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; 390:232243.
  29. Mock LL, Parmelee PA, Kutner N, Scott J, Johnson TM. Content validation of symptom-specific nocturia quality-of-life instrument developed in men: issues expressed by women, as well as men. Urology 2008; 72:736742.
  30. Holm-Larsen T, Weiss J, Langkilde LK. Economic burden of nocturia in the US adult population. J Urol Suppl 2010; 100:332336.
  31. Ali A, Snape J. Nocturia in older people: a review of causes, consequences, assessment, and management. Int J Clin Pract 2004; 58:366373.
  32. Miu DK, Lau S, Szeto SS. Etiology and predictors of urinary incontinence and its effect on quality of life. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2010; 10:177182.
  33. Tibaek S, Gard G, Klarskov P, Iversen HK, Dehlendorff C, Jensen R. Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in stroke patients: a cross-sectional, clinical survey. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:763771.
  34. Bliwise DL, Foley DJ, Vitiello MV, Ansari FP, Ancoli-Israel S, Walsh JK. Nocturia and disturbed sleep in the elderly. Sleep Med 2009; 10:540548.
  35. Asplund R. Nocturia: consequences for sleep and daytime activities and associated risks. Eur Urol Suppl 2005; 3(6):2432.
  36. Hernández C, Estivill E, Prieto M, Badia X. Nocturia in Spanish patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24:10331038.
  37. Pollak CP, Perlick D, Linsner JP, Wenston J, Hsieh F. Sleep problems in the community elderly as predictors of death and nursing home placement. J Community Health 1990; 15:123135.
  38. Bursztyn M, Jacob J, Stessman J. Usefulness of nocturia as a mortality risk factor for coronary heart disease among persons born in 1920 or 1921. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98:13111315.
  39. Appell RA, Sand PK. Nocturia: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:3439.
  40. Weiss JP, Blaivas JG, Stember DS, Chaikin DC. Evaluation of the etiology of nocturia in men: the nocturia and nocturnal bladder capacity indices. Neurourol Urodyn 1999; 18:559565.
  41. Jaffe JS, Ginsberg PC, Silverberg DM, Harkaway RC. The need for voiding diaries in the evaluation of men with nocturia. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2002; 102:261265.
  42. Yoshimura K, Terai A. Classification and distribution of symptomatic nocturia with special attention to duration of time in bed: a patient-based study. BJU Int 2005; 95:12591262.
  43. Polderman KH. Mechanisms of action, physiological effects, and complications of hypothermia. Crit Care Med 2009; 37:S186S202.
  44. Soda T, Masui K, Okuno H, Terai A, Ogawa O, Yoshimura K. Efficacy of nondrug lifestyle measures for the treatment of nocturia. J Urol 2010; 184:10001004.
  45. Flynn MK, Amundsen CL, Perevich M, Liu F, Webster GD. Outcome of a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial of botulinum A toxin for refractory overactive bladder. J Urol 2009; 181:26082615.
  46. Asplund R, Sundberg B, Bengtsson P. Desmopressin for the treatment of nocturnal polyuria in the elderly: a dose titration study. Br J Urol 1998; 82:642646.
  47. Abrams P, Mattiasson A, Lose GR, Robertson GL. The role of desmopressin treatment in adult nocturia. BJU Int 2002; 90:3236.
  48. Andersson K. Treatment of the overactive bladder syndrome and detrusor overactivity with antimuscarinic drugs. Continence 2005; 1:18.
  49. Reynard JM, Cannon A, Yang Q, Abrams P. A novel therapy for nocturnal polyuria: a double-blind randomized trial of frusemide against placebo. Br J Urol 1998; 81:215218.
  50. Cho MC, Ku JH, Paick JS. Alpha-blocker plus diuretic combination therapy as second-line treatment for nocturia in men with LUTS: a pilot study. Urology 2009; 73:549553.
  51. Fu FG, Lavery HJ, Wu DL. Reducing nocturia in the elderly: a randomized placebo-controlled trial of staggered furosemide and desmopressin. Neurourol Urodyn 2011; 30:312316.
  52. Falahatkar S, Mokhtari G, Pourezza F, Asgari SA, Kamran AN. Celecoxib for treatment of nocturia caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Urology 2008; 72:813816.
  53. Addla SK, Adeyoju AB, Neilson D, O’Reilly P. Diclofenac for treatment of nocturia caused by nocturnal polyuria: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Eur Urol 2006; 49:720725.
  54. Saito M, Kawatani M, Kinoshita Y, Satoh K, Miyagawa I. Effectiveness of an anti-inflammatory drug, loxoprofen, for patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2005; 12:779782.
References
  1. Abrams P. Nocturia: the major problem in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO). Eur Urol Suppl 2005; 3(6):816.
  2. Bosch JL, Weiss J. The prevalence and causes of nocturia. J Urol 2010; 184:440446.
  3. Tikkinen KA, Johnson TM, Tammela TL, et al. Nocturia frequency, bother, and quality of life: how often is too often? A population-based study in Finland. Eur Urol 2010; 57:488496.
  4. Klingler HG, Heidler H, Madersbacher H, Primus G. Nocturia: an Austrian study on the multifactorial etiology of this symptom. Neurourol Urodyn 2009; 28:427431.
  5. Mariappan P, Turner KJ, Sothilingam S, Rajan P, Sundram M, Steward LH. Nocturia, nocturia indices and variables from frequency-volume charts are significantly different in Asian and Caucasian men with lower urinary tract symptoms: a prospective comparison study. BJU Int 2007; 100:332336.
  6. Asplund R. Mortality in the elderly in relation to nocturnal micturition. BJU Int 1999; 84:297301.
  7. Booth J, O’Neil K, Lawrence M, et al. Advancing community nursing practice: detecting and managing nocturia in community-living older people. Final report. 2008. Queens Nursing Institute, Scotland. http://www.qnis.co.uk/documents/Item3.2-finalreportnocturiav2.doc. Accessed 8/22/11
  8. Kawauchi A, Tanaka Y, Soh J, Ukimura O, Kojima M, Miki T. Causes of nocturnal urinary frequency and reasons for its increase with age in healthy older men. J Urol 2000; 163:8184.
  9. Madersbacher S, Pycha A, Schatzl G, Mian C, Klingler CH, Marberger M. The aging lower urinary tract: a comparative urodynamics study of men and women. Urology 1998; 51:206212.
  10. Elbedawi A, Yalla SV, Resnick NM. Structural basis of geriatric voiding dysfunction. I: methods of a prospective ultra structural/urodynamics study and an overview of the findings. J Urol 1993; 150:16501656.
  11. Weiss JP, Blaivas JG, Jones M, Wang JT, Guan Z; 037 Study Group. Age related pathogenesis of nocturia in patients with overactive bladder. J Urol 2007; 178:548551.
  12. Natsume O, Kaneko Y, Hirayama A, Fujimoto K, Hirao Y. Fluid control in elderly patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2009; 16:307313.
  13. Asplund R. Pharmacotherapy for nocturia in the elderly patient. Drugs Aging 2007; 24:325343.
  14. Sugaya K, Nishijima S, Oda M, Owan T, Miyazato M, Ogawa Y. Biochemical and body composition analysis of nocturia in the elderly. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:205211.
  15. Shiri R, Hakama M, Häkkinen J, et al. The effects of lifestyle factors on the incidence of nocturia. J Urol 2008; 180:20592062.
  16. Asplund R. Obesity in elderly people with nocturia: cause or consequence? Can J Urol 2007; 14:34243428.
  17. Hardin-Fanning F, Gross JC. The effects of sleep-disordered breathing symptoms on voiding patterns in stroke patients. Urol Nurs 2007; 27:221229.
  18. Foley DJ, Vitiello MV, Bliwise DL, Ancoli-Israel S, Monjan AA, Walsh JK. Frequent napping is associated with excessive daytime sleepiness, depression, pain, and nocturia in older adults: findings from the National Sleep Foundation ‘2003 Sleep in America’ Poll. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007; 15:344350.
  19. Häkkinen JT, Shiri R, Koskimäki J, Tammela TL, Auvinen A, Hakama M. Depressive symptoms increase the incidence of nocturia: Tampere Aging Male Urologic Study (TAMUS). J Urol 2008; 179:18971901.
  20. Natsume O, Kaneko Y, Hirayama A, Fujimoto K, Hirao Y. Fluid control in elderly patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2009; 16:307313.
  21. Kujubu DA, Aboseif SR. An overview of nocturia and the syndrome of nocturnal polyuria in the elderly. Nat Clin Pract Nephrol 2008; 4:426435.
  22. Hashimoto M, Imamura T, Tanimukai S, Kazui H, Mori E. Urinary incontinence: an unrecognized adverse effect with donepezil (letter). Lancet 2000; 356:568.
  23. Wagg A, Cohen M. Medical therapy for the overactive bladder in the elderly. Age Ageing 2002; 31:241246.
  24. Williams G, Donaldson RM. Nifedipine and nocturia. Lancet 1986: 1:738.
  25. Yoshimura K, Kamoto T, Tsukamoto T, Oshiro K, Kinukawa N, Ogawa O. Seasonal alterations in nocturia and other storage symptoms in three Japanese communities. Urology 2007; 69:864870.
  26. Asplund R. Hip fractures, nocturia, and nocturnal polyuria in the elderly. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2006; 43:319326.
  27. Stewart RB, Moore MT, May FE, Marks RG, Hale WE. Nocturia: a risk factor for falls in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40:12171220.
  28. van Balen R, Steyerberg EW, Polder JJ, Ribbers TL, Habbema JD, Cools HJ. Hip fracture in elderly patients: outcomes for function, quality of life, and type of residence. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; 390:232243.
  29. Mock LL, Parmelee PA, Kutner N, Scott J, Johnson TM. Content validation of symptom-specific nocturia quality-of-life instrument developed in men: issues expressed by women, as well as men. Urology 2008; 72:736742.
  30. Holm-Larsen T, Weiss J, Langkilde LK. Economic burden of nocturia in the US adult population. J Urol Suppl 2010; 100:332336.
  31. Ali A, Snape J. Nocturia in older people: a review of causes, consequences, assessment, and management. Int J Clin Pract 2004; 58:366373.
  32. Miu DK, Lau S, Szeto SS. Etiology and predictors of urinary incontinence and its effect on quality of life. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2010; 10:177182.
  33. Tibaek S, Gard G, Klarskov P, Iversen HK, Dehlendorff C, Jensen R. Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in stroke patients: a cross-sectional, clinical survey. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:763771.
  34. Bliwise DL, Foley DJ, Vitiello MV, Ansari FP, Ancoli-Israel S, Walsh JK. Nocturia and disturbed sleep in the elderly. Sleep Med 2009; 10:540548.
  35. Asplund R. Nocturia: consequences for sleep and daytime activities and associated risks. Eur Urol Suppl 2005; 3(6):2432.
  36. Hernández C, Estivill E, Prieto M, Badia X. Nocturia in Spanish patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24:10331038.
  37. Pollak CP, Perlick D, Linsner JP, Wenston J, Hsieh F. Sleep problems in the community elderly as predictors of death and nursing home placement. J Community Health 1990; 15:123135.
  38. Bursztyn M, Jacob J, Stessman J. Usefulness of nocturia as a mortality risk factor for coronary heart disease among persons born in 1920 or 1921. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98:13111315.
  39. Appell RA, Sand PK. Nocturia: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27:3439.
  40. Weiss JP, Blaivas JG, Stember DS, Chaikin DC. Evaluation of the etiology of nocturia in men: the nocturia and nocturnal bladder capacity indices. Neurourol Urodyn 1999; 18:559565.
  41. Jaffe JS, Ginsberg PC, Silverberg DM, Harkaway RC. The need for voiding diaries in the evaluation of men with nocturia. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2002; 102:261265.
  42. Yoshimura K, Terai A. Classification and distribution of symptomatic nocturia with special attention to duration of time in bed: a patient-based study. BJU Int 2005; 95:12591262.
  43. Polderman KH. Mechanisms of action, physiological effects, and complications of hypothermia. Crit Care Med 2009; 37:S186S202.
  44. Soda T, Masui K, Okuno H, Terai A, Ogawa O, Yoshimura K. Efficacy of nondrug lifestyle measures for the treatment of nocturia. J Urol 2010; 184:10001004.
  45. Flynn MK, Amundsen CL, Perevich M, Liu F, Webster GD. Outcome of a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial of botulinum A toxin for refractory overactive bladder. J Urol 2009; 181:26082615.
  46. Asplund R, Sundberg B, Bengtsson P. Desmopressin for the treatment of nocturnal polyuria in the elderly: a dose titration study. Br J Urol 1998; 82:642646.
  47. Abrams P, Mattiasson A, Lose GR, Robertson GL. The role of desmopressin treatment in adult nocturia. BJU Int 2002; 90:3236.
  48. Andersson K. Treatment of the overactive bladder syndrome and detrusor overactivity with antimuscarinic drugs. Continence 2005; 1:18.
  49. Reynard JM, Cannon A, Yang Q, Abrams P. A novel therapy for nocturnal polyuria: a double-blind randomized trial of frusemide against placebo. Br J Urol 1998; 81:215218.
  50. Cho MC, Ku JH, Paick JS. Alpha-blocker plus diuretic combination therapy as second-line treatment for nocturia in men with LUTS: a pilot study. Urology 2009; 73:549553.
  51. Fu FG, Lavery HJ, Wu DL. Reducing nocturia in the elderly: a randomized placebo-controlled trial of staggered furosemide and desmopressin. Neurourol Urodyn 2011; 30:312316.
  52. Falahatkar S, Mokhtari G, Pourezza F, Asgari SA, Kamran AN. Celecoxib for treatment of nocturia caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Urology 2008; 72:813816.
  53. Addla SK, Adeyoju AB, Neilson D, O’Reilly P. Diclofenac for treatment of nocturia caused by nocturnal polyuria: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Eur Urol 2006; 49:720725.
  54. Saito M, Kawatani M, Kinoshita Y, Satoh K, Miyagawa I. Effectiveness of an anti-inflammatory drug, loxoprofen, for patients with nocturia. Int J Urol 2005; 12:779782.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(11)
Page Number
757-764
Page Number
757-764
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Nocturia in the elderly: A wake-up call
Display Headline
Nocturia in the elderly: A wake-up call
Sections
Inside the Article

KEY POINTS

  • Nocturia is multifactorial and is caused by factors that increase urine production and others that decrease the bladder’s ability to hold urine.
  • The first priority in treating nocturia is to identify and treat concomitant conditions that may be contributing to it, such as diabetes mellitus, diabetes insipidus, urinary tract infections, hypercalcemia, and hypokalemia.
  • Nonpharmacologic measures can help, but by themselves usually do not solve the problem.
  • Drug therapies for nocturia include desmopressin (DDAVP), antimuscarinic agents, alpha-blockers, and 5-alpha reductase inhibitors.
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

A new ICU paradigm: Intensivists as primary critical care physicians

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/10/2017 - 10:12
Display Headline
A new ICU paradigm: Intensivists as primary critical care physicians

After nearly a half-century, the subspecialty of critical care medicine—uniquely trained physicians caring for critically ill or injured patients in specialized, discrete nursing units—continues to suffer from an identity crisis.

Too often, the role of the intensivist in caring for the patient is unclear, to the patient, to the family, and to other physicians. Is the intensivist merely a consultant, or does he or she have a larger role?

The time has come to end the identity crisis with a fundamental paradigm shift, to identify intensivists as the principal caregivers of critically ill patients, ie, the “primary critical care physicians,” or PCCPs. We think this is necessary based not only on evidence from clinical studies, but also on our decades of experience as intensivist caregivers in a high-intensity, closed-staffing model.

REASONS FOR THE IDENTITY CRISIS

The reasons for the continued identity crisis of intensivists are many and complex.

To begin with, other physicians tend to be ambiguous about the duties of intensivists, and the general population is mostly unaware of the subspecialty. In contrast to mature subspecialties such as cardiology or gastroenterology, where responsibilities are generally known to physicians and the lay public alike, or in contrast even to recently evolved specialties such as emergency medicine, the enigmatic roles of an intensivist may differ depending on primary specialty (anesthesiology, internal medicine, surgery) and the patient population, or even among intensive care units (ICUs) within the same hospital.

Moreover, that an identity crisis exists is even more surprising given the disproportionately large consumption by critical care medicine of finite economic resources. One would expect that a sector of health care that expends 1% of the GNP1 would have clearly explicit roles and responsibilities for its physicians.

Nearly three-quarters of the care by intensivists in the United States is delivered in what is considered an “open” or “low-intensity” ICU staffing model2: an intensivist makes treatment recommendations but otherwise has no overarching authority over patient care. In this model, the admitting physician is not trained in critical care and is not available throughout the day to make decisions concerning the management of the patient. In addition, various consulting physicians and single-organ specialists may not be aware of the overall management plan, resulting in potentially unnecessary or conflicting orders and increased expense.2 What is more, in an open ICU model, critical care nurses are often left to detect and correct a significant change in a patient’s status without the necessary immediate physician availability, resulting not only in a stressful working environment for nursing staff, but also in potential harm associated with individuals providing care outside their scope of practice.3

In only a small percentage of ICUs—mostly medical ICUs and ICUs in teaching hospitals—is critical care provided in a “high-intensity” or “closed” staffing pattern, in which treatment decisions are cohesively managed under the guidance of an intensivist.2

EVIDENCE IN THE MEDICAL LITERATURE

Staffing patterns in the ICU

Several studies have attempted to identify the consequences of these different ICU staffing patterns on patient care.

Hanson et al4 examined two concurrent patient cohorts admitted to a surgical ICU. The study cohort was cared for by an on-site critical care team supervised by an intensivist, while the control cohort received care from a team with patient care responsibilities in multiple sites, supervised by a general surgeon. The results showed that patients cared for by the critical care team spent less time in the ICU, used fewer resources, had fewer complications, and had lower total hospital charges. The difference between the two cohorts was most evident in patients with the worst Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores.

According to Hanson et al, the lack of an accepted prototype for the delivery of critical care is due to factors such as the relative youth of the discipline, contention over control of individual patient management, and the absence of a single academic advocate.4

Moreover, Pronovost et al5 concluded that high-intensity staffing (mandatory intensivist consultation or closed ICU) was associated with lower ICU mortality rates in 93% of studies and with a reduced ICU length of stay in the high-intensity staffing units when compared with ICUs with low-intensity staffing (no intensivist or elective intensivist consultation).

Critics of our PCCP paradigm may point to a study by Levy et al6 that, using a database of more than 100,000 patients, could not demonstrate any survival benefit with management by critical care physicians. Indeed the study found that patients managed by intensivists had a higher mortality rate than patients managed by physicians not trained in critical care. However, they also showed that more patients managed for the entire stay by intensivists received interventions such as intravenous drugs, mechanical ventilation, and continuous sedation and that they had a higher mean severity of illness as measured by the expanded Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and higher hospital mortality rates than patients who were not managed by a critical care team.

According to Levy et al, most ICUs in the United States are structured as completely open units in which the admitting physicians retain full clinical and decisional responsibility and thus have the option to care for their patients with or without input from intensivists.6

However, a recent study by Kim et al7 likely rebuts the findings of Levy et al. Kim et al analyzed more than 100,000 ICU admissions and found that the lowest odds of death within 30 days were in ICUs that had high-intensity physician staffing and multidisciplinary care teams, suggesting that the presence of an intensivist confers a survival benefit.

Other studies have also shown that high-intensity staffing improves patient outcomes in the ICU.5,8,9

Issues of cost and use of resources

Issues concerning cost and human resources for staffing ICUs have acquired increasing importance. According to Angus et al,10 intensivists provided care to only 36.8% of all ICU patients. The demand for critical care services will continue to grow rapidly as the population ages. It is this shift in the care of the critically ill that requires intensivists to take on the role of the PCCP, so as to provide high-quality, evidence-based critical care and to promote a long-term sustainable model of physician and nursing care.

 

 

OUR EXPERIENCE

Our intensivist group has been providing a near-primary-care style of critical care practice for almost 40 years, from its inception in 1977 by one of the authors (A.B.), to our current group of 15 board-certified intensivists. We can easily cite the clinical value of our practice approach, with outcome data showing consistent and better-than-expected Standardized Mortality Ratio accounts from our APACHE IV data (personal communication, Cleveland Clinic Cerner/APACHE IV report), or with reports showing that the presence of a full-time, attending-level, in-house staff physician ensures that patients, surgeons, and consultants have confidence and respect for the care provided. However, we feel that the intangible components are what make our practice a prototype for the PCCP model.

A dedicated team with a low turnover rate

First, we have a team of anesthesiology- and surgery-based intensivists dedicated to ICU practice, with a very low turnover or burnout rate, in contrast to most ICUs in the United States, where intensivists tend to practice part-time (at other times either providing operating-room-based anesthesia or surgical care or working in a pulmonary- or sleep-lab-based practice). We believe this point should not go unstressed: we have a team of physicians who have dedicated their career to working in the ICU full-time, and some have done so in excess of 20 years, even as long as 30 years! It is our opinion that we are able to provide such a highly desirable working environment by a unique daily staffing model that does not utilize the conventional practice style of one intensivist on-call per week.

We also feel that our model dramatically reduces the risk of burnout by permitting our attending intensivists to break up on-call sequences so that there are days on which work in the ICU is not also associated with on-call responsibilities.

A successful fellowship program

Second, we have an extremely successful fellowship program, which began in 1974 when one of the authors (A.B.) advocated the training of anesthesiology residents as intensivists.11 The American Board of Anesthesiology certifies on average 55 candidates per year in critical care medicine, and our program trains about 10% of the physicians applying for certification. In most years, there are actually more candidates for our program than there are available positions, which is atypical for anesthesiology-based critical care training programs. This wealth of young, talented candidates interested in critical care as a career is, again, in contrast to most anesthesiology-based programs, which find it difficult to enroll even one fellow per year.

Critical care programs grounded in anesthesiology typically struggle because of the realities of economics.12 The payoff of operating-room-based anesthesiology practices generally outshines those in critical care, yet we already have three times as many candidates as there are positions to start our training program in the next 2 years. We feel that candidates are attracted to our program simply because our environment (dedicated staffing, equal clinical footing with surgeons, low burnout rates) is seen as an exciting, positively charged role-modeling atmosphere for young physicians who may have a career interest that involves more than just their original base specialty.

A collegial working relationship

Third, we have a thriving, collegial working relationship—including daily bedside and weekly bioethics rounds with our nursing staff—which has fueled a high degree of professional satisfaction among nurses. This is evidenced by the extremely low turnover rate of nurses (less than 5% per year in the last 5 years) and by national recognition for nursing excellence (Beacon Award for Critical Care Excellence, American Association of Critical Care Nurses) (personal communication, S. Wilson, Nurse Manager). In 2009, the four nurses out of 174 who left did so to further their careers.

While low turnover rates among nurses and award-winning practices are surely a testament to a highly motivated and skilled nursing team, there is no question that a constructive collegiality among the physicians and nurses has provided an environment to allow these positive aspects to flourish.

OVERCOMING ROADBLOCKS

Obviously, although in theory it is easy to proclaim a PCCP paradigm, in reality the roadblocks are many.

For example, standardization of education and credentialing would be an essential hurdle to overcome. The current educational arrangement of the various adult specialties (anesthesiology, internal medicine, surgery), each offering disparate subspecialty critical care training and certification, is deeply rooted in interdisciplinary politics, but without any demonstration of improved patient care.13 As described recently by Kaplan and Shaw,14 an all-encompassing training and credentialing standard for critical care is essential for 21st century medicine and would go a long way toward development of the PCCP paradigm.

Another major roadblock is the shortage of intensivists in the United States.13 There are many reasons why physicians opt not to select critical care as a career, such as a non-straight-forward training pathway (as described above), recognition that the 24-hours per day, 7-days-per-week nature of critical care affects lifestyle issues, and inconsistent physician compensation.13

However, technological and personnel advances, including the use of electronic (e-ICU)15 and mid-level practitioner models, have led to creative approaches to extend critical care coverage.13

Additionally, the multitude of physician specialty stakeholders and the overall flux of the future of medical care in the United States all would contribute to the difficulties of prioritizing the implementation of the PCCP concept. Also, our practice style—a large intensivist group working in an ostensibly closed surgical ICU in a tertiary-care hospital—is one possible model, as is the even more highly evolved Cleveland Clinic medical ICU, where medical intensivists are already essentially PCCPs. But these models of care may not be generalizable among the local care patterns and medical politics across hospitals or ICUs.

Based on the described successes of our practice model, coupled with evidence in the literature, we have proposed a paradigm shift toward the concept of a PCCP. To be sure, paradigm shifts nearly always require time, effort, and wherewithal. In the end, however, we feel that embracement of the PCCP paradigm would result in a concise, discrete understanding of the role of intensivist, eliminate the specialty’s identity crisis, and ultimately improve patient care.

References
  1. Bloomfield EL. The impact of economics on changing medical technology with reference to critical care medicine in the United States. Anesth Analg 2003; 96:418425.
  2. Gajic O, Afessa B. Physician staffing models and patient safety in the ICU. Chest 2009; 135:10381044.
  3. Baggs JG, Schmitt MH, Mushlin AI, et al. Association between nurse-physician collaboration and patient outcomes in three intensive care units. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:19911998.
  4. Hanson CW, Deutschman CS, Anderson HL, et al. Effects of an organized critical care service on outcomes and resource utilization: a cohort study. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:270274.
  5. Pronovost PJ, Angus DC, Dorman T, Robinson KA, Dremsizov TT, Young TL. Physician staffing patterns and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review. JAMA 2002; 288:21512162.
  6. Levy MM, Rapoport J, Lemeshow S, Chalfin DB, Phillips G, Danis M. Association between critical care physician management and patient mortality in the intensive care unit. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148:801809.
  7. Kim MM, Barnato AE, Angus DC, Fleisher LA, Kahn JM. The effect of multidisciplinary care teams on intensive care unit mortality. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170:369376.
  8. Carson SS, Stocking C, Podsadecki T, et al. Effects of organizational change in the medical intensive care unit of a teaching hospital: a comparison of ‘open’ and ‘closed’ formats. JAMA 1996; 276:322328.
  9. Treggiari MM, Martin DP, Yanez ND, Caldwell E, Hudson LD, Rubenfeld GD. Effect of intensive care unit organizational model and structure on outcomes in patients with acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007; 176:685690.
  10. Angus DC, Kelley MA, Schmitz RJ, White A, Popovich J; Committee on Manpower for Pulmonary and Critical Care Societies (COMPACCS). Caring for the critically ill patient. Current and projected workforce requirements for care of the critically ill and patients with pulmonary disease: can we meet the requirements of an aging population? JAMA 2000; 284:27622770.
  11. Boutros AR. Anesthesiology and intensive care (editorial). Anesthesiology 1974; 41:319320.
  12. Boyle WA. A critical time for anesthesiology? American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Newsletter, September 2009;1011. http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/9960917c#/9960917c/12. Accessed July 13, 2011.
  13. Ewart GW, Marcus L, Gaba MM, Bradner RH, Medina JL, Chandler EB. The critical care medicine crisis: a call for federal action: a white paper from the critical care professional societies. Chest 2004; 125:15181521.
  14. Kaplan LJ, Shaw AD. Standards for education and credentialing in critical care medicine. JAMA 2011; 305:296297.
  15. Leong JR, Sirio CA, Rotondi AJ. eICU program favorably affects clinical and economic outcomes. Crit Care 2005, http://ccforum.com/content/9/5/E22. Accessed July 13, 2011.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Marc J. Popovich, MD
Medical Director, Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Shahpour Esfandiari, MD
Director Emeritus, Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Azmy Boutros, MD, FRCA
Chairman Emeritus, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Marc J. Popovich, MD, Anesthesiology Institute, G58, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail popovim@ccf.org

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
697-700
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Marc J. Popovich, MD
Medical Director, Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Shahpour Esfandiari, MD
Director Emeritus, Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Azmy Boutros, MD, FRCA
Chairman Emeritus, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Marc J. Popovich, MD, Anesthesiology Institute, G58, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail popovim@ccf.org

Author and Disclosure Information

Marc J. Popovich, MD
Medical Director, Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Shahpour Esfandiari, MD
Director Emeritus, Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Azmy Boutros, MD, FRCA
Chairman Emeritus, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Marc J. Popovich, MD, Anesthesiology Institute, G58, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail popovim@ccf.org

Article PDF
Article PDF

After nearly a half-century, the subspecialty of critical care medicine—uniquely trained physicians caring for critically ill or injured patients in specialized, discrete nursing units—continues to suffer from an identity crisis.

Too often, the role of the intensivist in caring for the patient is unclear, to the patient, to the family, and to other physicians. Is the intensivist merely a consultant, or does he or she have a larger role?

The time has come to end the identity crisis with a fundamental paradigm shift, to identify intensivists as the principal caregivers of critically ill patients, ie, the “primary critical care physicians,” or PCCPs. We think this is necessary based not only on evidence from clinical studies, but also on our decades of experience as intensivist caregivers in a high-intensity, closed-staffing model.

REASONS FOR THE IDENTITY CRISIS

The reasons for the continued identity crisis of intensivists are many and complex.

To begin with, other physicians tend to be ambiguous about the duties of intensivists, and the general population is mostly unaware of the subspecialty. In contrast to mature subspecialties such as cardiology or gastroenterology, where responsibilities are generally known to physicians and the lay public alike, or in contrast even to recently evolved specialties such as emergency medicine, the enigmatic roles of an intensivist may differ depending on primary specialty (anesthesiology, internal medicine, surgery) and the patient population, or even among intensive care units (ICUs) within the same hospital.

Moreover, that an identity crisis exists is even more surprising given the disproportionately large consumption by critical care medicine of finite economic resources. One would expect that a sector of health care that expends 1% of the GNP1 would have clearly explicit roles and responsibilities for its physicians.

Nearly three-quarters of the care by intensivists in the United States is delivered in what is considered an “open” or “low-intensity” ICU staffing model2: an intensivist makes treatment recommendations but otherwise has no overarching authority over patient care. In this model, the admitting physician is not trained in critical care and is not available throughout the day to make decisions concerning the management of the patient. In addition, various consulting physicians and single-organ specialists may not be aware of the overall management plan, resulting in potentially unnecessary or conflicting orders and increased expense.2 What is more, in an open ICU model, critical care nurses are often left to detect and correct a significant change in a patient’s status without the necessary immediate physician availability, resulting not only in a stressful working environment for nursing staff, but also in potential harm associated with individuals providing care outside their scope of practice.3

In only a small percentage of ICUs—mostly medical ICUs and ICUs in teaching hospitals—is critical care provided in a “high-intensity” or “closed” staffing pattern, in which treatment decisions are cohesively managed under the guidance of an intensivist.2

EVIDENCE IN THE MEDICAL LITERATURE

Staffing patterns in the ICU

Several studies have attempted to identify the consequences of these different ICU staffing patterns on patient care.

Hanson et al4 examined two concurrent patient cohorts admitted to a surgical ICU. The study cohort was cared for by an on-site critical care team supervised by an intensivist, while the control cohort received care from a team with patient care responsibilities in multiple sites, supervised by a general surgeon. The results showed that patients cared for by the critical care team spent less time in the ICU, used fewer resources, had fewer complications, and had lower total hospital charges. The difference between the two cohorts was most evident in patients with the worst Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores.

According to Hanson et al, the lack of an accepted prototype for the delivery of critical care is due to factors such as the relative youth of the discipline, contention over control of individual patient management, and the absence of a single academic advocate.4

Moreover, Pronovost et al5 concluded that high-intensity staffing (mandatory intensivist consultation or closed ICU) was associated with lower ICU mortality rates in 93% of studies and with a reduced ICU length of stay in the high-intensity staffing units when compared with ICUs with low-intensity staffing (no intensivist or elective intensivist consultation).

Critics of our PCCP paradigm may point to a study by Levy et al6 that, using a database of more than 100,000 patients, could not demonstrate any survival benefit with management by critical care physicians. Indeed the study found that patients managed by intensivists had a higher mortality rate than patients managed by physicians not trained in critical care. However, they also showed that more patients managed for the entire stay by intensivists received interventions such as intravenous drugs, mechanical ventilation, and continuous sedation and that they had a higher mean severity of illness as measured by the expanded Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and higher hospital mortality rates than patients who were not managed by a critical care team.

According to Levy et al, most ICUs in the United States are structured as completely open units in which the admitting physicians retain full clinical and decisional responsibility and thus have the option to care for their patients with or without input from intensivists.6

However, a recent study by Kim et al7 likely rebuts the findings of Levy et al. Kim et al analyzed more than 100,000 ICU admissions and found that the lowest odds of death within 30 days were in ICUs that had high-intensity physician staffing and multidisciplinary care teams, suggesting that the presence of an intensivist confers a survival benefit.

Other studies have also shown that high-intensity staffing improves patient outcomes in the ICU.5,8,9

Issues of cost and use of resources

Issues concerning cost and human resources for staffing ICUs have acquired increasing importance. According to Angus et al,10 intensivists provided care to only 36.8% of all ICU patients. The demand for critical care services will continue to grow rapidly as the population ages. It is this shift in the care of the critically ill that requires intensivists to take on the role of the PCCP, so as to provide high-quality, evidence-based critical care and to promote a long-term sustainable model of physician and nursing care.

 

 

OUR EXPERIENCE

Our intensivist group has been providing a near-primary-care style of critical care practice for almost 40 years, from its inception in 1977 by one of the authors (A.B.), to our current group of 15 board-certified intensivists. We can easily cite the clinical value of our practice approach, with outcome data showing consistent and better-than-expected Standardized Mortality Ratio accounts from our APACHE IV data (personal communication, Cleveland Clinic Cerner/APACHE IV report), or with reports showing that the presence of a full-time, attending-level, in-house staff physician ensures that patients, surgeons, and consultants have confidence and respect for the care provided. However, we feel that the intangible components are what make our practice a prototype for the PCCP model.

A dedicated team with a low turnover rate

First, we have a team of anesthesiology- and surgery-based intensivists dedicated to ICU practice, with a very low turnover or burnout rate, in contrast to most ICUs in the United States, where intensivists tend to practice part-time (at other times either providing operating-room-based anesthesia or surgical care or working in a pulmonary- or sleep-lab-based practice). We believe this point should not go unstressed: we have a team of physicians who have dedicated their career to working in the ICU full-time, and some have done so in excess of 20 years, even as long as 30 years! It is our opinion that we are able to provide such a highly desirable working environment by a unique daily staffing model that does not utilize the conventional practice style of one intensivist on-call per week.

We also feel that our model dramatically reduces the risk of burnout by permitting our attending intensivists to break up on-call sequences so that there are days on which work in the ICU is not also associated with on-call responsibilities.

A successful fellowship program

Second, we have an extremely successful fellowship program, which began in 1974 when one of the authors (A.B.) advocated the training of anesthesiology residents as intensivists.11 The American Board of Anesthesiology certifies on average 55 candidates per year in critical care medicine, and our program trains about 10% of the physicians applying for certification. In most years, there are actually more candidates for our program than there are available positions, which is atypical for anesthesiology-based critical care training programs. This wealth of young, talented candidates interested in critical care as a career is, again, in contrast to most anesthesiology-based programs, which find it difficult to enroll even one fellow per year.

Critical care programs grounded in anesthesiology typically struggle because of the realities of economics.12 The payoff of operating-room-based anesthesiology practices generally outshines those in critical care, yet we already have three times as many candidates as there are positions to start our training program in the next 2 years. We feel that candidates are attracted to our program simply because our environment (dedicated staffing, equal clinical footing with surgeons, low burnout rates) is seen as an exciting, positively charged role-modeling atmosphere for young physicians who may have a career interest that involves more than just their original base specialty.

A collegial working relationship

Third, we have a thriving, collegial working relationship—including daily bedside and weekly bioethics rounds with our nursing staff—which has fueled a high degree of professional satisfaction among nurses. This is evidenced by the extremely low turnover rate of nurses (less than 5% per year in the last 5 years) and by national recognition for nursing excellence (Beacon Award for Critical Care Excellence, American Association of Critical Care Nurses) (personal communication, S. Wilson, Nurse Manager). In 2009, the four nurses out of 174 who left did so to further their careers.

While low turnover rates among nurses and award-winning practices are surely a testament to a highly motivated and skilled nursing team, there is no question that a constructive collegiality among the physicians and nurses has provided an environment to allow these positive aspects to flourish.

OVERCOMING ROADBLOCKS

Obviously, although in theory it is easy to proclaim a PCCP paradigm, in reality the roadblocks are many.

For example, standardization of education and credentialing would be an essential hurdle to overcome. The current educational arrangement of the various adult specialties (anesthesiology, internal medicine, surgery), each offering disparate subspecialty critical care training and certification, is deeply rooted in interdisciplinary politics, but without any demonstration of improved patient care.13 As described recently by Kaplan and Shaw,14 an all-encompassing training and credentialing standard for critical care is essential for 21st century medicine and would go a long way toward development of the PCCP paradigm.

Another major roadblock is the shortage of intensivists in the United States.13 There are many reasons why physicians opt not to select critical care as a career, such as a non-straight-forward training pathway (as described above), recognition that the 24-hours per day, 7-days-per-week nature of critical care affects lifestyle issues, and inconsistent physician compensation.13

However, technological and personnel advances, including the use of electronic (e-ICU)15 and mid-level practitioner models, have led to creative approaches to extend critical care coverage.13

Additionally, the multitude of physician specialty stakeholders and the overall flux of the future of medical care in the United States all would contribute to the difficulties of prioritizing the implementation of the PCCP concept. Also, our practice style—a large intensivist group working in an ostensibly closed surgical ICU in a tertiary-care hospital—is one possible model, as is the even more highly evolved Cleveland Clinic medical ICU, where medical intensivists are already essentially PCCPs. But these models of care may not be generalizable among the local care patterns and medical politics across hospitals or ICUs.

Based on the described successes of our practice model, coupled with evidence in the literature, we have proposed a paradigm shift toward the concept of a PCCP. To be sure, paradigm shifts nearly always require time, effort, and wherewithal. In the end, however, we feel that embracement of the PCCP paradigm would result in a concise, discrete understanding of the role of intensivist, eliminate the specialty’s identity crisis, and ultimately improve patient care.

After nearly a half-century, the subspecialty of critical care medicine—uniquely trained physicians caring for critically ill or injured patients in specialized, discrete nursing units—continues to suffer from an identity crisis.

Too often, the role of the intensivist in caring for the patient is unclear, to the patient, to the family, and to other physicians. Is the intensivist merely a consultant, or does he or she have a larger role?

The time has come to end the identity crisis with a fundamental paradigm shift, to identify intensivists as the principal caregivers of critically ill patients, ie, the “primary critical care physicians,” or PCCPs. We think this is necessary based not only on evidence from clinical studies, but also on our decades of experience as intensivist caregivers in a high-intensity, closed-staffing model.

REASONS FOR THE IDENTITY CRISIS

The reasons for the continued identity crisis of intensivists are many and complex.

To begin with, other physicians tend to be ambiguous about the duties of intensivists, and the general population is mostly unaware of the subspecialty. In contrast to mature subspecialties such as cardiology or gastroenterology, where responsibilities are generally known to physicians and the lay public alike, or in contrast even to recently evolved specialties such as emergency medicine, the enigmatic roles of an intensivist may differ depending on primary specialty (anesthesiology, internal medicine, surgery) and the patient population, or even among intensive care units (ICUs) within the same hospital.

Moreover, that an identity crisis exists is even more surprising given the disproportionately large consumption by critical care medicine of finite economic resources. One would expect that a sector of health care that expends 1% of the GNP1 would have clearly explicit roles and responsibilities for its physicians.

Nearly three-quarters of the care by intensivists in the United States is delivered in what is considered an “open” or “low-intensity” ICU staffing model2: an intensivist makes treatment recommendations but otherwise has no overarching authority over patient care. In this model, the admitting physician is not trained in critical care and is not available throughout the day to make decisions concerning the management of the patient. In addition, various consulting physicians and single-organ specialists may not be aware of the overall management plan, resulting in potentially unnecessary or conflicting orders and increased expense.2 What is more, in an open ICU model, critical care nurses are often left to detect and correct a significant change in a patient’s status without the necessary immediate physician availability, resulting not only in a stressful working environment for nursing staff, but also in potential harm associated with individuals providing care outside their scope of practice.3

In only a small percentage of ICUs—mostly medical ICUs and ICUs in teaching hospitals—is critical care provided in a “high-intensity” or “closed” staffing pattern, in which treatment decisions are cohesively managed under the guidance of an intensivist.2

EVIDENCE IN THE MEDICAL LITERATURE

Staffing patterns in the ICU

Several studies have attempted to identify the consequences of these different ICU staffing patterns on patient care.

Hanson et al4 examined two concurrent patient cohorts admitted to a surgical ICU. The study cohort was cared for by an on-site critical care team supervised by an intensivist, while the control cohort received care from a team with patient care responsibilities in multiple sites, supervised by a general surgeon. The results showed that patients cared for by the critical care team spent less time in the ICU, used fewer resources, had fewer complications, and had lower total hospital charges. The difference between the two cohorts was most evident in patients with the worst Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores.

According to Hanson et al, the lack of an accepted prototype for the delivery of critical care is due to factors such as the relative youth of the discipline, contention over control of individual patient management, and the absence of a single academic advocate.4

Moreover, Pronovost et al5 concluded that high-intensity staffing (mandatory intensivist consultation or closed ICU) was associated with lower ICU mortality rates in 93% of studies and with a reduced ICU length of stay in the high-intensity staffing units when compared with ICUs with low-intensity staffing (no intensivist or elective intensivist consultation).

Critics of our PCCP paradigm may point to a study by Levy et al6 that, using a database of more than 100,000 patients, could not demonstrate any survival benefit with management by critical care physicians. Indeed the study found that patients managed by intensivists had a higher mortality rate than patients managed by physicians not trained in critical care. However, they also showed that more patients managed for the entire stay by intensivists received interventions such as intravenous drugs, mechanical ventilation, and continuous sedation and that they had a higher mean severity of illness as measured by the expanded Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and higher hospital mortality rates than patients who were not managed by a critical care team.

According to Levy et al, most ICUs in the United States are structured as completely open units in which the admitting physicians retain full clinical and decisional responsibility and thus have the option to care for their patients with or without input from intensivists.6

However, a recent study by Kim et al7 likely rebuts the findings of Levy et al. Kim et al analyzed more than 100,000 ICU admissions and found that the lowest odds of death within 30 days were in ICUs that had high-intensity physician staffing and multidisciplinary care teams, suggesting that the presence of an intensivist confers a survival benefit.

Other studies have also shown that high-intensity staffing improves patient outcomes in the ICU.5,8,9

Issues of cost and use of resources

Issues concerning cost and human resources for staffing ICUs have acquired increasing importance. According to Angus et al,10 intensivists provided care to only 36.8% of all ICU patients. The demand for critical care services will continue to grow rapidly as the population ages. It is this shift in the care of the critically ill that requires intensivists to take on the role of the PCCP, so as to provide high-quality, evidence-based critical care and to promote a long-term sustainable model of physician and nursing care.

 

 

OUR EXPERIENCE

Our intensivist group has been providing a near-primary-care style of critical care practice for almost 40 years, from its inception in 1977 by one of the authors (A.B.), to our current group of 15 board-certified intensivists. We can easily cite the clinical value of our practice approach, with outcome data showing consistent and better-than-expected Standardized Mortality Ratio accounts from our APACHE IV data (personal communication, Cleveland Clinic Cerner/APACHE IV report), or with reports showing that the presence of a full-time, attending-level, in-house staff physician ensures that patients, surgeons, and consultants have confidence and respect for the care provided. However, we feel that the intangible components are what make our practice a prototype for the PCCP model.

A dedicated team with a low turnover rate

First, we have a team of anesthesiology- and surgery-based intensivists dedicated to ICU practice, with a very low turnover or burnout rate, in contrast to most ICUs in the United States, where intensivists tend to practice part-time (at other times either providing operating-room-based anesthesia or surgical care or working in a pulmonary- or sleep-lab-based practice). We believe this point should not go unstressed: we have a team of physicians who have dedicated their career to working in the ICU full-time, and some have done so in excess of 20 years, even as long as 30 years! It is our opinion that we are able to provide such a highly desirable working environment by a unique daily staffing model that does not utilize the conventional practice style of one intensivist on-call per week.

We also feel that our model dramatically reduces the risk of burnout by permitting our attending intensivists to break up on-call sequences so that there are days on which work in the ICU is not also associated with on-call responsibilities.

A successful fellowship program

Second, we have an extremely successful fellowship program, which began in 1974 when one of the authors (A.B.) advocated the training of anesthesiology residents as intensivists.11 The American Board of Anesthesiology certifies on average 55 candidates per year in critical care medicine, and our program trains about 10% of the physicians applying for certification. In most years, there are actually more candidates for our program than there are available positions, which is atypical for anesthesiology-based critical care training programs. This wealth of young, talented candidates interested in critical care as a career is, again, in contrast to most anesthesiology-based programs, which find it difficult to enroll even one fellow per year.

Critical care programs grounded in anesthesiology typically struggle because of the realities of economics.12 The payoff of operating-room-based anesthesiology practices generally outshines those in critical care, yet we already have three times as many candidates as there are positions to start our training program in the next 2 years. We feel that candidates are attracted to our program simply because our environment (dedicated staffing, equal clinical footing with surgeons, low burnout rates) is seen as an exciting, positively charged role-modeling atmosphere for young physicians who may have a career interest that involves more than just their original base specialty.

A collegial working relationship

Third, we have a thriving, collegial working relationship—including daily bedside and weekly bioethics rounds with our nursing staff—which has fueled a high degree of professional satisfaction among nurses. This is evidenced by the extremely low turnover rate of nurses (less than 5% per year in the last 5 years) and by national recognition for nursing excellence (Beacon Award for Critical Care Excellence, American Association of Critical Care Nurses) (personal communication, S. Wilson, Nurse Manager). In 2009, the four nurses out of 174 who left did so to further their careers.

While low turnover rates among nurses and award-winning practices are surely a testament to a highly motivated and skilled nursing team, there is no question that a constructive collegiality among the physicians and nurses has provided an environment to allow these positive aspects to flourish.

OVERCOMING ROADBLOCKS

Obviously, although in theory it is easy to proclaim a PCCP paradigm, in reality the roadblocks are many.

For example, standardization of education and credentialing would be an essential hurdle to overcome. The current educational arrangement of the various adult specialties (anesthesiology, internal medicine, surgery), each offering disparate subspecialty critical care training and certification, is deeply rooted in interdisciplinary politics, but without any demonstration of improved patient care.13 As described recently by Kaplan and Shaw,14 an all-encompassing training and credentialing standard for critical care is essential for 21st century medicine and would go a long way toward development of the PCCP paradigm.

Another major roadblock is the shortage of intensivists in the United States.13 There are many reasons why physicians opt not to select critical care as a career, such as a non-straight-forward training pathway (as described above), recognition that the 24-hours per day, 7-days-per-week nature of critical care affects lifestyle issues, and inconsistent physician compensation.13

However, technological and personnel advances, including the use of electronic (e-ICU)15 and mid-level practitioner models, have led to creative approaches to extend critical care coverage.13

Additionally, the multitude of physician specialty stakeholders and the overall flux of the future of medical care in the United States all would contribute to the difficulties of prioritizing the implementation of the PCCP concept. Also, our practice style—a large intensivist group working in an ostensibly closed surgical ICU in a tertiary-care hospital—is one possible model, as is the even more highly evolved Cleveland Clinic medical ICU, where medical intensivists are already essentially PCCPs. But these models of care may not be generalizable among the local care patterns and medical politics across hospitals or ICUs.

Based on the described successes of our practice model, coupled with evidence in the literature, we have proposed a paradigm shift toward the concept of a PCCP. To be sure, paradigm shifts nearly always require time, effort, and wherewithal. In the end, however, we feel that embracement of the PCCP paradigm would result in a concise, discrete understanding of the role of intensivist, eliminate the specialty’s identity crisis, and ultimately improve patient care.

References
  1. Bloomfield EL. The impact of economics on changing medical technology with reference to critical care medicine in the United States. Anesth Analg 2003; 96:418425.
  2. Gajic O, Afessa B. Physician staffing models and patient safety in the ICU. Chest 2009; 135:10381044.
  3. Baggs JG, Schmitt MH, Mushlin AI, et al. Association between nurse-physician collaboration and patient outcomes in three intensive care units. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:19911998.
  4. Hanson CW, Deutschman CS, Anderson HL, et al. Effects of an organized critical care service on outcomes and resource utilization: a cohort study. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:270274.
  5. Pronovost PJ, Angus DC, Dorman T, Robinson KA, Dremsizov TT, Young TL. Physician staffing patterns and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review. JAMA 2002; 288:21512162.
  6. Levy MM, Rapoport J, Lemeshow S, Chalfin DB, Phillips G, Danis M. Association between critical care physician management and patient mortality in the intensive care unit. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148:801809.
  7. Kim MM, Barnato AE, Angus DC, Fleisher LA, Kahn JM. The effect of multidisciplinary care teams on intensive care unit mortality. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170:369376.
  8. Carson SS, Stocking C, Podsadecki T, et al. Effects of organizational change in the medical intensive care unit of a teaching hospital: a comparison of ‘open’ and ‘closed’ formats. JAMA 1996; 276:322328.
  9. Treggiari MM, Martin DP, Yanez ND, Caldwell E, Hudson LD, Rubenfeld GD. Effect of intensive care unit organizational model and structure on outcomes in patients with acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007; 176:685690.
  10. Angus DC, Kelley MA, Schmitz RJ, White A, Popovich J; Committee on Manpower for Pulmonary and Critical Care Societies (COMPACCS). Caring for the critically ill patient. Current and projected workforce requirements for care of the critically ill and patients with pulmonary disease: can we meet the requirements of an aging population? JAMA 2000; 284:27622770.
  11. Boutros AR. Anesthesiology and intensive care (editorial). Anesthesiology 1974; 41:319320.
  12. Boyle WA. A critical time for anesthesiology? American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Newsletter, September 2009;1011. http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/9960917c#/9960917c/12. Accessed July 13, 2011.
  13. Ewart GW, Marcus L, Gaba MM, Bradner RH, Medina JL, Chandler EB. The critical care medicine crisis: a call for federal action: a white paper from the critical care professional societies. Chest 2004; 125:15181521.
  14. Kaplan LJ, Shaw AD. Standards for education and credentialing in critical care medicine. JAMA 2011; 305:296297.
  15. Leong JR, Sirio CA, Rotondi AJ. eICU program favorably affects clinical and economic outcomes. Crit Care 2005, http://ccforum.com/content/9/5/E22. Accessed July 13, 2011.
References
  1. Bloomfield EL. The impact of economics on changing medical technology with reference to critical care medicine in the United States. Anesth Analg 2003; 96:418425.
  2. Gajic O, Afessa B. Physician staffing models and patient safety in the ICU. Chest 2009; 135:10381044.
  3. Baggs JG, Schmitt MH, Mushlin AI, et al. Association between nurse-physician collaboration and patient outcomes in three intensive care units. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:19911998.
  4. Hanson CW, Deutschman CS, Anderson HL, et al. Effects of an organized critical care service on outcomes and resource utilization: a cohort study. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:270274.
  5. Pronovost PJ, Angus DC, Dorman T, Robinson KA, Dremsizov TT, Young TL. Physician staffing patterns and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review. JAMA 2002; 288:21512162.
  6. Levy MM, Rapoport J, Lemeshow S, Chalfin DB, Phillips G, Danis M. Association between critical care physician management and patient mortality in the intensive care unit. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148:801809.
  7. Kim MM, Barnato AE, Angus DC, Fleisher LA, Kahn JM. The effect of multidisciplinary care teams on intensive care unit mortality. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170:369376.
  8. Carson SS, Stocking C, Podsadecki T, et al. Effects of organizational change in the medical intensive care unit of a teaching hospital: a comparison of ‘open’ and ‘closed’ formats. JAMA 1996; 276:322328.
  9. Treggiari MM, Martin DP, Yanez ND, Caldwell E, Hudson LD, Rubenfeld GD. Effect of intensive care unit organizational model and structure on outcomes in patients with acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007; 176:685690.
  10. Angus DC, Kelley MA, Schmitz RJ, White A, Popovich J; Committee on Manpower for Pulmonary and Critical Care Societies (COMPACCS). Caring for the critically ill patient. Current and projected workforce requirements for care of the critically ill and patients with pulmonary disease: can we meet the requirements of an aging population? JAMA 2000; 284:27622770.
  11. Boutros AR. Anesthesiology and intensive care (editorial). Anesthesiology 1974; 41:319320.
  12. Boyle WA. A critical time for anesthesiology? American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Newsletter, September 2009;1011. http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/9960917c#/9960917c/12. Accessed July 13, 2011.
  13. Ewart GW, Marcus L, Gaba MM, Bradner RH, Medina JL, Chandler EB. The critical care medicine crisis: a call for federal action: a white paper from the critical care professional societies. Chest 2004; 125:15181521.
  14. Kaplan LJ, Shaw AD. Standards for education and credentialing in critical care medicine. JAMA 2011; 305:296297.
  15. Leong JR, Sirio CA, Rotondi AJ. eICU program favorably affects clinical and economic outcomes. Crit Care 2005, http://ccforum.com/content/9/5/E22. Accessed July 13, 2011.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
697-700
Page Number
697-700
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
A new ICU paradigm: Intensivists as primary critical care physicians
Display Headline
A new ICU paradigm: Intensivists as primary critical care physicians
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Jet lag and shift work sleep disorders: How to help reset the internal clock

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 06/12/2018 - 08:54
Display Headline
Jet lag and shift work sleep disorders: How to help reset the internal clock

For people who must travel long distances east or west by air or who must work the night shift, some relief is possible for the grogginess and disorientation that often ensue. The problems arise from the body’s internal clock being out of sync with the sun. Part of the solution involves helping reset the internal clock, or sometimes, preventing it from resetting itself.

This review will focus on jet lag sleep disorder and shift work sleep disorder, with an emphasis on the causes, the clinical assessment, and evidence-based treatment options.

WHEN THE INTERNAL CLOCK IS OUT OF SYNC WITH THE SUN

Circadian rhythm sleep disorders are the result of dyssynchrony between the body’s internal clock and the external 24-hour light-dark cycle. Patients typically present with insomnia or excessive somnolence. These disorders may represent an intrinsic disorder, such as delayed or advanced sleep-phase disorder, or may be the result of transmeridian air travel or working nonstandard shifts.1

Modified with permission of Elsevier LTD. From Beersma DG, Gordijn MC. Circadian control of the sleep-wake cycle. Physiol Behav 2007; 90:190–195.
Figure 1. The two-process model of sleep regulation. Sleep propensity grows during periods of wakefulness and abates during sleeping periods. The homeostatic process (process S, blue line) is limited to a range of values determined by a clock-like circadian process (process C, red lines) that varies with the biological time of day.
Sleep and wakefulness are conceptually governed by two processes, “process S” and “process C.”2 The homeostatic drive to sleep (process S) is proportional to the duration of sleep restriction, and it becomes maximal at about 40 hours.3 In contrast, process C creates a drive for wakefulness that variably opposes process S and depends on circadian rhythms intrinsic to the organism (Figure 1).4 Coordinating this sleep-wake rhythm (and numerous other behavioral and physiologic processes) are the neurons of the suprachiasmatic nuclei of the hypothalamus.5–8

The intrinsic human circadian period is typically slightly longer than 24 hours,9 but it is synchronized (“entrained”) to the 24-hour day by various environmental inputs, or zeitgebers (German for “time-givers”), the most important of which is light exposure.10

When the internal clock is out of sync with the sun, the misalignment can result in daytime anergia, alternating complaints of insomnia and hypersomnia, and various other symptoms, including emotional disturbances and gastrointestinal distress. In particular, long-distance air travel or a nocturnal work schedule overwhelms the ability of the intrinsic clock to adjust rapidly enough, and the result is jet lag sleep disorder or shift work sleep disorder.1

TOOLS TO EVALUATE CIRCADIAN RHYTHM DISTURBANCES

A thorough history is the cornerstone of the evaluation for all sleep disorders, and if a circadian rhythm disturbance is suspected, the sleep history is supplemented with specific questions to establish a clear diagnosis.

When assessing for jet lag disorder, ask about:

  • The patient’s degree of sleep deprivation before and during travel
  • His or her innate circadian preference (ie, whether he or she is a “night owl” or “early bird”)
  • Patterns of alcohol and caffeine consumption.

When assessing for shift work disorder, include the above questions and also look for differences in the sleep-wake schedule on working days vs nonworking days, as well as external contributors to poor sleep quality (eg, the degree to which daytime sleep is not “protected”).

The following tools help in acquiring this information.

Sleep diary

In a sleep diary or log, patients record the times that they take naps, maintain consolidated sleep, and subsequently arise. The diary also prompts the patient for information about sleep latency, wakefulness after sleep onset, time in bed, medication and caffeine intake, and the restorative quality of sleep.

While the sleep diary by itself may provide insight into counteractive sleep-related behaviors and misperceptions the patient may have, compliance is often limited. Therefore, the sleep diary is best used in conjunction with actigraphy.

Actigraphy

An actigraph is a wristwatch-size motion detector, typically worn continuously for 7 days or longer. The data it gathers and stores serve as a surrogate measure of various sleep-wake variables.11

Either a sleep diary or actigraphy is required to demonstrate the stability of sleep patterns and circadian preference, but the actigraph typically generates more reliable data.11,12 It is also valuable in assessing the response to treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders.13

Are you an early bird or a night owl?

The Morningness-Eveningness questionnaire contains 19 items. Night owls tend to score lower on it than early birds do.14 This information may help some people avoid situations in which they may not do well, such as an early bird going on a permanent night-shift schedule.

Other assessment tools

Polysomnography is used primarily to rule out sleep-disordered breathing; it is not indicated for routine evaluation of circadian rhythm sleep disorders.

The minimum core body temperature and the peak melatonin secretion follow a 24-hour cycle. Although these measures are often used in research, they are not routinely used in clinical practice. (The minimum core body temperature is discussed further below.)

 

 

JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

Jet lag results from air travel across multiple time zones, with a resultant discordance between the internal circadian clock and the destination’s light-dark cycle. Most sufferers report sleeping poorly at night and feeling groggy during the day, and some also experience general malaise and gastrointestinal distress.1

The severity depends on a number of variables.

Going west is easier than going east

Westward travel is normally less taxing than eastward travel, as it requires setting one’s internal clock later rather than earlier. Presumably, because the circadian period tends to exceed 24 hours, we can move our internal clock later by about 2 hours per day, but we can move it earlier by only 1 to 1.5 hours.15,16

The more time zones crossed, the longer it takes the circadian pacemaker to re-entrain and the longer-lasting and more severe are the symptoms of jet lag. Travel across one or two time zones is only transiently troublesome.

Does age affect jet lag?

Whether age affects the severity of jet lag is not yet known.

In a study of simulated jet lag (requiring a 6-hour advance), middle-aged people (ages 37 to 52) experienced a greater degree of fragmented sleep on polysomnography than younger ones (ages 18 to 25). The older group also had greater impairment in daytime alertness, suggesting that phase tolerance—ie, the ability to sleep at an abnormal time in the circadian cycle17—decreases with age. However, two field studies involving both eastward and westward travel yielded the opposite results, suggesting that older age may actually protect against jet lag.18–20

Methodologic differences preclude direct comparisons of the studies, as do differences in the age groups studied.

Light exposure can help or hurt, depending on the timing

Reprinted with permission of Elsevier LTD. From Burgess HJ, et al. Bright light, dark, and melatonin can promote circadian adaptation in night shift workers. Sleep Med Rev 2002; 6:407–420.
Figure 2. A schematic human phase-response curve to light (blue line) and a one to exogenous melatonin (red line). The y axis shows the direction and relative magnitude of the phase shift produced by the administration of light or melatonin at various times, which are shown on the x axis. This graph shows typical times and phase relationships among these rhythms when the circadian clock is entrained to a 24-hour day. For individuals with earlier or later circadian rhythms, the local time axis should be adjusted accordingly. The light phase-response curve is a schematic based on the results of numerous studies. The melatonin curve is based on a single study using 0.5-mg doses of melatonin.22
Light exposure is of primary importance in shifting the circadian clock, and the direction of the shift depends on the timing of the exposure (Figure 2).20–22

Our core body temperature dips to its lowest point about 2 to 3 hours before we habitually awake. Exposure to bright light in the hours leading up to this minimum (the inverted triangle in Figure 2) sets our internal clock later (a phase delay)—desirable, say, for someone travelling from New York City to Los Angeles. Conversely, exposure to bright light after this temperature minimum sets the clock earlier.

Inadvertent shifting of circadian phase in the wrong direction (“antidromic re-entrainment”) is common and delays circadian reacclimation and the dissipation of jet lag symptoms.

Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of jet lag. American College of Physicians, 2010. Modified with permission of the American College of Physicians.
Figure 3. Diagram demonstrating a flight from Chicago to Paris, seven time zones east. Times when darkness and light should be sought are denoted by the letters “D” for darkness and “L” for light. The inverted triangles represent the minimum core body temperature. Subsequent to arrival, the depicted light-dark pattern should result in average daily phase shifts of 1 hour.
For example (Figure 3),23 a typical flight from Chicago to Paris (seven time zones to the east) arrives there early in the morning Paris time. Although the clocks at Charles de Gaulle airport say 08:00, the traveler’s internal clock says it is still 01:00. Furthermore, his or her core body temperature will reach its minimum at about 04:00 Chicago time, or 11:00 Paris time. If the traveller decides to go for a walk right away, the light exposure will promote a phase delay rather than the desired phase advance. Therefore, circadian re-entrainment will be relatively prolonged.24

We discuss ways to reduce antidromic reentrainment in more detail further below.

Other factors

Other factors that contribute to travel fatigue include sleep deprivation (before the flight or en route), acute discomfort as the plane ascends to its cruising altitude,25 and excessive alcohol or caffeine intake during the flight. Although the effects of these factors rapidly diminish once one reaches the travel destination, jet lag will persist until circadian re-entrainment occurs.15

NONDRUG THERAPIES FOR JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

The goal of treatment is to realign the circadian rhythm in the most rapid and efficient way and to minimize symptoms in the meantime. Frequent shifts to different time zones, often required in business travel, are very difficult to accommodate, and business travelers actually may do better if they remain on their home-based schedule.

One study compared keeping home-based sleep hours as opposed to adopting local sleep hours during a 2-day stay after a 9-hour westward flight.26 Travelers who remained on home-based hours were less sleepy and had lower (ie, better) global jet lag ratings than those who adopted local sleep hours, in part because of better sleep quality and duration. Nevertheless, about one-third of the participants said they preferred to adhere to the local schedule.

Strategic avoidance of, and exposure to, light

If the traveler intends to remain at the destination long enough, he or she can adjust better (and avoid an antidromic process) via strategic avoidance of and exposure to light.24

Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of jet lag. American College of Physicians, 2010. Modified with permission of the American College of Physicians.
Figure 4. The diagram demonstrates a flight from Los Angeles to Rome, nine time zones east. Times when darkness (letter D) and light (letter L) should be sought are also indicated. The inverted triangles represent the minimum core body temperature. The depicted light-dark pattern should result in average daily phase shifts of 2 hours.
Burgess and Eastman23,27 have devised plans to help in deciding whether a phase delay or phase advance is most desirable, depending on the number of time zones crossed. Generally, shifts earlier in time are required for eastward flights (as in Figure 3), and shifts later in time are required for westward flights. However, advances of 8 hours or more are more readily accomplished by a phase delay (Figure 4).23,28

People travelling east, who want to set their clocks ahead (a phase advance), need to keep to the dark in the 3 hours leading up to the time they reach their minimum core body temperature (depicted as “D” in Figure 3), and then expose themselves to light in the 3 hours immediately after (“L” in Figure 3). Thus, the traveler from Chicago to Paris would do better by avoiding light exposure on arrival, either by remaining in darkness in his or her hotel room, or by wearing dark sunglasses when outdoors. Wearing sunglasses during transit to the hotel would also help avoid light exposure.

When attempting to delay circadian rhythms, the opposite light-dark patterns are sought, as depicted in Figure 4. As flight and layover patterns often do not permit strict adherence to these measures, they represent idealized scenarios.

The first step is to make a grid with a concurrent listing of home and destination times. In the example in Figure 3, the person is traveling seven time zones east. On day 0, a rectangle is drawn around the times representing home-based sleep hours.

Next, we mark the time at which we expect the traveler’s core body temperature to reach its minimum (inverted triangle). If the person habitually sleeps no more than 7 hours per night, then we mark this point as 2 hours before his or her habitual wake-up time; if the person sleeps more than 7 hours, then we place it 3 hours before wake-up time.23,29 This process is repeated at the bottom of the grid to represent the desired sleep schedule at the traveler’s destination. The distance between the home and the destination-based minimum core body temperature symbols represents the required degree of circadian realignment.

If a phase advance is required (eg, if travelling from Chicago to Paris), the core body temperature symbol is drawn on day 1 in the same location as day 0. For each subsequent day, the symbol is moved 1 hour earlier (which is about how fast the internal clock can advance),15,27 until a clock time within 1 hour of the desired destination core body temperature time is reached or satisfactory sleep and daytime functioning are achieved (Figure 3). If a phase delay is required (eg, if travelling from New York City to Los Angeles), the symbol is drawn 2 hours later on day 1 than on day 0 (reflecting the greater ease at which delays are achieved),15,27 with subsequent daily shifts in 2-hour increments, again until a clock time within 1 hour of the desired destination minimum core body temperature time is reached or satisfactory sleep and daytime functioning are achieved.

Requirements for darkness can be met with protective eyewear (ie, dark sunglasses), or by remaining in a dark room. Light requirements can be met with outdoor exposure, with a commercial light box, or with a separate apparatus (eg, goggles, visors) portable enough for travel.

 

 

DRUGS TO TREAT JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

Melatonin appears safe

Most field studies have found that nightly doses of melatonin (2–8 mg) improve the quality of sleep30–32 or alleviate daytime symptoms of jet lag, or both.20,30,31,33–36 Immediate-release preparations appear to be more effective than slow-release ones.31 Although most studies looked exclusively at adaptation to eastward travel,30–32,35,36 one studied westward travel,33 and another assessed melatonin’s effects during both departure and return trips that traversed 11 time zones.34

In studies of preflight dosing, melatonin was scheduled for up to 3 days before departure (and en route in two instances),30,34 at clock hours corresponding to the nocturnal sleep period at the travel destination (consistent times daily), and then for a subsequent 3 to 4 days between a destination time of 22:00 and 00:00 hours (ie, at bedtime).30,31,34–36 Several other studies further simplified this regimen, with participants taking nocturnal melatonin only on arrival at the destination, either for eastward31,32 or for westward travel.33

The study involving solely westward travel (Los Angeles to New Zealand) was the only one of the studies with positive findings that allowed for comparisons between participants who received melatonin before departure (3 days at 5-mg doses, taken between 07:00 and 08:00 Los Angeles time) and continuing for 5 days after arrival at 22:00 to 00:00 New Zealand time, and those who received melatonin beginning only on arrival.33 Significantly better jet lag outcomes were found in the latter group.

An important caveat is that melatonin is sold over the counter as a nutritional supplement and is not regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), so verification of purity of the product is difficult.

A comprehensive review by the National Academy of Sciences stated that, given the available data, short-term use of melatonin in total daily doses of 10 mg or less in healthy adults appears to be safe.37

Benzodiazepine receptor agonists improve sleep, but maybe not sleepiness

The use of standard hypnotics during periods of circadian realignment appears to be commonplace but has not been well studied.20 Trials of the newer benzodiazepine receptor agonists—three studies of zolpidem (Ambien) 10 mg30,38,39 and two of zopiclone 5 to 7.5 mg32,40—found consistently favorable subjective30,38 and objective32,39,40 outcomes in counteracting jet-lag-induced insomnia (for both eastward and westward travel). (Note: Zopiclone is not available in the United States, but its enantiomer eszopiclone [Lunesta] is.) However, the evidence is less clear for daytime symptoms of jet lag, with outcomes reported as favorable,30 equivocal,40 or inaccessible.32,38,39

The discrepancy between studies incorporating systematic daytime assessments may be due to differential medication effects (zolpidem vs zopiclone).

In two studies that compared these standard hypnotics to oral melatonin, one found that zopiclone 5 mg and melatonin 2 mg were equally beneficial with respect to sleep variables (other jet lag symptoms were not assessed).32 In another study, zolpidem 10 mg was superior to melatonin 5 mg for sleep and other jet lag symptoms, and the combination of zolpidem and melatonin was no better than zolpidem alone.30

Importantly, however, adverse effects were more frequent in those taking zolpidem and included nausea, vomiting, and confusion.30 Although these effects were not deemed serious, 14 participants (10%) withdrew from the study.

Stimulants

Caffeine is commonly used to combat the sleepiness of jet lag, but only two controlled field studies have assessed its efficacy.41,42 Both used slow-release preparations at a daily dosage of 300 mg.

In one study, after an eastward flight traversing seven time zones, participants took the pill at 08:00 destination time every day for 5 days.41 Curiously, alertness and other jet lag symptoms were not assessed, but circadian rhythms (determined by levels of cortisol in saliva) were re-entrained at a more rapid rate with caffeine than with placebo, and to a degree comparable with that achieved by exogenous melatonin.

In a follow-up study by the same group, those receiving caffeine were objectively less sleepy (as assessed by multiple sleep latency tests) than those taking melatonin or placebo, but subjective differences between groups were not identified.42 Furthermore, those taking caffeine had significantly more nocturnal sleep complaints, as assessed both objectively and subjectively.

A recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the stimulant armodafinil (Nuvigil) found less sleepiness on multiple sleep latency testing and a decrease in jet leg symptoms with a dosage of 150 mg than with placebo.43

SHIFT WORK SLEEP DISORDER: DEFINITION, PREDISPOSING FACTORS

Shift work refers to nonstandard work schedules, including on-call duty, rotating shifts, and permanent night work. In the United States, one in five workers works a nonstandard shift.20

While shift work presents obvious difficulties, the diagnosis of shift work sleep disorder is reserved for those who have chronic insomnia or sleepiness at times that are not conducive to the externally demanded sleep-wake schedule, despite having the opportunity for sufficient daytime sleep.1 When defined in such a fashion, this disorder may afflict nearly a third of workers,44 with potential adverse effects on safety, health, and quality of life.

Older age is considered a risk factor for intolerance to shift work.20 In a study of physiologic phase shifts in response to night work, older workers were less able to recover after several night shifts.45 A large survey of police officers working the night shift supported the finding of more sleep disruption and on-duty sleepiness in older people.46

 

 

TREATMENT OF SHIFT WORK SLEEP DISORDER

Bright light at work, sunglasses on the way home

Various field studies have described hastening of circadian adaptation (and immediate alerting effects) during night shifts with the use of bright light.20

Boivin and James47 found that workers who received 6 hours of intermittent bright light during their shifts experienced significantly greater phase delays than those who received no such intervention. Those receiving bright light also wore sunglasses during the commute home (to protect from an undesired phase advance), and this has demonstrated favorable effects as an independent intervention.48

Drug treatment of shift work sleep disorder

Melatonin: Mixed results. Two field studies found that taking melatonin (5–6 mg) before the daytime sleep period had a favorable impact on subjective sleep quality.49,50 However, two other studies found no such benefit with doses ranging from 6 to 10 mg.51,52 Differences between these studies—eg, shift schedules, dosages, and the time the melatonin was taken—preclude definitive comparisons.

Effects of melatonin on workplace alertness are indeterminate because of inconsistent measurements of this variable. Importantly, a simulated shift work study found no phase-shifting advantages of melatonin in those who concomitantly used bright light during their work shift with or without morning protective eyewear.48

Hypnotic drugs. In simulation studies and field studies, people taking benzodiazepine receptor agonists have consistently said they sleep better.53–58 A simulation study noted additional benefit in the ability to stay alert during the night shift (assessed by maintenance of wakefulness testing),55 but two other studies saw no changes in manifest sleepiness (assessed with multiple sleep latency tests).53,54 These divergent findings may represent different effects on these two dimensions of sleepiness.

The only field study to assess post-sleep psychomotor performance found no impairments after taking 7.5 mg of zopiclone, a relatively long-acting nonbenzodiazepine hypnotic.57

Stimulants. In the largest trial to date of shift work sleep disorder, modafinil 200 mg (the only drug currently FDA-approved for shift work sleep disorder) had significant benefits compared with placebo with respect to objective measurements of workplace sleepiness, reaction time performance testing, and self-rated improvement of symptoms.59 Perhaps because of the low dose studied, both treated and untreated patients continued to manifest sleepiness within the pathologic range on objective testing.

Although the efficacy of caffeine is well documented as a countermeasure for sleepiness during experimentally induced sleep deprivation,20 very few field trials have specifically addressed impairments associated with shift work sleep disorder. In one study, caffeine at a dose of 4 mg/kg taken 30 minutes before starting a night shift provided objective improvement in both performance and alertness.60

Strategic napping is an additional practical intervention to promote alertness during night shifts, and cumulative data indicate that it provides objective and subjective improvements in alertness and performance.61,62 Earlier timed naps (ie, before or during the early portion of a shift) of short duration (ie, 20 minutes or less) are likely to produce maximal benefit, because they avoid sleep inertia (the grogginess or sleepiness that may follow a long nap), and also because they have no effect on the subsequent daytime sleep bout.61,63

Interventions may also be used in combination. For example, napping in conjunction with caffeine results in a greater degree of increased objective alertness than either intervention alone.60

How about days off?

The recommendations described here presume that shift workers maintain the workday sleep-wake schedule continuously, including when they are not at work. This is likely not a real-world scenario.

Smith et al64 developed a “compromise” phase position, whereby internal rhythms are optimized to facilitate alertness during work and sleepiness during the day, while allowing one to adopt a non-workday sleep schedule that maintains accessibility to family and social activities. In brief, non-workday sleep starts about 5.5 hours earlier than workday sleep; all sleep bouts are followed by brief exposure to bright light (to avoid excessive phase delay); and, as described previously, both workplace bright light and protection from morning light are implemented.

Although further studies are needed to determine whether this regimen is practical in real life, study participants who achieved desired partial phase shifts had performance ratings on a par with baseline levels, and comparable to those in a group that achieved complete re-entrainment.64

Finally, all shift workers need to be encouraged to protect the daytime bedroom environment just as daytime workers protect their nighttime environment. Sleep should be sought in an appropriately darkened and quiet environment, phones and doorbells silenced, and appointments scheduled accordingly.

References
  1. International Classification of Sleep Disorders: Diagnostic and Coding Manual/American Academy of Sleep Medicine. 2nd ed. Westchester, IL: American Academy of Sleep Medicine; 2005.
  2. Borbély AA, Achermann P. Concepts and models of sleep regulation: an overview. J Sleep Res 1992; 1:6379.
  3. Carskadon MA, Dement WC. Effects of total sleep loss on sleep tendency. Percept Mot Skills 1979; 48:495506.
  4. Beersma DG, Gordijn MC. Circadian control of the sleep-wake cycle. Physiol Behav 2007; 90:190195.
  5. Moore RY, Eichler VB. Loss of a circadian adrenal corticosterone rhythm following suprachiasmatic lesions in the rat. Brain Res 1972; 42:201206.
  6. Stephan FK, Zucker I. Circadian rhythms in drinking behavior and locomotor activity of rats are eliminated by hypothalamic lesions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1972; 69:15831586.
  7. Welsh DK, Logothetis DE, Meister M, Reppert SM. Individual neurons dissociated from rat suprachiasmatic nucleus express independently phased circadian firing rhythms. Neuron 1995; 14:697706.
  8. Ralph MR, Foster RG, Davis FC, Menaker M. Transplanted suprachiasmatic nucleus determines circadian period. Science 1990; 247:975978.
  9. Czeisler CA, Duffy JF, Shanahan TL, et al. Stability, precision, and near-24-hour period of the human circadian pacemaker. Science 1999; 284:21772181.
  10. Waterhouse JM, DeCoursey PJ. Human circadian organization. In:Dunlap JC, Loros JJ, DeCoursey PJ, editors. Chronobiology: Biological Timekeeping. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates; 2004:291324.
  11. Morgenthaler T, Alessi C, Friedman L, et al; Standards of Practice Committee; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Practice parameters for the use of actigraphy in the assessment of sleep and sleep disorders: an update for 2007. Sleep 2007; 30:519529.
  12. Bradshaw DA, Yanagi MA, Pak ES, Peery TS, Ruff GA. Nightly sleep duration in the 2-week period preceding multiple sleep latency testing. J Clin Sleep Med 2007; 3:613619.
  13. Morgenthaler TI, Lee-Chiong T, Alessi C, et al; Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Practice parameters for the clinical evaluation and treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders. An American Academy of Sleep Medicine report. Sleep 2007; 30:14451459.
  14. Horne JA, Ostberg O. A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-eveningness in human circadian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol 1976; 4:97110.
  15. Waterhouse J, Reilly T, Atkinson G, Edwards B. Jet lag: trends and coping strategies. Lancet 2007; 369:11171129.
  16. Eastman CI, Gazda CJ, Burgess HJ, Crowley SJ, Fogg LF. Advancing circadian rhythms before eastward flight: a strategy to prevent or reduce jet lag. Sleep 2005; 28:3344.
  17. Moline ML, Pollak CP, Monk TH, et al. Age-related differences in recovery from simulated jet lag. Sleep 1992; 15:2840.
  18. Waterhouse J, Edwards B, Nevill A, et al. Identifying some determinants of “jet lag” and its symptoms: a study of athletes and other travellers. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36:5460.
  19. Tresguerres JA, Ariznavarreta C, Granados B, et al. Circadian urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin, cortisol excretion and locomotor activity in airline pilots during transmeridian flights. J Pineal Res 2001; 31:1622.
  20. Sack RL, Auckley D, Auger RR, et al; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Circadian rhythm sleep disorders: part I, basic principles, shift work and jet lag disorders. An American Academy of Sleep Medicine review. Sleep 2007; 30:14601483.
  21. Burgess HJ, Sharkey KM, Eastman CI. Bright light, dark and melatonin can promote circadian adaptation in night shift workers. Sleep Med Rev 2002; 6:407420.
  22. Lewy AJ, Bauer VK, Saeeduddin A, et al. The human phase response curve (PRC) to melatonin is about 12 hours out of phase with the PRC to light. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:7183.
  23. Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of Jet Lag. 2010. http://pier.acponline.org/physicians/screening/prev1015/prev1015.html. Accessed June 25, 2010.
  24. Daan S, Lewy AJ. Scheduled exposure to daylight: a potential strategy to reduce “jet lag” following transmeridian flight. Psychopharmacol Bull 1984; 20:566568.
  25. Muhm JM, Rock PB, McMullin DL, et al. Effect of aircraft-cabin altitude on passenger discomfort. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:1827.
  26. Lowden A, Akerstedt T. Retaining home-base sleep hours to prevent jet lag in connection with a westward flight across nine time zones. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:365376.
  27. Eastman CI, Burgess HJ. How to travel the world without jet lag. Sleep Med Clin 2009; 4:241255.
  28. Revell VL, Eastman CI. How to trick mother nature into letting you fly around or stay up all night. J Biol Rhythms 2005; 20:353365.
  29. Cagnacci A, Elliott JA, Yen SS. Melatonin: a major regulator of the circadian rhythm of core temperature in humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992; 75:447452.
  30. Suhner A, Schlagenhauf P, Höfer I, Johnson R, Tschopp A, Steffen R. Effectiveness and tolerability of melatonin and zolpidem for the alleviation of jet lag. Aviat Space Environ Med 2001; 72:638646.
  31. Suhner A, Schlagenhauf P, Johnson R, Tschopp A, Steffen R. Comparative study to determine the optimal melatonin dosage form for the alleviation of jet lag. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:655666.
  32. Paul MA, Gray G, Sardana TM, Pigeau RA. Melatonin and zopiclone as facilitators of early circadian sleep in operational air transport crews. Aviat Space Environ Med 2004; 75:439443.
  33. Petrie K, Dawson AG, Thompson L, Brook R. A double-blind trial of melatonin as a treatment for jet lag in international cabin crew. Biol Psychiatry 1993; 33:526530.
  34. Petrie K, Conaglen JV, Thompson L, Chamberlain K. Effect of melatonin on jet lag after long haul flights. BMJ 1989; 298:705707.
  35. Arendt J, Aldhous M, Marks V. Alleviation of jet lag by melatonin: preliminary results of controlled double blind trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986; 292:1170.
  36. Claustrat B, Brun J, David M, Sassolas G, Chazot G. Melatonin and jet lag: confirmatory result using a simplified protocol. Biol Psychiatry 1992; 32:705711.
  37. Committee on the Framework for Evaluating the Safety of Dietary Supplements, Food and Nutrition Board, Board on Life Sciences, Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies. Dietary supplements: a framework for evaluating safety. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2005.
  38. Jamieson AO, Zammit GK, Rosenberg RS, Davis JR, Walsh JK. Zolpidem reduces the sleep disturbance of jet lag. Sleep Med 2001; 2:423430.
  39. Hirschfeld U, Moreno-Reyes R, Akseki E, et al. Progressive elevation of plasma thyrotropin during adaptation to simulated jet lag: effects of treatment with bright light or zolpidem. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81:32703277.
  40. Daurat A, Benoit O, Buguet A. Effects of zopiclone on the rest/activity rhythm after a westward flight across five time zones. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2000; 149:241245.
  41. Piérard C, Beaumont M, Enslen M, et al. Resynchronization of hormonal rhythms after an eastbound flight in humans: effects of slow-release caffeine and melatonin. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 85:144150.
  42. Beaumont M, Batéjat D, Piérard C, et al. Caffeine or melatonin effects on sleep and sleepiness after rapid eastward transmeridian travel. J Appl Physiol 2004; 96:5058.
  43. Rosenberg RP, Bogan RK, Tiller JM, et al. A phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of armodafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with jet lag disorder. Mayo Clin Proc 2010; 85:630638.
  44. Drake CL, Roehrs T, Richardson G, Walsh JK, Roth T. Shift work sleep disorder: prevalence and consequences beyond that of symptomatic day workers. Sleep 2004; 27:14531462.
  45. Härmä MI, Hakola T, Akerstedt T, Laitinen JT. Age and adjustment to night work. Occup Environ Med 1994; 51:568573.
  46. Smith L, Mason C. Reducing night shift exposure: a pilot study of rota, night shift and age effects on sleepiness and fatigue. J Hum Ergol (Tokyo) 2001; 30:8387.
  47. Boivin DB, James FO. Circadian adaptation to night-shift work by judicious light and darkness exposure. J Biol Rhythms 2002; 17:556567.
  48. Crowley SJ, Lee C, Tseng CY, Fogg LF, Eastman CI. Combinations of bright light, scheduled dark, sunglasses, and melatonin to facilitate circadian entrainment to night shift work. J Biol Rhythms 2003; 18:513523.
  49. Folkard S, Arendt J, Clark M. Can melatonin improve shift workers’ tolerance of the night shift? Some preliminary findings. Chronobiol Int 1993; 10:315320.
  50. Yoon IY, Song BG. Role of morning melatonin administration and attenuation of sunlight exposure in improving adaptation of nightshift workers. Chronobiol Int 2002; 19:903913.
  51. James M, Tremea MO, Jones JS, Krohmer JR. Can melatonin improve adaptation to night shift? Am J Emerg Med 1998; 16:367370.
  52. Jorgensen KM, Witting MD. Does exogenous melatonin improve day sleep or night alertness in emergency physicians working night shifts? Ann Emerg Med 1998; 31:699704.
  53. Walsh JK, Schweitzer PK, Anch AM, Muehlbach MJ, Jenkins NA, Dickins QS. Sleepiness/alertness on a simulated night shift following sleep at home with triazolam. Sleep 1991; 14:140146.
  54. Walsh JK, Sugerman JL, Muehlbach MJ, Schweitzer PK. Physiological sleep tendency on a simulated night shift: adaptation and effects of triazolam. Sleep 1988; 11:251264.
  55. Porcù S, Bellatreccia A, Ferrara M, Casagrande M. Performance, ability to stay awake, and tendency to fall asleep during the night after a diurnal sleep with temazepam or placebo. Sleep 1997; 20:535541.
  56. Monchesky TC, Billings BJ, Phillips R, Bourgouin J. Zopiclone in insomniac shiftworkers. Evaluation of its hypnotic properties and its effects on mood and work performance. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1989; 61:255259.
  57. Moon CA, Hindmarch I, Holland RL. The effect of zopiclone 7.5 mg on the sleep, mood and performance of shift workers. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1990; 5(suppl 2):7983.
  58. Puca FM, Perrucci S, Prudenzano MP, et al. Quality of life in shift work syndrome. Funct Neurol 1996; 11:261268.
  59. Czeisler CA, Walsh JK, Roth T, et al; US Modafinil in Shift Work Sleep Disorder Study Group. Modafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with shift-work sleep disorder. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:476486.
  60. Schweitzer PK, Randazzo AC, Stone K, Erman M, Walsh JK. Laboratory and field studies of naps and caffeine as practical countermeasures for sleep-wake problems associated with night work. Sleep 2006; 29:3950.
  61. Sallinen M, Härmä M, Akerstedt T, Rosa R, Lillqvist O. Promoting alertness with a short nap during a night shift. J Sleep Res 1998; 7:240247.
  62. Garbarino S, Mascialino B, Penco MA, et al. Professional shift-work drivers who adopt prophylactic naps can reduce the risk of car accidents during night work. Sleep 2004; 27:12951302.
  63. Purnell MT, Feyer AM, Herbison GP. The impact of a nap opportunity during the night shift on the performance and alertness of 12-h shift workers. J Sleep Res 2002; 11:219227.
  64. Smith MR, Fogg LF, Eastman CI. A compromise circadian phase position for permanent night work improves mood, fatigue, and performance. Sleep 2009; 32:14811489.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Bhanu P. Kolla, MBBS
Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

R. Robert Auger, MD
Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

Address: R. Robert Auger, MD, Mayo Center For Sleep Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Gonda Building 17W, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905; e-mail auger.raymond1@mayo.edu

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
675-684
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Bhanu P. Kolla, MBBS
Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

R. Robert Auger, MD
Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

Address: R. Robert Auger, MD, Mayo Center For Sleep Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Gonda Building 17W, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905; e-mail auger.raymond1@mayo.edu

Author and Disclosure Information

Bhanu P. Kolla, MBBS
Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

R. Robert Auger, MD
Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

Address: R. Robert Auger, MD, Mayo Center For Sleep Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Gonda Building 17W, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905; e-mail auger.raymond1@mayo.edu

Article PDF
Article PDF

For people who must travel long distances east or west by air or who must work the night shift, some relief is possible for the grogginess and disorientation that often ensue. The problems arise from the body’s internal clock being out of sync with the sun. Part of the solution involves helping reset the internal clock, or sometimes, preventing it from resetting itself.

This review will focus on jet lag sleep disorder and shift work sleep disorder, with an emphasis on the causes, the clinical assessment, and evidence-based treatment options.

WHEN THE INTERNAL CLOCK IS OUT OF SYNC WITH THE SUN

Circadian rhythm sleep disorders are the result of dyssynchrony between the body’s internal clock and the external 24-hour light-dark cycle. Patients typically present with insomnia or excessive somnolence. These disorders may represent an intrinsic disorder, such as delayed or advanced sleep-phase disorder, or may be the result of transmeridian air travel or working nonstandard shifts.1

Modified with permission of Elsevier LTD. From Beersma DG, Gordijn MC. Circadian control of the sleep-wake cycle. Physiol Behav 2007; 90:190–195.
Figure 1. The two-process model of sleep regulation. Sleep propensity grows during periods of wakefulness and abates during sleeping periods. The homeostatic process (process S, blue line) is limited to a range of values determined by a clock-like circadian process (process C, red lines) that varies with the biological time of day.
Sleep and wakefulness are conceptually governed by two processes, “process S” and “process C.”2 The homeostatic drive to sleep (process S) is proportional to the duration of sleep restriction, and it becomes maximal at about 40 hours.3 In contrast, process C creates a drive for wakefulness that variably opposes process S and depends on circadian rhythms intrinsic to the organism (Figure 1).4 Coordinating this sleep-wake rhythm (and numerous other behavioral and physiologic processes) are the neurons of the suprachiasmatic nuclei of the hypothalamus.5–8

The intrinsic human circadian period is typically slightly longer than 24 hours,9 but it is synchronized (“entrained”) to the 24-hour day by various environmental inputs, or zeitgebers (German for “time-givers”), the most important of which is light exposure.10

When the internal clock is out of sync with the sun, the misalignment can result in daytime anergia, alternating complaints of insomnia and hypersomnia, and various other symptoms, including emotional disturbances and gastrointestinal distress. In particular, long-distance air travel or a nocturnal work schedule overwhelms the ability of the intrinsic clock to adjust rapidly enough, and the result is jet lag sleep disorder or shift work sleep disorder.1

TOOLS TO EVALUATE CIRCADIAN RHYTHM DISTURBANCES

A thorough history is the cornerstone of the evaluation for all sleep disorders, and if a circadian rhythm disturbance is suspected, the sleep history is supplemented with specific questions to establish a clear diagnosis.

When assessing for jet lag disorder, ask about:

  • The patient’s degree of sleep deprivation before and during travel
  • His or her innate circadian preference (ie, whether he or she is a “night owl” or “early bird”)
  • Patterns of alcohol and caffeine consumption.

When assessing for shift work disorder, include the above questions and also look for differences in the sleep-wake schedule on working days vs nonworking days, as well as external contributors to poor sleep quality (eg, the degree to which daytime sleep is not “protected”).

The following tools help in acquiring this information.

Sleep diary

In a sleep diary or log, patients record the times that they take naps, maintain consolidated sleep, and subsequently arise. The diary also prompts the patient for information about sleep latency, wakefulness after sleep onset, time in bed, medication and caffeine intake, and the restorative quality of sleep.

While the sleep diary by itself may provide insight into counteractive sleep-related behaviors and misperceptions the patient may have, compliance is often limited. Therefore, the sleep diary is best used in conjunction with actigraphy.

Actigraphy

An actigraph is a wristwatch-size motion detector, typically worn continuously for 7 days or longer. The data it gathers and stores serve as a surrogate measure of various sleep-wake variables.11

Either a sleep diary or actigraphy is required to demonstrate the stability of sleep patterns and circadian preference, but the actigraph typically generates more reliable data.11,12 It is also valuable in assessing the response to treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders.13

Are you an early bird or a night owl?

The Morningness-Eveningness questionnaire contains 19 items. Night owls tend to score lower on it than early birds do.14 This information may help some people avoid situations in which they may not do well, such as an early bird going on a permanent night-shift schedule.

Other assessment tools

Polysomnography is used primarily to rule out sleep-disordered breathing; it is not indicated for routine evaluation of circadian rhythm sleep disorders.

The minimum core body temperature and the peak melatonin secretion follow a 24-hour cycle. Although these measures are often used in research, they are not routinely used in clinical practice. (The minimum core body temperature is discussed further below.)

 

 

JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

Jet lag results from air travel across multiple time zones, with a resultant discordance between the internal circadian clock and the destination’s light-dark cycle. Most sufferers report sleeping poorly at night and feeling groggy during the day, and some also experience general malaise and gastrointestinal distress.1

The severity depends on a number of variables.

Going west is easier than going east

Westward travel is normally less taxing than eastward travel, as it requires setting one’s internal clock later rather than earlier. Presumably, because the circadian period tends to exceed 24 hours, we can move our internal clock later by about 2 hours per day, but we can move it earlier by only 1 to 1.5 hours.15,16

The more time zones crossed, the longer it takes the circadian pacemaker to re-entrain and the longer-lasting and more severe are the symptoms of jet lag. Travel across one or two time zones is only transiently troublesome.

Does age affect jet lag?

Whether age affects the severity of jet lag is not yet known.

In a study of simulated jet lag (requiring a 6-hour advance), middle-aged people (ages 37 to 52) experienced a greater degree of fragmented sleep on polysomnography than younger ones (ages 18 to 25). The older group also had greater impairment in daytime alertness, suggesting that phase tolerance—ie, the ability to sleep at an abnormal time in the circadian cycle17—decreases with age. However, two field studies involving both eastward and westward travel yielded the opposite results, suggesting that older age may actually protect against jet lag.18–20

Methodologic differences preclude direct comparisons of the studies, as do differences in the age groups studied.

Light exposure can help or hurt, depending on the timing

Reprinted with permission of Elsevier LTD. From Burgess HJ, et al. Bright light, dark, and melatonin can promote circadian adaptation in night shift workers. Sleep Med Rev 2002; 6:407–420.
Figure 2. A schematic human phase-response curve to light (blue line) and a one to exogenous melatonin (red line). The y axis shows the direction and relative magnitude of the phase shift produced by the administration of light or melatonin at various times, which are shown on the x axis. This graph shows typical times and phase relationships among these rhythms when the circadian clock is entrained to a 24-hour day. For individuals with earlier or later circadian rhythms, the local time axis should be adjusted accordingly. The light phase-response curve is a schematic based on the results of numerous studies. The melatonin curve is based on a single study using 0.5-mg doses of melatonin.22
Light exposure is of primary importance in shifting the circadian clock, and the direction of the shift depends on the timing of the exposure (Figure 2).20–22

Our core body temperature dips to its lowest point about 2 to 3 hours before we habitually awake. Exposure to bright light in the hours leading up to this minimum (the inverted triangle in Figure 2) sets our internal clock later (a phase delay)—desirable, say, for someone travelling from New York City to Los Angeles. Conversely, exposure to bright light after this temperature minimum sets the clock earlier.

Inadvertent shifting of circadian phase in the wrong direction (“antidromic re-entrainment”) is common and delays circadian reacclimation and the dissipation of jet lag symptoms.

Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of jet lag. American College of Physicians, 2010. Modified with permission of the American College of Physicians.
Figure 3. Diagram demonstrating a flight from Chicago to Paris, seven time zones east. Times when darkness and light should be sought are denoted by the letters “D” for darkness and “L” for light. The inverted triangles represent the minimum core body temperature. Subsequent to arrival, the depicted light-dark pattern should result in average daily phase shifts of 1 hour.
For example (Figure 3),23 a typical flight from Chicago to Paris (seven time zones to the east) arrives there early in the morning Paris time. Although the clocks at Charles de Gaulle airport say 08:00, the traveler’s internal clock says it is still 01:00. Furthermore, his or her core body temperature will reach its minimum at about 04:00 Chicago time, or 11:00 Paris time. If the traveller decides to go for a walk right away, the light exposure will promote a phase delay rather than the desired phase advance. Therefore, circadian re-entrainment will be relatively prolonged.24

We discuss ways to reduce antidromic reentrainment in more detail further below.

Other factors

Other factors that contribute to travel fatigue include sleep deprivation (before the flight or en route), acute discomfort as the plane ascends to its cruising altitude,25 and excessive alcohol or caffeine intake during the flight. Although the effects of these factors rapidly diminish once one reaches the travel destination, jet lag will persist until circadian re-entrainment occurs.15

NONDRUG THERAPIES FOR JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

The goal of treatment is to realign the circadian rhythm in the most rapid and efficient way and to minimize symptoms in the meantime. Frequent shifts to different time zones, often required in business travel, are very difficult to accommodate, and business travelers actually may do better if they remain on their home-based schedule.

One study compared keeping home-based sleep hours as opposed to adopting local sleep hours during a 2-day stay after a 9-hour westward flight.26 Travelers who remained on home-based hours were less sleepy and had lower (ie, better) global jet lag ratings than those who adopted local sleep hours, in part because of better sleep quality and duration. Nevertheless, about one-third of the participants said they preferred to adhere to the local schedule.

Strategic avoidance of, and exposure to, light

If the traveler intends to remain at the destination long enough, he or she can adjust better (and avoid an antidromic process) via strategic avoidance of and exposure to light.24

Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of jet lag. American College of Physicians, 2010. Modified with permission of the American College of Physicians.
Figure 4. The diagram demonstrates a flight from Los Angeles to Rome, nine time zones east. Times when darkness (letter D) and light (letter L) should be sought are also indicated. The inverted triangles represent the minimum core body temperature. The depicted light-dark pattern should result in average daily phase shifts of 2 hours.
Burgess and Eastman23,27 have devised plans to help in deciding whether a phase delay or phase advance is most desirable, depending on the number of time zones crossed. Generally, shifts earlier in time are required for eastward flights (as in Figure 3), and shifts later in time are required for westward flights. However, advances of 8 hours or more are more readily accomplished by a phase delay (Figure 4).23,28

People travelling east, who want to set their clocks ahead (a phase advance), need to keep to the dark in the 3 hours leading up to the time they reach their minimum core body temperature (depicted as “D” in Figure 3), and then expose themselves to light in the 3 hours immediately after (“L” in Figure 3). Thus, the traveler from Chicago to Paris would do better by avoiding light exposure on arrival, either by remaining in darkness in his or her hotel room, or by wearing dark sunglasses when outdoors. Wearing sunglasses during transit to the hotel would also help avoid light exposure.

When attempting to delay circadian rhythms, the opposite light-dark patterns are sought, as depicted in Figure 4. As flight and layover patterns often do not permit strict adherence to these measures, they represent idealized scenarios.

The first step is to make a grid with a concurrent listing of home and destination times. In the example in Figure 3, the person is traveling seven time zones east. On day 0, a rectangle is drawn around the times representing home-based sleep hours.

Next, we mark the time at which we expect the traveler’s core body temperature to reach its minimum (inverted triangle). If the person habitually sleeps no more than 7 hours per night, then we mark this point as 2 hours before his or her habitual wake-up time; if the person sleeps more than 7 hours, then we place it 3 hours before wake-up time.23,29 This process is repeated at the bottom of the grid to represent the desired sleep schedule at the traveler’s destination. The distance between the home and the destination-based minimum core body temperature symbols represents the required degree of circadian realignment.

If a phase advance is required (eg, if travelling from Chicago to Paris), the core body temperature symbol is drawn on day 1 in the same location as day 0. For each subsequent day, the symbol is moved 1 hour earlier (which is about how fast the internal clock can advance),15,27 until a clock time within 1 hour of the desired destination core body temperature time is reached or satisfactory sleep and daytime functioning are achieved (Figure 3). If a phase delay is required (eg, if travelling from New York City to Los Angeles), the symbol is drawn 2 hours later on day 1 than on day 0 (reflecting the greater ease at which delays are achieved),15,27 with subsequent daily shifts in 2-hour increments, again until a clock time within 1 hour of the desired destination minimum core body temperature time is reached or satisfactory sleep and daytime functioning are achieved.

Requirements for darkness can be met with protective eyewear (ie, dark sunglasses), or by remaining in a dark room. Light requirements can be met with outdoor exposure, with a commercial light box, or with a separate apparatus (eg, goggles, visors) portable enough for travel.

 

 

DRUGS TO TREAT JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

Melatonin appears safe

Most field studies have found that nightly doses of melatonin (2–8 mg) improve the quality of sleep30–32 or alleviate daytime symptoms of jet lag, or both.20,30,31,33–36 Immediate-release preparations appear to be more effective than slow-release ones.31 Although most studies looked exclusively at adaptation to eastward travel,30–32,35,36 one studied westward travel,33 and another assessed melatonin’s effects during both departure and return trips that traversed 11 time zones.34

In studies of preflight dosing, melatonin was scheduled for up to 3 days before departure (and en route in two instances),30,34 at clock hours corresponding to the nocturnal sleep period at the travel destination (consistent times daily), and then for a subsequent 3 to 4 days between a destination time of 22:00 and 00:00 hours (ie, at bedtime).30,31,34–36 Several other studies further simplified this regimen, with participants taking nocturnal melatonin only on arrival at the destination, either for eastward31,32 or for westward travel.33

The study involving solely westward travel (Los Angeles to New Zealand) was the only one of the studies with positive findings that allowed for comparisons between participants who received melatonin before departure (3 days at 5-mg doses, taken between 07:00 and 08:00 Los Angeles time) and continuing for 5 days after arrival at 22:00 to 00:00 New Zealand time, and those who received melatonin beginning only on arrival.33 Significantly better jet lag outcomes were found in the latter group.

An important caveat is that melatonin is sold over the counter as a nutritional supplement and is not regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), so verification of purity of the product is difficult.

A comprehensive review by the National Academy of Sciences stated that, given the available data, short-term use of melatonin in total daily doses of 10 mg or less in healthy adults appears to be safe.37

Benzodiazepine receptor agonists improve sleep, but maybe not sleepiness

The use of standard hypnotics during periods of circadian realignment appears to be commonplace but has not been well studied.20 Trials of the newer benzodiazepine receptor agonists—three studies of zolpidem (Ambien) 10 mg30,38,39 and two of zopiclone 5 to 7.5 mg32,40—found consistently favorable subjective30,38 and objective32,39,40 outcomes in counteracting jet-lag-induced insomnia (for both eastward and westward travel). (Note: Zopiclone is not available in the United States, but its enantiomer eszopiclone [Lunesta] is.) However, the evidence is less clear for daytime symptoms of jet lag, with outcomes reported as favorable,30 equivocal,40 or inaccessible.32,38,39

The discrepancy between studies incorporating systematic daytime assessments may be due to differential medication effects (zolpidem vs zopiclone).

In two studies that compared these standard hypnotics to oral melatonin, one found that zopiclone 5 mg and melatonin 2 mg were equally beneficial with respect to sleep variables (other jet lag symptoms were not assessed).32 In another study, zolpidem 10 mg was superior to melatonin 5 mg for sleep and other jet lag symptoms, and the combination of zolpidem and melatonin was no better than zolpidem alone.30

Importantly, however, adverse effects were more frequent in those taking zolpidem and included nausea, vomiting, and confusion.30 Although these effects were not deemed serious, 14 participants (10%) withdrew from the study.

Stimulants

Caffeine is commonly used to combat the sleepiness of jet lag, but only two controlled field studies have assessed its efficacy.41,42 Both used slow-release preparations at a daily dosage of 300 mg.

In one study, after an eastward flight traversing seven time zones, participants took the pill at 08:00 destination time every day for 5 days.41 Curiously, alertness and other jet lag symptoms were not assessed, but circadian rhythms (determined by levels of cortisol in saliva) were re-entrained at a more rapid rate with caffeine than with placebo, and to a degree comparable with that achieved by exogenous melatonin.

In a follow-up study by the same group, those receiving caffeine were objectively less sleepy (as assessed by multiple sleep latency tests) than those taking melatonin or placebo, but subjective differences between groups were not identified.42 Furthermore, those taking caffeine had significantly more nocturnal sleep complaints, as assessed both objectively and subjectively.

A recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the stimulant armodafinil (Nuvigil) found less sleepiness on multiple sleep latency testing and a decrease in jet leg symptoms with a dosage of 150 mg than with placebo.43

SHIFT WORK SLEEP DISORDER: DEFINITION, PREDISPOSING FACTORS

Shift work refers to nonstandard work schedules, including on-call duty, rotating shifts, and permanent night work. In the United States, one in five workers works a nonstandard shift.20

While shift work presents obvious difficulties, the diagnosis of shift work sleep disorder is reserved for those who have chronic insomnia or sleepiness at times that are not conducive to the externally demanded sleep-wake schedule, despite having the opportunity for sufficient daytime sleep.1 When defined in such a fashion, this disorder may afflict nearly a third of workers,44 with potential adverse effects on safety, health, and quality of life.

Older age is considered a risk factor for intolerance to shift work.20 In a study of physiologic phase shifts in response to night work, older workers were less able to recover after several night shifts.45 A large survey of police officers working the night shift supported the finding of more sleep disruption and on-duty sleepiness in older people.46

 

 

TREATMENT OF SHIFT WORK SLEEP DISORDER

Bright light at work, sunglasses on the way home

Various field studies have described hastening of circadian adaptation (and immediate alerting effects) during night shifts with the use of bright light.20

Boivin and James47 found that workers who received 6 hours of intermittent bright light during their shifts experienced significantly greater phase delays than those who received no such intervention. Those receiving bright light also wore sunglasses during the commute home (to protect from an undesired phase advance), and this has demonstrated favorable effects as an independent intervention.48

Drug treatment of shift work sleep disorder

Melatonin: Mixed results. Two field studies found that taking melatonin (5–6 mg) before the daytime sleep period had a favorable impact on subjective sleep quality.49,50 However, two other studies found no such benefit with doses ranging from 6 to 10 mg.51,52 Differences between these studies—eg, shift schedules, dosages, and the time the melatonin was taken—preclude definitive comparisons.

Effects of melatonin on workplace alertness are indeterminate because of inconsistent measurements of this variable. Importantly, a simulated shift work study found no phase-shifting advantages of melatonin in those who concomitantly used bright light during their work shift with or without morning protective eyewear.48

Hypnotic drugs. In simulation studies and field studies, people taking benzodiazepine receptor agonists have consistently said they sleep better.53–58 A simulation study noted additional benefit in the ability to stay alert during the night shift (assessed by maintenance of wakefulness testing),55 but two other studies saw no changes in manifest sleepiness (assessed with multiple sleep latency tests).53,54 These divergent findings may represent different effects on these two dimensions of sleepiness.

The only field study to assess post-sleep psychomotor performance found no impairments after taking 7.5 mg of zopiclone, a relatively long-acting nonbenzodiazepine hypnotic.57

Stimulants. In the largest trial to date of shift work sleep disorder, modafinil 200 mg (the only drug currently FDA-approved for shift work sleep disorder) had significant benefits compared with placebo with respect to objective measurements of workplace sleepiness, reaction time performance testing, and self-rated improvement of symptoms.59 Perhaps because of the low dose studied, both treated and untreated patients continued to manifest sleepiness within the pathologic range on objective testing.

Although the efficacy of caffeine is well documented as a countermeasure for sleepiness during experimentally induced sleep deprivation,20 very few field trials have specifically addressed impairments associated with shift work sleep disorder. In one study, caffeine at a dose of 4 mg/kg taken 30 minutes before starting a night shift provided objective improvement in both performance and alertness.60

Strategic napping is an additional practical intervention to promote alertness during night shifts, and cumulative data indicate that it provides objective and subjective improvements in alertness and performance.61,62 Earlier timed naps (ie, before or during the early portion of a shift) of short duration (ie, 20 minutes or less) are likely to produce maximal benefit, because they avoid sleep inertia (the grogginess or sleepiness that may follow a long nap), and also because they have no effect on the subsequent daytime sleep bout.61,63

Interventions may also be used in combination. For example, napping in conjunction with caffeine results in a greater degree of increased objective alertness than either intervention alone.60

How about days off?

The recommendations described here presume that shift workers maintain the workday sleep-wake schedule continuously, including when they are not at work. This is likely not a real-world scenario.

Smith et al64 developed a “compromise” phase position, whereby internal rhythms are optimized to facilitate alertness during work and sleepiness during the day, while allowing one to adopt a non-workday sleep schedule that maintains accessibility to family and social activities. In brief, non-workday sleep starts about 5.5 hours earlier than workday sleep; all sleep bouts are followed by brief exposure to bright light (to avoid excessive phase delay); and, as described previously, both workplace bright light and protection from morning light are implemented.

Although further studies are needed to determine whether this regimen is practical in real life, study participants who achieved desired partial phase shifts had performance ratings on a par with baseline levels, and comparable to those in a group that achieved complete re-entrainment.64

Finally, all shift workers need to be encouraged to protect the daytime bedroom environment just as daytime workers protect their nighttime environment. Sleep should be sought in an appropriately darkened and quiet environment, phones and doorbells silenced, and appointments scheduled accordingly.

For people who must travel long distances east or west by air or who must work the night shift, some relief is possible for the grogginess and disorientation that often ensue. The problems arise from the body’s internal clock being out of sync with the sun. Part of the solution involves helping reset the internal clock, or sometimes, preventing it from resetting itself.

This review will focus on jet lag sleep disorder and shift work sleep disorder, with an emphasis on the causes, the clinical assessment, and evidence-based treatment options.

WHEN THE INTERNAL CLOCK IS OUT OF SYNC WITH THE SUN

Circadian rhythm sleep disorders are the result of dyssynchrony between the body’s internal clock and the external 24-hour light-dark cycle. Patients typically present with insomnia or excessive somnolence. These disorders may represent an intrinsic disorder, such as delayed or advanced sleep-phase disorder, or may be the result of transmeridian air travel or working nonstandard shifts.1

Modified with permission of Elsevier LTD. From Beersma DG, Gordijn MC. Circadian control of the sleep-wake cycle. Physiol Behav 2007; 90:190–195.
Figure 1. The two-process model of sleep regulation. Sleep propensity grows during periods of wakefulness and abates during sleeping periods. The homeostatic process (process S, blue line) is limited to a range of values determined by a clock-like circadian process (process C, red lines) that varies with the biological time of day.
Sleep and wakefulness are conceptually governed by two processes, “process S” and “process C.”2 The homeostatic drive to sleep (process S) is proportional to the duration of sleep restriction, and it becomes maximal at about 40 hours.3 In contrast, process C creates a drive for wakefulness that variably opposes process S and depends on circadian rhythms intrinsic to the organism (Figure 1).4 Coordinating this sleep-wake rhythm (and numerous other behavioral and physiologic processes) are the neurons of the suprachiasmatic nuclei of the hypothalamus.5–8

The intrinsic human circadian period is typically slightly longer than 24 hours,9 but it is synchronized (“entrained”) to the 24-hour day by various environmental inputs, or zeitgebers (German for “time-givers”), the most important of which is light exposure.10

When the internal clock is out of sync with the sun, the misalignment can result in daytime anergia, alternating complaints of insomnia and hypersomnia, and various other symptoms, including emotional disturbances and gastrointestinal distress. In particular, long-distance air travel or a nocturnal work schedule overwhelms the ability of the intrinsic clock to adjust rapidly enough, and the result is jet lag sleep disorder or shift work sleep disorder.1

TOOLS TO EVALUATE CIRCADIAN RHYTHM DISTURBANCES

A thorough history is the cornerstone of the evaluation for all sleep disorders, and if a circadian rhythm disturbance is suspected, the sleep history is supplemented with specific questions to establish a clear diagnosis.

When assessing for jet lag disorder, ask about:

  • The patient’s degree of sleep deprivation before and during travel
  • His or her innate circadian preference (ie, whether he or she is a “night owl” or “early bird”)
  • Patterns of alcohol and caffeine consumption.

When assessing for shift work disorder, include the above questions and also look for differences in the sleep-wake schedule on working days vs nonworking days, as well as external contributors to poor sleep quality (eg, the degree to which daytime sleep is not “protected”).

The following tools help in acquiring this information.

Sleep diary

In a sleep diary or log, patients record the times that they take naps, maintain consolidated sleep, and subsequently arise. The diary also prompts the patient for information about sleep latency, wakefulness after sleep onset, time in bed, medication and caffeine intake, and the restorative quality of sleep.

While the sleep diary by itself may provide insight into counteractive sleep-related behaviors and misperceptions the patient may have, compliance is often limited. Therefore, the sleep diary is best used in conjunction with actigraphy.

Actigraphy

An actigraph is a wristwatch-size motion detector, typically worn continuously for 7 days or longer. The data it gathers and stores serve as a surrogate measure of various sleep-wake variables.11

Either a sleep diary or actigraphy is required to demonstrate the stability of sleep patterns and circadian preference, but the actigraph typically generates more reliable data.11,12 It is also valuable in assessing the response to treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders.13

Are you an early bird or a night owl?

The Morningness-Eveningness questionnaire contains 19 items. Night owls tend to score lower on it than early birds do.14 This information may help some people avoid situations in which they may not do well, such as an early bird going on a permanent night-shift schedule.

Other assessment tools

Polysomnography is used primarily to rule out sleep-disordered breathing; it is not indicated for routine evaluation of circadian rhythm sleep disorders.

The minimum core body temperature and the peak melatonin secretion follow a 24-hour cycle. Although these measures are often used in research, they are not routinely used in clinical practice. (The minimum core body temperature is discussed further below.)

 

 

JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

Jet lag results from air travel across multiple time zones, with a resultant discordance between the internal circadian clock and the destination’s light-dark cycle. Most sufferers report sleeping poorly at night and feeling groggy during the day, and some also experience general malaise and gastrointestinal distress.1

The severity depends on a number of variables.

Going west is easier than going east

Westward travel is normally less taxing than eastward travel, as it requires setting one’s internal clock later rather than earlier. Presumably, because the circadian period tends to exceed 24 hours, we can move our internal clock later by about 2 hours per day, but we can move it earlier by only 1 to 1.5 hours.15,16

The more time zones crossed, the longer it takes the circadian pacemaker to re-entrain and the longer-lasting and more severe are the symptoms of jet lag. Travel across one or two time zones is only transiently troublesome.

Does age affect jet lag?

Whether age affects the severity of jet lag is not yet known.

In a study of simulated jet lag (requiring a 6-hour advance), middle-aged people (ages 37 to 52) experienced a greater degree of fragmented sleep on polysomnography than younger ones (ages 18 to 25). The older group also had greater impairment in daytime alertness, suggesting that phase tolerance—ie, the ability to sleep at an abnormal time in the circadian cycle17—decreases with age. However, two field studies involving both eastward and westward travel yielded the opposite results, suggesting that older age may actually protect against jet lag.18–20

Methodologic differences preclude direct comparisons of the studies, as do differences in the age groups studied.

Light exposure can help or hurt, depending on the timing

Reprinted with permission of Elsevier LTD. From Burgess HJ, et al. Bright light, dark, and melatonin can promote circadian adaptation in night shift workers. Sleep Med Rev 2002; 6:407–420.
Figure 2. A schematic human phase-response curve to light (blue line) and a one to exogenous melatonin (red line). The y axis shows the direction and relative magnitude of the phase shift produced by the administration of light or melatonin at various times, which are shown on the x axis. This graph shows typical times and phase relationships among these rhythms when the circadian clock is entrained to a 24-hour day. For individuals with earlier or later circadian rhythms, the local time axis should be adjusted accordingly. The light phase-response curve is a schematic based on the results of numerous studies. The melatonin curve is based on a single study using 0.5-mg doses of melatonin.22
Light exposure is of primary importance in shifting the circadian clock, and the direction of the shift depends on the timing of the exposure (Figure 2).20–22

Our core body temperature dips to its lowest point about 2 to 3 hours before we habitually awake. Exposure to bright light in the hours leading up to this minimum (the inverted triangle in Figure 2) sets our internal clock later (a phase delay)—desirable, say, for someone travelling from New York City to Los Angeles. Conversely, exposure to bright light after this temperature minimum sets the clock earlier.

Inadvertent shifting of circadian phase in the wrong direction (“antidromic re-entrainment”) is common and delays circadian reacclimation and the dissipation of jet lag symptoms.

Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of jet lag. American College of Physicians, 2010. Modified with permission of the American College of Physicians.
Figure 3. Diagram demonstrating a flight from Chicago to Paris, seven time zones east. Times when darkness and light should be sought are denoted by the letters “D” for darkness and “L” for light. The inverted triangles represent the minimum core body temperature. Subsequent to arrival, the depicted light-dark pattern should result in average daily phase shifts of 1 hour.
For example (Figure 3),23 a typical flight from Chicago to Paris (seven time zones to the east) arrives there early in the morning Paris time. Although the clocks at Charles de Gaulle airport say 08:00, the traveler’s internal clock says it is still 01:00. Furthermore, his or her core body temperature will reach its minimum at about 04:00 Chicago time, or 11:00 Paris time. If the traveller decides to go for a walk right away, the light exposure will promote a phase delay rather than the desired phase advance. Therefore, circadian re-entrainment will be relatively prolonged.24

We discuss ways to reduce antidromic reentrainment in more detail further below.

Other factors

Other factors that contribute to travel fatigue include sleep deprivation (before the flight or en route), acute discomfort as the plane ascends to its cruising altitude,25 and excessive alcohol or caffeine intake during the flight. Although the effects of these factors rapidly diminish once one reaches the travel destination, jet lag will persist until circadian re-entrainment occurs.15

NONDRUG THERAPIES FOR JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

The goal of treatment is to realign the circadian rhythm in the most rapid and efficient way and to minimize symptoms in the meantime. Frequent shifts to different time zones, often required in business travel, are very difficult to accommodate, and business travelers actually may do better if they remain on their home-based schedule.

One study compared keeping home-based sleep hours as opposed to adopting local sleep hours during a 2-day stay after a 9-hour westward flight.26 Travelers who remained on home-based hours were less sleepy and had lower (ie, better) global jet lag ratings than those who adopted local sleep hours, in part because of better sleep quality and duration. Nevertheless, about one-third of the participants said they preferred to adhere to the local schedule.

Strategic avoidance of, and exposure to, light

If the traveler intends to remain at the destination long enough, he or she can adjust better (and avoid an antidromic process) via strategic avoidance of and exposure to light.24

Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of jet lag. American College of Physicians, 2010. Modified with permission of the American College of Physicians.
Figure 4. The diagram demonstrates a flight from Los Angeles to Rome, nine time zones east. Times when darkness (letter D) and light (letter L) should be sought are also indicated. The inverted triangles represent the minimum core body temperature. The depicted light-dark pattern should result in average daily phase shifts of 2 hours.
Burgess and Eastman23,27 have devised plans to help in deciding whether a phase delay or phase advance is most desirable, depending on the number of time zones crossed. Generally, shifts earlier in time are required for eastward flights (as in Figure 3), and shifts later in time are required for westward flights. However, advances of 8 hours or more are more readily accomplished by a phase delay (Figure 4).23,28

People travelling east, who want to set their clocks ahead (a phase advance), need to keep to the dark in the 3 hours leading up to the time they reach their minimum core body temperature (depicted as “D” in Figure 3), and then expose themselves to light in the 3 hours immediately after (“L” in Figure 3). Thus, the traveler from Chicago to Paris would do better by avoiding light exposure on arrival, either by remaining in darkness in his or her hotel room, or by wearing dark sunglasses when outdoors. Wearing sunglasses during transit to the hotel would also help avoid light exposure.

When attempting to delay circadian rhythms, the opposite light-dark patterns are sought, as depicted in Figure 4. As flight and layover patterns often do not permit strict adherence to these measures, they represent idealized scenarios.

The first step is to make a grid with a concurrent listing of home and destination times. In the example in Figure 3, the person is traveling seven time zones east. On day 0, a rectangle is drawn around the times representing home-based sleep hours.

Next, we mark the time at which we expect the traveler’s core body temperature to reach its minimum (inverted triangle). If the person habitually sleeps no more than 7 hours per night, then we mark this point as 2 hours before his or her habitual wake-up time; if the person sleeps more than 7 hours, then we place it 3 hours before wake-up time.23,29 This process is repeated at the bottom of the grid to represent the desired sleep schedule at the traveler’s destination. The distance between the home and the destination-based minimum core body temperature symbols represents the required degree of circadian realignment.

If a phase advance is required (eg, if travelling from Chicago to Paris), the core body temperature symbol is drawn on day 1 in the same location as day 0. For each subsequent day, the symbol is moved 1 hour earlier (which is about how fast the internal clock can advance),15,27 until a clock time within 1 hour of the desired destination core body temperature time is reached or satisfactory sleep and daytime functioning are achieved (Figure 3). If a phase delay is required (eg, if travelling from New York City to Los Angeles), the symbol is drawn 2 hours later on day 1 than on day 0 (reflecting the greater ease at which delays are achieved),15,27 with subsequent daily shifts in 2-hour increments, again until a clock time within 1 hour of the desired destination minimum core body temperature time is reached or satisfactory sleep and daytime functioning are achieved.

Requirements for darkness can be met with protective eyewear (ie, dark sunglasses), or by remaining in a dark room. Light requirements can be met with outdoor exposure, with a commercial light box, or with a separate apparatus (eg, goggles, visors) portable enough for travel.

 

 

DRUGS TO TREAT JET LAG SLEEP DISORDER

Melatonin appears safe

Most field studies have found that nightly doses of melatonin (2–8 mg) improve the quality of sleep30–32 or alleviate daytime symptoms of jet lag, or both.20,30,31,33–36 Immediate-release preparations appear to be more effective than slow-release ones.31 Although most studies looked exclusively at adaptation to eastward travel,30–32,35,36 one studied westward travel,33 and another assessed melatonin’s effects during both departure and return trips that traversed 11 time zones.34

In studies of preflight dosing, melatonin was scheduled for up to 3 days before departure (and en route in two instances),30,34 at clock hours corresponding to the nocturnal sleep period at the travel destination (consistent times daily), and then for a subsequent 3 to 4 days between a destination time of 22:00 and 00:00 hours (ie, at bedtime).30,31,34–36 Several other studies further simplified this regimen, with participants taking nocturnal melatonin only on arrival at the destination, either for eastward31,32 or for westward travel.33

The study involving solely westward travel (Los Angeles to New Zealand) was the only one of the studies with positive findings that allowed for comparisons between participants who received melatonin before departure (3 days at 5-mg doses, taken between 07:00 and 08:00 Los Angeles time) and continuing for 5 days after arrival at 22:00 to 00:00 New Zealand time, and those who received melatonin beginning only on arrival.33 Significantly better jet lag outcomes were found in the latter group.

An important caveat is that melatonin is sold over the counter as a nutritional supplement and is not regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), so verification of purity of the product is difficult.

A comprehensive review by the National Academy of Sciences stated that, given the available data, short-term use of melatonin in total daily doses of 10 mg or less in healthy adults appears to be safe.37

Benzodiazepine receptor agonists improve sleep, but maybe not sleepiness

The use of standard hypnotics during periods of circadian realignment appears to be commonplace but has not been well studied.20 Trials of the newer benzodiazepine receptor agonists—three studies of zolpidem (Ambien) 10 mg30,38,39 and two of zopiclone 5 to 7.5 mg32,40—found consistently favorable subjective30,38 and objective32,39,40 outcomes in counteracting jet-lag-induced insomnia (for both eastward and westward travel). (Note: Zopiclone is not available in the United States, but its enantiomer eszopiclone [Lunesta] is.) However, the evidence is less clear for daytime symptoms of jet lag, with outcomes reported as favorable,30 equivocal,40 or inaccessible.32,38,39

The discrepancy between studies incorporating systematic daytime assessments may be due to differential medication effects (zolpidem vs zopiclone).

In two studies that compared these standard hypnotics to oral melatonin, one found that zopiclone 5 mg and melatonin 2 mg were equally beneficial with respect to sleep variables (other jet lag symptoms were not assessed).32 In another study, zolpidem 10 mg was superior to melatonin 5 mg for sleep and other jet lag symptoms, and the combination of zolpidem and melatonin was no better than zolpidem alone.30

Importantly, however, adverse effects were more frequent in those taking zolpidem and included nausea, vomiting, and confusion.30 Although these effects were not deemed serious, 14 participants (10%) withdrew from the study.

Stimulants

Caffeine is commonly used to combat the sleepiness of jet lag, but only two controlled field studies have assessed its efficacy.41,42 Both used slow-release preparations at a daily dosage of 300 mg.

In one study, after an eastward flight traversing seven time zones, participants took the pill at 08:00 destination time every day for 5 days.41 Curiously, alertness and other jet lag symptoms were not assessed, but circadian rhythms (determined by levels of cortisol in saliva) were re-entrained at a more rapid rate with caffeine than with placebo, and to a degree comparable with that achieved by exogenous melatonin.

In a follow-up study by the same group, those receiving caffeine were objectively less sleepy (as assessed by multiple sleep latency tests) than those taking melatonin or placebo, but subjective differences between groups were not identified.42 Furthermore, those taking caffeine had significantly more nocturnal sleep complaints, as assessed both objectively and subjectively.

A recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the stimulant armodafinil (Nuvigil) found less sleepiness on multiple sleep latency testing and a decrease in jet leg symptoms with a dosage of 150 mg than with placebo.43

SHIFT WORK SLEEP DISORDER: DEFINITION, PREDISPOSING FACTORS

Shift work refers to nonstandard work schedules, including on-call duty, rotating shifts, and permanent night work. In the United States, one in five workers works a nonstandard shift.20

While shift work presents obvious difficulties, the diagnosis of shift work sleep disorder is reserved for those who have chronic insomnia or sleepiness at times that are not conducive to the externally demanded sleep-wake schedule, despite having the opportunity for sufficient daytime sleep.1 When defined in such a fashion, this disorder may afflict nearly a third of workers,44 with potential adverse effects on safety, health, and quality of life.

Older age is considered a risk factor for intolerance to shift work.20 In a study of physiologic phase shifts in response to night work, older workers were less able to recover after several night shifts.45 A large survey of police officers working the night shift supported the finding of more sleep disruption and on-duty sleepiness in older people.46

 

 

TREATMENT OF SHIFT WORK SLEEP DISORDER

Bright light at work, sunglasses on the way home

Various field studies have described hastening of circadian adaptation (and immediate alerting effects) during night shifts with the use of bright light.20

Boivin and James47 found that workers who received 6 hours of intermittent bright light during their shifts experienced significantly greater phase delays than those who received no such intervention. Those receiving bright light also wore sunglasses during the commute home (to protect from an undesired phase advance), and this has demonstrated favorable effects as an independent intervention.48

Drug treatment of shift work sleep disorder

Melatonin: Mixed results. Two field studies found that taking melatonin (5–6 mg) before the daytime sleep period had a favorable impact on subjective sleep quality.49,50 However, two other studies found no such benefit with doses ranging from 6 to 10 mg.51,52 Differences between these studies—eg, shift schedules, dosages, and the time the melatonin was taken—preclude definitive comparisons.

Effects of melatonin on workplace alertness are indeterminate because of inconsistent measurements of this variable. Importantly, a simulated shift work study found no phase-shifting advantages of melatonin in those who concomitantly used bright light during their work shift with or without morning protective eyewear.48

Hypnotic drugs. In simulation studies and field studies, people taking benzodiazepine receptor agonists have consistently said they sleep better.53–58 A simulation study noted additional benefit in the ability to stay alert during the night shift (assessed by maintenance of wakefulness testing),55 but two other studies saw no changes in manifest sleepiness (assessed with multiple sleep latency tests).53,54 These divergent findings may represent different effects on these two dimensions of sleepiness.

The only field study to assess post-sleep psychomotor performance found no impairments after taking 7.5 mg of zopiclone, a relatively long-acting nonbenzodiazepine hypnotic.57

Stimulants. In the largest trial to date of shift work sleep disorder, modafinil 200 mg (the only drug currently FDA-approved for shift work sleep disorder) had significant benefits compared with placebo with respect to objective measurements of workplace sleepiness, reaction time performance testing, and self-rated improvement of symptoms.59 Perhaps because of the low dose studied, both treated and untreated patients continued to manifest sleepiness within the pathologic range on objective testing.

Although the efficacy of caffeine is well documented as a countermeasure for sleepiness during experimentally induced sleep deprivation,20 very few field trials have specifically addressed impairments associated with shift work sleep disorder. In one study, caffeine at a dose of 4 mg/kg taken 30 minutes before starting a night shift provided objective improvement in both performance and alertness.60

Strategic napping is an additional practical intervention to promote alertness during night shifts, and cumulative data indicate that it provides objective and subjective improvements in alertness and performance.61,62 Earlier timed naps (ie, before or during the early portion of a shift) of short duration (ie, 20 minutes or less) are likely to produce maximal benefit, because they avoid sleep inertia (the grogginess or sleepiness that may follow a long nap), and also because they have no effect on the subsequent daytime sleep bout.61,63

Interventions may also be used in combination. For example, napping in conjunction with caffeine results in a greater degree of increased objective alertness than either intervention alone.60

How about days off?

The recommendations described here presume that shift workers maintain the workday sleep-wake schedule continuously, including when they are not at work. This is likely not a real-world scenario.

Smith et al64 developed a “compromise” phase position, whereby internal rhythms are optimized to facilitate alertness during work and sleepiness during the day, while allowing one to adopt a non-workday sleep schedule that maintains accessibility to family and social activities. In brief, non-workday sleep starts about 5.5 hours earlier than workday sleep; all sleep bouts are followed by brief exposure to bright light (to avoid excessive phase delay); and, as described previously, both workplace bright light and protection from morning light are implemented.

Although further studies are needed to determine whether this regimen is practical in real life, study participants who achieved desired partial phase shifts had performance ratings on a par with baseline levels, and comparable to those in a group that achieved complete re-entrainment.64

Finally, all shift workers need to be encouraged to protect the daytime bedroom environment just as daytime workers protect their nighttime environment. Sleep should be sought in an appropriately darkened and quiet environment, phones and doorbells silenced, and appointments scheduled accordingly.

References
  1. International Classification of Sleep Disorders: Diagnostic and Coding Manual/American Academy of Sleep Medicine. 2nd ed. Westchester, IL: American Academy of Sleep Medicine; 2005.
  2. Borbély AA, Achermann P. Concepts and models of sleep regulation: an overview. J Sleep Res 1992; 1:6379.
  3. Carskadon MA, Dement WC. Effects of total sleep loss on sleep tendency. Percept Mot Skills 1979; 48:495506.
  4. Beersma DG, Gordijn MC. Circadian control of the sleep-wake cycle. Physiol Behav 2007; 90:190195.
  5. Moore RY, Eichler VB. Loss of a circadian adrenal corticosterone rhythm following suprachiasmatic lesions in the rat. Brain Res 1972; 42:201206.
  6. Stephan FK, Zucker I. Circadian rhythms in drinking behavior and locomotor activity of rats are eliminated by hypothalamic lesions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1972; 69:15831586.
  7. Welsh DK, Logothetis DE, Meister M, Reppert SM. Individual neurons dissociated from rat suprachiasmatic nucleus express independently phased circadian firing rhythms. Neuron 1995; 14:697706.
  8. Ralph MR, Foster RG, Davis FC, Menaker M. Transplanted suprachiasmatic nucleus determines circadian period. Science 1990; 247:975978.
  9. Czeisler CA, Duffy JF, Shanahan TL, et al. Stability, precision, and near-24-hour period of the human circadian pacemaker. Science 1999; 284:21772181.
  10. Waterhouse JM, DeCoursey PJ. Human circadian organization. In:Dunlap JC, Loros JJ, DeCoursey PJ, editors. Chronobiology: Biological Timekeeping. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates; 2004:291324.
  11. Morgenthaler T, Alessi C, Friedman L, et al; Standards of Practice Committee; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Practice parameters for the use of actigraphy in the assessment of sleep and sleep disorders: an update for 2007. Sleep 2007; 30:519529.
  12. Bradshaw DA, Yanagi MA, Pak ES, Peery TS, Ruff GA. Nightly sleep duration in the 2-week period preceding multiple sleep latency testing. J Clin Sleep Med 2007; 3:613619.
  13. Morgenthaler TI, Lee-Chiong T, Alessi C, et al; Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Practice parameters for the clinical evaluation and treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders. An American Academy of Sleep Medicine report. Sleep 2007; 30:14451459.
  14. Horne JA, Ostberg O. A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-eveningness in human circadian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol 1976; 4:97110.
  15. Waterhouse J, Reilly T, Atkinson G, Edwards B. Jet lag: trends and coping strategies. Lancet 2007; 369:11171129.
  16. Eastman CI, Gazda CJ, Burgess HJ, Crowley SJ, Fogg LF. Advancing circadian rhythms before eastward flight: a strategy to prevent or reduce jet lag. Sleep 2005; 28:3344.
  17. Moline ML, Pollak CP, Monk TH, et al. Age-related differences in recovery from simulated jet lag. Sleep 1992; 15:2840.
  18. Waterhouse J, Edwards B, Nevill A, et al. Identifying some determinants of “jet lag” and its symptoms: a study of athletes and other travellers. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36:5460.
  19. Tresguerres JA, Ariznavarreta C, Granados B, et al. Circadian urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin, cortisol excretion and locomotor activity in airline pilots during transmeridian flights. J Pineal Res 2001; 31:1622.
  20. Sack RL, Auckley D, Auger RR, et al; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Circadian rhythm sleep disorders: part I, basic principles, shift work and jet lag disorders. An American Academy of Sleep Medicine review. Sleep 2007; 30:14601483.
  21. Burgess HJ, Sharkey KM, Eastman CI. Bright light, dark and melatonin can promote circadian adaptation in night shift workers. Sleep Med Rev 2002; 6:407420.
  22. Lewy AJ, Bauer VK, Saeeduddin A, et al. The human phase response curve (PRC) to melatonin is about 12 hours out of phase with the PRC to light. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:7183.
  23. Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of Jet Lag. 2010. http://pier.acponline.org/physicians/screening/prev1015/prev1015.html. Accessed June 25, 2010.
  24. Daan S, Lewy AJ. Scheduled exposure to daylight: a potential strategy to reduce “jet lag” following transmeridian flight. Psychopharmacol Bull 1984; 20:566568.
  25. Muhm JM, Rock PB, McMullin DL, et al. Effect of aircraft-cabin altitude on passenger discomfort. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:1827.
  26. Lowden A, Akerstedt T. Retaining home-base sleep hours to prevent jet lag in connection with a westward flight across nine time zones. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:365376.
  27. Eastman CI, Burgess HJ. How to travel the world without jet lag. Sleep Med Clin 2009; 4:241255.
  28. Revell VL, Eastman CI. How to trick mother nature into letting you fly around or stay up all night. J Biol Rhythms 2005; 20:353365.
  29. Cagnacci A, Elliott JA, Yen SS. Melatonin: a major regulator of the circadian rhythm of core temperature in humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992; 75:447452.
  30. Suhner A, Schlagenhauf P, Höfer I, Johnson R, Tschopp A, Steffen R. Effectiveness and tolerability of melatonin and zolpidem for the alleviation of jet lag. Aviat Space Environ Med 2001; 72:638646.
  31. Suhner A, Schlagenhauf P, Johnson R, Tschopp A, Steffen R. Comparative study to determine the optimal melatonin dosage form for the alleviation of jet lag. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:655666.
  32. Paul MA, Gray G, Sardana TM, Pigeau RA. Melatonin and zopiclone as facilitators of early circadian sleep in operational air transport crews. Aviat Space Environ Med 2004; 75:439443.
  33. Petrie K, Dawson AG, Thompson L, Brook R. A double-blind trial of melatonin as a treatment for jet lag in international cabin crew. Biol Psychiatry 1993; 33:526530.
  34. Petrie K, Conaglen JV, Thompson L, Chamberlain K. Effect of melatonin on jet lag after long haul flights. BMJ 1989; 298:705707.
  35. Arendt J, Aldhous M, Marks V. Alleviation of jet lag by melatonin: preliminary results of controlled double blind trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986; 292:1170.
  36. Claustrat B, Brun J, David M, Sassolas G, Chazot G. Melatonin and jet lag: confirmatory result using a simplified protocol. Biol Psychiatry 1992; 32:705711.
  37. Committee on the Framework for Evaluating the Safety of Dietary Supplements, Food and Nutrition Board, Board on Life Sciences, Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies. Dietary supplements: a framework for evaluating safety. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2005.
  38. Jamieson AO, Zammit GK, Rosenberg RS, Davis JR, Walsh JK. Zolpidem reduces the sleep disturbance of jet lag. Sleep Med 2001; 2:423430.
  39. Hirschfeld U, Moreno-Reyes R, Akseki E, et al. Progressive elevation of plasma thyrotropin during adaptation to simulated jet lag: effects of treatment with bright light or zolpidem. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81:32703277.
  40. Daurat A, Benoit O, Buguet A. Effects of zopiclone on the rest/activity rhythm after a westward flight across five time zones. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2000; 149:241245.
  41. Piérard C, Beaumont M, Enslen M, et al. Resynchronization of hormonal rhythms after an eastbound flight in humans: effects of slow-release caffeine and melatonin. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 85:144150.
  42. Beaumont M, Batéjat D, Piérard C, et al. Caffeine or melatonin effects on sleep and sleepiness after rapid eastward transmeridian travel. J Appl Physiol 2004; 96:5058.
  43. Rosenberg RP, Bogan RK, Tiller JM, et al. A phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of armodafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with jet lag disorder. Mayo Clin Proc 2010; 85:630638.
  44. Drake CL, Roehrs T, Richardson G, Walsh JK, Roth T. Shift work sleep disorder: prevalence and consequences beyond that of symptomatic day workers. Sleep 2004; 27:14531462.
  45. Härmä MI, Hakola T, Akerstedt T, Laitinen JT. Age and adjustment to night work. Occup Environ Med 1994; 51:568573.
  46. Smith L, Mason C. Reducing night shift exposure: a pilot study of rota, night shift and age effects on sleepiness and fatigue. J Hum Ergol (Tokyo) 2001; 30:8387.
  47. Boivin DB, James FO. Circadian adaptation to night-shift work by judicious light and darkness exposure. J Biol Rhythms 2002; 17:556567.
  48. Crowley SJ, Lee C, Tseng CY, Fogg LF, Eastman CI. Combinations of bright light, scheduled dark, sunglasses, and melatonin to facilitate circadian entrainment to night shift work. J Biol Rhythms 2003; 18:513523.
  49. Folkard S, Arendt J, Clark M. Can melatonin improve shift workers’ tolerance of the night shift? Some preliminary findings. Chronobiol Int 1993; 10:315320.
  50. Yoon IY, Song BG. Role of morning melatonin administration and attenuation of sunlight exposure in improving adaptation of nightshift workers. Chronobiol Int 2002; 19:903913.
  51. James M, Tremea MO, Jones JS, Krohmer JR. Can melatonin improve adaptation to night shift? Am J Emerg Med 1998; 16:367370.
  52. Jorgensen KM, Witting MD. Does exogenous melatonin improve day sleep or night alertness in emergency physicians working night shifts? Ann Emerg Med 1998; 31:699704.
  53. Walsh JK, Schweitzer PK, Anch AM, Muehlbach MJ, Jenkins NA, Dickins QS. Sleepiness/alertness on a simulated night shift following sleep at home with triazolam. Sleep 1991; 14:140146.
  54. Walsh JK, Sugerman JL, Muehlbach MJ, Schweitzer PK. Physiological sleep tendency on a simulated night shift: adaptation and effects of triazolam. Sleep 1988; 11:251264.
  55. Porcù S, Bellatreccia A, Ferrara M, Casagrande M. Performance, ability to stay awake, and tendency to fall asleep during the night after a diurnal sleep with temazepam or placebo. Sleep 1997; 20:535541.
  56. Monchesky TC, Billings BJ, Phillips R, Bourgouin J. Zopiclone in insomniac shiftworkers. Evaluation of its hypnotic properties and its effects on mood and work performance. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1989; 61:255259.
  57. Moon CA, Hindmarch I, Holland RL. The effect of zopiclone 7.5 mg on the sleep, mood and performance of shift workers. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1990; 5(suppl 2):7983.
  58. Puca FM, Perrucci S, Prudenzano MP, et al. Quality of life in shift work syndrome. Funct Neurol 1996; 11:261268.
  59. Czeisler CA, Walsh JK, Roth T, et al; US Modafinil in Shift Work Sleep Disorder Study Group. Modafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with shift-work sleep disorder. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:476486.
  60. Schweitzer PK, Randazzo AC, Stone K, Erman M, Walsh JK. Laboratory and field studies of naps and caffeine as practical countermeasures for sleep-wake problems associated with night work. Sleep 2006; 29:3950.
  61. Sallinen M, Härmä M, Akerstedt T, Rosa R, Lillqvist O. Promoting alertness with a short nap during a night shift. J Sleep Res 1998; 7:240247.
  62. Garbarino S, Mascialino B, Penco MA, et al. Professional shift-work drivers who adopt prophylactic naps can reduce the risk of car accidents during night work. Sleep 2004; 27:12951302.
  63. Purnell MT, Feyer AM, Herbison GP. The impact of a nap opportunity during the night shift on the performance and alertness of 12-h shift workers. J Sleep Res 2002; 11:219227.
  64. Smith MR, Fogg LF, Eastman CI. A compromise circadian phase position for permanent night work improves mood, fatigue, and performance. Sleep 2009; 32:14811489.
References
  1. International Classification of Sleep Disorders: Diagnostic and Coding Manual/American Academy of Sleep Medicine. 2nd ed. Westchester, IL: American Academy of Sleep Medicine; 2005.
  2. Borbély AA, Achermann P. Concepts and models of sleep regulation: an overview. J Sleep Res 1992; 1:6379.
  3. Carskadon MA, Dement WC. Effects of total sleep loss on sleep tendency. Percept Mot Skills 1979; 48:495506.
  4. Beersma DG, Gordijn MC. Circadian control of the sleep-wake cycle. Physiol Behav 2007; 90:190195.
  5. Moore RY, Eichler VB. Loss of a circadian adrenal corticosterone rhythm following suprachiasmatic lesions in the rat. Brain Res 1972; 42:201206.
  6. Stephan FK, Zucker I. Circadian rhythms in drinking behavior and locomotor activity of rats are eliminated by hypothalamic lesions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1972; 69:15831586.
  7. Welsh DK, Logothetis DE, Meister M, Reppert SM. Individual neurons dissociated from rat suprachiasmatic nucleus express independently phased circadian firing rhythms. Neuron 1995; 14:697706.
  8. Ralph MR, Foster RG, Davis FC, Menaker M. Transplanted suprachiasmatic nucleus determines circadian period. Science 1990; 247:975978.
  9. Czeisler CA, Duffy JF, Shanahan TL, et al. Stability, precision, and near-24-hour period of the human circadian pacemaker. Science 1999; 284:21772181.
  10. Waterhouse JM, DeCoursey PJ. Human circadian organization. In:Dunlap JC, Loros JJ, DeCoursey PJ, editors. Chronobiology: Biological Timekeeping. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates; 2004:291324.
  11. Morgenthaler T, Alessi C, Friedman L, et al; Standards of Practice Committee; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Practice parameters for the use of actigraphy in the assessment of sleep and sleep disorders: an update for 2007. Sleep 2007; 30:519529.
  12. Bradshaw DA, Yanagi MA, Pak ES, Peery TS, Ruff GA. Nightly sleep duration in the 2-week period preceding multiple sleep latency testing. J Clin Sleep Med 2007; 3:613619.
  13. Morgenthaler TI, Lee-Chiong T, Alessi C, et al; Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Practice parameters for the clinical evaluation and treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders. An American Academy of Sleep Medicine report. Sleep 2007; 30:14451459.
  14. Horne JA, Ostberg O. A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-eveningness in human circadian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol 1976; 4:97110.
  15. Waterhouse J, Reilly T, Atkinson G, Edwards B. Jet lag: trends and coping strategies. Lancet 2007; 369:11171129.
  16. Eastman CI, Gazda CJ, Burgess HJ, Crowley SJ, Fogg LF. Advancing circadian rhythms before eastward flight: a strategy to prevent or reduce jet lag. Sleep 2005; 28:3344.
  17. Moline ML, Pollak CP, Monk TH, et al. Age-related differences in recovery from simulated jet lag. Sleep 1992; 15:2840.
  18. Waterhouse J, Edwards B, Nevill A, et al. Identifying some determinants of “jet lag” and its symptoms: a study of athletes and other travellers. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36:5460.
  19. Tresguerres JA, Ariznavarreta C, Granados B, et al. Circadian urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin, cortisol excretion and locomotor activity in airline pilots during transmeridian flights. J Pineal Res 2001; 31:1622.
  20. Sack RL, Auckley D, Auger RR, et al; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Circadian rhythm sleep disorders: part I, basic principles, shift work and jet lag disorders. An American Academy of Sleep Medicine review. Sleep 2007; 30:14601483.
  21. Burgess HJ, Sharkey KM, Eastman CI. Bright light, dark and melatonin can promote circadian adaptation in night shift workers. Sleep Med Rev 2002; 6:407420.
  22. Lewy AJ, Bauer VK, Saeeduddin A, et al. The human phase response curve (PRC) to melatonin is about 12 hours out of phase with the PRC to light. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:7183.
  23. Burgess HJ, Eastman CT. Prevention of Jet Lag. 2010. http://pier.acponline.org/physicians/screening/prev1015/prev1015.html. Accessed June 25, 2010.
  24. Daan S, Lewy AJ. Scheduled exposure to daylight: a potential strategy to reduce “jet lag” following transmeridian flight. Psychopharmacol Bull 1984; 20:566568.
  25. Muhm JM, Rock PB, McMullin DL, et al. Effect of aircraft-cabin altitude on passenger discomfort. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:1827.
  26. Lowden A, Akerstedt T. Retaining home-base sleep hours to prevent jet lag in connection with a westward flight across nine time zones. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:365376.
  27. Eastman CI, Burgess HJ. How to travel the world without jet lag. Sleep Med Clin 2009; 4:241255.
  28. Revell VL, Eastman CI. How to trick mother nature into letting you fly around or stay up all night. J Biol Rhythms 2005; 20:353365.
  29. Cagnacci A, Elliott JA, Yen SS. Melatonin: a major regulator of the circadian rhythm of core temperature in humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992; 75:447452.
  30. Suhner A, Schlagenhauf P, Höfer I, Johnson R, Tschopp A, Steffen R. Effectiveness and tolerability of melatonin and zolpidem for the alleviation of jet lag. Aviat Space Environ Med 2001; 72:638646.
  31. Suhner A, Schlagenhauf P, Johnson R, Tschopp A, Steffen R. Comparative study to determine the optimal melatonin dosage form for the alleviation of jet lag. Chronobiol Int 1998; 15:655666.
  32. Paul MA, Gray G, Sardana TM, Pigeau RA. Melatonin and zopiclone as facilitators of early circadian sleep in operational air transport crews. Aviat Space Environ Med 2004; 75:439443.
  33. Petrie K, Dawson AG, Thompson L, Brook R. A double-blind trial of melatonin as a treatment for jet lag in international cabin crew. Biol Psychiatry 1993; 33:526530.
  34. Petrie K, Conaglen JV, Thompson L, Chamberlain K. Effect of melatonin on jet lag after long haul flights. BMJ 1989; 298:705707.
  35. Arendt J, Aldhous M, Marks V. Alleviation of jet lag by melatonin: preliminary results of controlled double blind trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986; 292:1170.
  36. Claustrat B, Brun J, David M, Sassolas G, Chazot G. Melatonin and jet lag: confirmatory result using a simplified protocol. Biol Psychiatry 1992; 32:705711.
  37. Committee on the Framework for Evaluating the Safety of Dietary Supplements, Food and Nutrition Board, Board on Life Sciences, Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies. Dietary supplements: a framework for evaluating safety. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2005.
  38. Jamieson AO, Zammit GK, Rosenberg RS, Davis JR, Walsh JK. Zolpidem reduces the sleep disturbance of jet lag. Sleep Med 2001; 2:423430.
  39. Hirschfeld U, Moreno-Reyes R, Akseki E, et al. Progressive elevation of plasma thyrotropin during adaptation to simulated jet lag: effects of treatment with bright light or zolpidem. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81:32703277.
  40. Daurat A, Benoit O, Buguet A. Effects of zopiclone on the rest/activity rhythm after a westward flight across five time zones. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2000; 149:241245.
  41. Piérard C, Beaumont M, Enslen M, et al. Resynchronization of hormonal rhythms after an eastbound flight in humans: effects of slow-release caffeine and melatonin. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 85:144150.
  42. Beaumont M, Batéjat D, Piérard C, et al. Caffeine or melatonin effects on sleep and sleepiness after rapid eastward transmeridian travel. J Appl Physiol 2004; 96:5058.
  43. Rosenberg RP, Bogan RK, Tiller JM, et al. A phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of armodafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with jet lag disorder. Mayo Clin Proc 2010; 85:630638.
  44. Drake CL, Roehrs T, Richardson G, Walsh JK, Roth T. Shift work sleep disorder: prevalence and consequences beyond that of symptomatic day workers. Sleep 2004; 27:14531462.
  45. Härmä MI, Hakola T, Akerstedt T, Laitinen JT. Age and adjustment to night work. Occup Environ Med 1994; 51:568573.
  46. Smith L, Mason C. Reducing night shift exposure: a pilot study of rota, night shift and age effects on sleepiness and fatigue. J Hum Ergol (Tokyo) 2001; 30:8387.
  47. Boivin DB, James FO. Circadian adaptation to night-shift work by judicious light and darkness exposure. J Biol Rhythms 2002; 17:556567.
  48. Crowley SJ, Lee C, Tseng CY, Fogg LF, Eastman CI. Combinations of bright light, scheduled dark, sunglasses, and melatonin to facilitate circadian entrainment to night shift work. J Biol Rhythms 2003; 18:513523.
  49. Folkard S, Arendt J, Clark M. Can melatonin improve shift workers’ tolerance of the night shift? Some preliminary findings. Chronobiol Int 1993; 10:315320.
  50. Yoon IY, Song BG. Role of morning melatonin administration and attenuation of sunlight exposure in improving adaptation of nightshift workers. Chronobiol Int 2002; 19:903913.
  51. James M, Tremea MO, Jones JS, Krohmer JR. Can melatonin improve adaptation to night shift? Am J Emerg Med 1998; 16:367370.
  52. Jorgensen KM, Witting MD. Does exogenous melatonin improve day sleep or night alertness in emergency physicians working night shifts? Ann Emerg Med 1998; 31:699704.
  53. Walsh JK, Schweitzer PK, Anch AM, Muehlbach MJ, Jenkins NA, Dickins QS. Sleepiness/alertness on a simulated night shift following sleep at home with triazolam. Sleep 1991; 14:140146.
  54. Walsh JK, Sugerman JL, Muehlbach MJ, Schweitzer PK. Physiological sleep tendency on a simulated night shift: adaptation and effects of triazolam. Sleep 1988; 11:251264.
  55. Porcù S, Bellatreccia A, Ferrara M, Casagrande M. Performance, ability to stay awake, and tendency to fall asleep during the night after a diurnal sleep with temazepam or placebo. Sleep 1997; 20:535541.
  56. Monchesky TC, Billings BJ, Phillips R, Bourgouin J. Zopiclone in insomniac shiftworkers. Evaluation of its hypnotic properties and its effects on mood and work performance. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1989; 61:255259.
  57. Moon CA, Hindmarch I, Holland RL. The effect of zopiclone 7.5 mg on the sleep, mood and performance of shift workers. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1990; 5(suppl 2):7983.
  58. Puca FM, Perrucci S, Prudenzano MP, et al. Quality of life in shift work syndrome. Funct Neurol 1996; 11:261268.
  59. Czeisler CA, Walsh JK, Roth T, et al; US Modafinil in Shift Work Sleep Disorder Study Group. Modafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with shift-work sleep disorder. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:476486.
  60. Schweitzer PK, Randazzo AC, Stone K, Erman M, Walsh JK. Laboratory and field studies of naps and caffeine as practical countermeasures for sleep-wake problems associated with night work. Sleep 2006; 29:3950.
  61. Sallinen M, Härmä M, Akerstedt T, Rosa R, Lillqvist O. Promoting alertness with a short nap during a night shift. J Sleep Res 1998; 7:240247.
  62. Garbarino S, Mascialino B, Penco MA, et al. Professional shift-work drivers who adopt prophylactic naps can reduce the risk of car accidents during night work. Sleep 2004; 27:12951302.
  63. Purnell MT, Feyer AM, Herbison GP. The impact of a nap opportunity during the night shift on the performance and alertness of 12-h shift workers. J Sleep Res 2002; 11:219227.
  64. Smith MR, Fogg LF, Eastman CI. A compromise circadian phase position for permanent night work improves mood, fatigue, and performance. Sleep 2009; 32:14811489.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
675-684
Page Number
675-684
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Jet lag and shift work sleep disorders: How to help reset the internal clock
Display Headline
Jet lag and shift work sleep disorders: How to help reset the internal clock
Sections
Inside the Article

KEY POINTS

  • Symptoms include daytime anergia, alternating complaints of insomnia and hypersomnia, emotional disturbances, and gastrointestinal distress. The severity depends on the degree and the duration of dyssynchrony, as well as on innate factors such as age and whether the patient is an “early bird” or a “night owl.”
  • Drug treatment addresses sleep-related symptoms (eg, somnolence, insomnia) and attempts to hasten circadian reacclimation.
  • Exposure to bright light in the hours leading up to the patient’s minimum core body temperature tends to push the internal clock later in time, whereas bright light in the hours immediately afterward pushes the clock earlier in time.
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Use ProPublica
Article PDF Media

Update in intensive care medicine: Studies that challenged our practice in the last 5 years

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/10/2017 - 08:42
Display Headline
Update in intensive care medicine: Studies that challenged our practice in the last 5 years

We have seen significant growth in clinical research in critical care medicine in the last decade. Advances have been made in many important areas in this field; of these, advances in treating septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and also in supportive therapies for critically ill patients (eg, sedatives, insulin), have perhaps received the most attention.

Of note, several once-established therapies in these areas have failed the test of time, as the result of evidence from more-recent clinical trials. For example, recent studies have shown that a pulmonary arterial catheter does not improve outcomes in patients with ARDS. Similarly, what used to be “optimal” fluid management in patients with ARDS is no longer considered appropriate.

In this review, we summarize eight major studies in critical care medicine published in the last 5 years, studies that have contributed to changes in our practice in the intensive care unit (ICU).

FLUID MANAGEMENT IN ARDS

Key points

  • In patients with acute lung injury (ALI) and ARDS, fluid restriction is associated with better outcomes than a liberal fluid policy.
  • A pulmonary arterial catheter is not necessary and, compared with a central venous catheter, may result in more complications in patients with ALI and ARDS.

Background

Fluid management practices in patients with ARDS have been extremely variable. Two different approaches are commonly used: the liberal or “wet” approach to optimize tissue perfusion and the “dry” approach, which focuses on reducing lung edema. Given that most deaths attributed to ARDS result from extrapulmonary organ failure, aggressive fluid restriction has been the less popular approach.

Additionally, although earlier studies and meta-analyses suggested that the use of a pulmonary arterial catheter was not associated with better outcomes in critically ill patients,1 controversy remained regarding the value of a pulmonary arterial catheter compared with a central venous catheter in guiding fluid management in patients with ARDS, and data were insufficient to prove one strategy better than the other.

The Fluids and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT)

NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK; WIEDEMANN HP, WHEELER AP, BERNARD GR, ET AL. COMPARISON OF TWO FLUID-MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES IN ACUTE LUNG INJURY. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:2564–2575.

NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK; WHEELER AP, BERNARD GR, THOMPSON BT, ET AL. PULMONARY-ARTERY VERSUS CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER TO GUIDE TREATMENT OF ACUTE LUNG INJURY. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:2213–2224.

The Fluids and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) compared two fluid strategies2 and also the utility of a pulmonary arterial catheter vs a central venous catheter3 in patients with ALI or ARDS.

This two-by-two factorial trial randomized 1,000 patients to be treated according to either a conservative (fluid-restrictive or “dry”) or a liberal (“wet”) fluid management strategy for 7 days. Additionally, they were randomly assigned to receive either a central venous catheter or a pulmonary arterial catheter. The trial thus had four treatment groups:

  • Fluid-restricted and a central venous catheter, with a goal of keeping the central venous pressure below 4 mm Hg
  • Fluid-restricted and a pulmonary arterial catheter: fluids were restricted and diuretics were given to keep the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure below 8 mm Hg
  • Fluid-liberal and a central venous catheter: fluids were given to keep the central venous pressure between 10 and 14 mm Hg
  • Fluid-liberal and a pulmonary arterial catheter: fluids were given to keep the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure between 14 and 18 mm Hg.

The primary end point was the mortality rate at 60 days. Secondary end points included the number of ventilator-free days and organ-failure-free days and parameters of lung physiology. All patients were managed with a low-tidal-volume strategy.

The ‘dry’ strategy was better

The cumulative fluid balance was −136 mL ± 491 mL in the “dry” group and 6,992 mL ± 502 mL in the “wet” group, a difference of more than 7 L (P < .0001). Of note, before randomization, the patients were already fluid-positive, with a mean total fluid balance of +2,700 mL).2

At 60 days, no statistically significant difference in mortality rate was seen between the fluid-management groups (25.5% in the dry group vs 28.4% in the wet group (P = .30). Nevertheless, patients in the dry group had better oxygenation indices and lung injury scores (including lower plateau airway pressure), resulting in more ventilator-free days (14.6 ± 0.5 vs 12.1 ± 0.5; P = .0002) and ICU-free days (13.4 ± 0.4 vs 11.2 ± 0.4; P = .0003).2

Although those in the dry-strategy group had a slightly lower cardiac index and mean arterial pressure, they did not have a higher incidence of shock.

More importantly, the dry group did not have a higher rate of nonpulmonary organ failure. Serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen concentrations were slightly higher in this group, but this was not associated with a higher incidence of renal failure or the use of dialysis: 10% in the dry-strategy group vs 14% in the wet-strategy group; P = .0642).2

No advantage with a pulmonary arterial catheter

The mortality rate did not differ between the catheter groups. However, the patients who received a pulmonary arterial catheter stayed in the ICU 0.2 days longer and had twice as many nonfatal cardiac arrhythmias as those who received a central venous catheter.3

Comments

The liberal fluid-strategy group had fluid balances similar to those seen in previous National Institutes of Health ARDS Network trials in which fluid management was not controlled. This suggests that the liberal fluid strategy reflects usual clinical practice.

Although the goals used in this study (central venous pressure < 4 mm Hg or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure < 8 mm Hg) could be difficult to achieve in clinical practice, a conservative strategy of fluid management is preferred in patients with ALI or ARDS, given the benefits observed in this trial.

A pulmonary arterial catheter is not indicated to guide hemodynamic management of patients with ARDS.

 

 

CORTICOSTEROID USE IN ARDS

Key points

  • In selected patients with ARDS, the prolonged use of corticosteroids may result in better oxygenation and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation.
  • Late use of corticosteroids in patients with ARDS (> 14 days after diagnosis) is not indicated and may increase the risk of death.
  • The role of corticosteroids in early ARDS (< 7 days after diagnosis) remains controversial.

Background

Systemic corticosteroid therapy was commonly used in ARDS patients in the 1970s and 1980s. However, a single-center study published in the late 1980s showed that a corticosteroid in high doses (methylprednisolone 30 mg/kg) resulted in more complications and was not associated with a lower mortality rate.4 On the other hand, a small study that included only patients with persistent ARDS (defined as ARDS lasting for more than 7 days) subsequently showed that oxygenation was significantly better and that fewer patients died while in the hospital with the use of methylprednisolone 2 mg/kg for 32 days.5

In view of these divergent findings, the ARDS Network decided to perform a study to help understand the role of corticosteroids in ARDS.

The Late Steroid Rescue Study (LaSRS)

STEINBERG KP, HUDSON LD, GOODMAN RB, ET AL; NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK. EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF CORTICOSTEROIDS FOR PERSISTENT ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:1671–1684.

The Late Steroid Rescue Study (LaSRS),6 a double-blind, multicenter trial, randomly assigned 180 patients with persistent ARDS (defined as ongoing disease 7–28 days after its onset) to receive methylprednisolone or placebo for 21 days.

Methylprednisolone was given in an initial dose of 2 mg/kg of predicted body weight followed by a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 6 hours for 14 days and then a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 12 hours for 7 days, and then it was tapered over 2 to 4 days and discontinued. It could be discontinued if 21 days of treatment were completed or if the patient was able to breathe without assistance.

The primary end point was the mortality rate at 60 days. Secondary end points included the number of ventilator-free days, organ-failure-free days, and complications and the levels of biomarkers of inflammation.

No reduction in mortality rates with steroids

The mortality rates did not differ significantly in the corticosteroid group vs the placebo group at 60 days:

  • 29.2% with methylprednisolone (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.8–39.4)
  • 28.6% with placebo (95% CI 20.3–38.6, P = 1.0).

Mortality rates at 180 days were also similar between the groups:

  • 31.5% with methylprednisolone (95% CI 22.8–41.7)
  • 31.9% with placebo (95% CI 23.2–42.0, P = 1.0).

In patients randomized between 7 and 13 days after the onset of ARDS, the mortality rates were lower in the methylprednisolone group than in the placebo group but the differences were not statistically significant. The mortality rate in this subgroup was 27% vs 36% (P = .26) at 60 days and was 27% vs 39% (P = .14) at 180 days.

However, in patients randomized more than 14 days after the onset of ARDS, the mortality rate was significantly higher in the methylprednisolone group than in the placebo group at 60 days (35% vs 8%, P = .02) and at 180 days (44% vs 12%, P = .01).

Some benefit in secondary outcomes

At day 28, methylprednisolone was associated with:

  • More ventilator-free days (11.2 ± 9.4 vs 6.8 ± 8.5, P < .001)
  • More shock-free days (20.7 ± 8.9 vs 17.9 ± 10.2, P = .04)
  • More ICU-free days (8.9 ± 8.2 vs 6.7 ± 7.8, P = .02).

Similarly, pulmonary physiologic indices were better with methylprednisolone, specifically:

  • The ratio of Pao2 to the fraction of inspired oxygen at days 3, 4, and 14 (P < .05)
  • Plateau pressure at days 4, 5, and 7 (P < .05)
  • Static compliance at days 7 and 14 (P < .05).

In terms of side effects, methylprednisolone was associated with more events associated with myopathy or neuropathy (9 vs 0, P = .001), but there were no differences in the number of serious infections or in glycemic control.

Comments

Although other recent studies suggested that corticosteroid use may be associated with a reduction in mortality rates,7–9 LaSRS did not confirm this effect. Although the doses and length of therapy were similar in these studies, LaSRS was much larger and included patients from the ARDS Network.

Nevertheless, LaSRS was criticized because of strict exclusion criteria and poor enrollment (only 5% of eligible patients were included). Additionally, it was conducted over a period of time when some ICU practices varied significantly (eg, low vs high tidal volume ventilation, tight vs loose glucose control).

The role of corticosteroids in early ARDS (< 7 days after diagnosis) remains controversial at best. Table 1 summarizes recent studies that evaluated the use of corticosteroids in patients with ARDS.

INTERRUPTING SEDATION DURING MECHANICAL VENTILATION

Key points

  • Daily awakening of mechanically ventilated patients is safe.
  • Daily interruption of sedation in mechanically ventilated patients is associated with a shorter length of mechanical ventilation.

Background

Sedatives are a central component of critical care. Continuous infusions of narcotics, benzodiazepines, and anesthetic agents are frequently used to promote comfort in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

Despite its widespread use in the ICU, there is little evidence that such sedation improves outcomes. Observational and randomized trials10–12 have shown that patients who receive continuous infusions of sedatives need to be on mechanical ventilation longer than those who receive intermittent dosing. Additionally, an earlier randomized controlled trial13 showed that daily interruption of sedative drug infusions decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation by almost 50% and resulted in a reduction in the length of stay in the ICU.

Despite these findings, many ICU physicians remain skeptical of the value of daily interruption of sedative medications and question the safety of this practice.

The Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) trial

GIRARD TD, KRESS JP, FUCHS BD, ET AL. EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF A PAIRED SEDATION AND VENTILATOR WEANING PROTOCOL FOR MECHANICALLY VENTILATED PATIENTS IN INTENSIVE CARE (AWAKENING AND BREATHING CONTROLLED TRIAL): A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL. LANCET 2008; 371:126–134.

The Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) trial14 was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that included 336 patients who required at least 12 consecutive hours of mechanical ventilation. All patients had to be receiving patient-targeted sedation.

Those in the intervention group (n = 168) had their sedation interrupted every day, followed by a clinical assessment to determine whether they could be allowed to try breathing spontaneously. The control group (n = 168) also received a clinical assessment for a trial of spontaneous breathing, while their sedation was continued as usual.

In patients in the intervention group who failed the screening for a spontaneous breathing trial, the sedatives were resumed at half the previous dose. Criteria for failure on the spontaneous breathing trial included any of the following: anxiety, agitation, respiratory rate more than 35 breaths per minute for 5 minutes or longer, cardiac arrhythmia, oxygen saturation less than 88% for 5 minutes or longer, or two or more signs of respiratory distress, tachycardia, bradycardia, paradoxical breathing, accessory muscle use, diaphoresis, or marked dyspnea.

 

 

Interrupting sedation was superior

The combination of sedation interruption and a spontaneous breathing trial was superior to a spontaneous breathing trial alone. The mean number of ventilator-free days:

  • 14.7 ± 0.9 with sedation interruption
  • 11.6 ± 0.9 days with usual care (P = .02).

The median time to ICU discharge:

  • 9.1 days with sedation interruption (interquartile range 5.1 to 17.8)
  • 12.9 days with usual care (interquartile range 6.0 to 24.2, P = .01).

The mortality rate at 28 days:

  • 28% with sedation interruption
  • 35% with usual care (P = .21).

The mortality rate at 1 year:

  • 44% with sedation interruption
  • 58% with usual care (hazard ratio [HR] in the intervention group 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.92, P = .01).

Of note, patients in the intervention group had a higher rate of self-extubation (9.6% vs 3.6%, P = .03), but the rate of reintubation was similar between the groups (14% vs 13%, P = .47).

Comments

The addition of daily awakenings to spontaneous breathing trials results in a further reduction in the number of ICU days and increases the number of ventilator-free days.

Of note, the protocol allowed patients in the control group to undergo a spontaneous breathing trial while on sedatives (69% of the patients were receiving sedation at the time). Therefore, a bias effect in favor of the intervention group cannot be excluded. However, both groups had to meet criteria for readiness for spontaneous breathing.

The study demonstrates the safety of daily awakenings and confirms previous findings suggesting that a daily trial of spontaneous breathing results in better ICU outcomes.

GLUCOSE CONTROL IN THE ICU

Key points

  • Although earlier studies suggested that intensive insulin therapy might be beneficial in critically ill patients, new findings show that strict glucose control can lead to complications without improving outcomes.

Background

A previous study15 found that intensive insulin therapy to maintain a blood glucose level between 80 and 110 mg/dL (compared with 180–200 mg/dL) reduced the mortality rate in surgical critical care patients. The mortality rate in the ICU was 4.6% with intensive insulin therapy vs 8.0% with conventional therapy (P < .04), and the effect was more robust for patients who remained longer than 5 days in the ICU (10.6% vs 20.2%).

Importantly, however, hypoglycemia (defined as blood glucose ≤ 40 mg/dL) occurred in 39 patients in the intensive-treatment group vs 6 patients in the conventional-treatment group.

The NICE-SUGAR trial

NICE-SUGAR STUDY INVESTIGATORS; FINFER S, CHITTOCK DR, SU SY, ET AL. INTENSIVE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL GLUCOSE CONTROL IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS. N ENGL J MED 2009; 360:1283–1297.

The Normoglycemia in Intensive Care Evaluation-Survival Using Glucose Algorithm Regulation (NICE-SUGAR) trial16 randomized 6,104 patients in medical and surgical ICUs to receive either intensive glucose control (blood glucose 81–108 mg/dL) with insulin therapy or conventional glucose control (blood glucose < 180 mg/dL). In the conventional-control group, insulin was discontinued if the blood glucose level dropped below 144 mg/dL.

A higher mortality rate with intensive glucose control

As expected, the intensive-control group achieved lower blood glucose levels: 115 vs 144 mg/dL.

Nevertheless, intensive glucose control was associated with a higher incidence of severe hypoglycemia, defined as a blood glucose level lower than 40 mg/dL: 6.8% vs 0.5%.

More importantly, compared with conventional insulin therapy, intensive glucose control was associated with a higher 90-day mortality rate: 27.5% vs 24.9% (odds ratio 1.14, 95% CI 1.02–1.28). These findings were similar in the subgroup of surgical patients (24.4% vs 19.8%, odds ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.07–1.61).

Comments

Of note, the conventional-control group had more patients who discontinued the treatment protocol prematurely. Additionally, more patients in this group received corticosteroids.

These results widely differ from those of a previous study by van den Berghe et al,15 which showed that tight glycemic control is associated with a survival benefit. The differences in outcomes are probably largely related to different patient populations, as van den Berghe et al included patients who had undergone cardiac surgery, who were more likely to benefit from strict blood glucose control.

The VISEP trial

BRUNKHORST FM, ENGEL C, BLOOS F, ET AL; GERMAN COMPETENCE NETWORK SEPSIS (SEPNET). INTENSIVE INSULIN THERAPY AND PENTASTARCH RESUSCITATION IN SEVERE SEPSIS. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:125–139.

The Volume Substitution and Insulin Therapy in Severe Sepsis (VISEP) trial was a multicenter study designed to compare intensive insulin therapy (target blood glucose level 80–110 mg/dL) and conventional glucose control (target blood glucose level 180–200 mg/dL) in patients with severe sepsis.17 It also compared two fluids for volume resuscitation: 10% pentastarch vs modified Ringer's lactate. It included both medical and surgical patients.

Trial halted early for safety reasons

The mean morning blood glucose level was significantly lower in the intensive insulin group (112 vs 151 mg/dL).

Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤ 40 mg/dL) was more common in the group that received intensive insulin therapy (17% vs 4.1%, P < .001).

Mortality rates at 28 days did not differ significantly: 24.7% with intensive control vs 26.0% with conventional glucose control. The mortality rate at 90 days was 39.7% in the intensive therapy group and 35.4% in the conventional therapy group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

The intensive insulin arm of the trial was stopped after 488 patients were enrolled because of a higher rate of hypoglycemia (12.1% vs 2.1%) and of serious adverse events (10.9% vs 5.2%).

Additionally, the fluid resuscitation arm of the study was suspended at the first planned interim analysis because of a higher risk of organ failure in the 10% pentastarch group.

 

 

CORTICOSTEROID THERAPY IN SEPTIC SHOCK

Key points

  • Corticosteroid therapy improves hemodynamic outcomes in patients with severe septic shock.
  • Although meta-analyses suggest the mortality rate is lower with corticosteroid therapy, there is not enough evidence from randomized controlled trials to prove that the use of low-dose corticosteroids lowers the mortality rate in patients with septic shock.
  • The corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test should not be used to determine the need for corticosteroids in patients with septic shock.

Background

A previous multicenter study,18 performed in France, found that the use of corticosteroids in patients with septic shock resulted in lower rates of death at 28 days, in the ICU, and in the hospital and a shorter time to vasopressor withdrawal. Nevertheless, the beneficial effects were not observed in patients with adequate adrenal reserve (based on an ACTH stimulation test).

This study was criticized because of a high mortality rate in the placebo group.

The CORTICUS study

SPRUNG CL, ANNANE D, KEH D, ET AL; CORTICUS STUDY GROUP. HYDROCORTISONE THERAPY FOR PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:111–124.

The Corticosteroid Therapy of Septic Shock (CORTICUS) study was a multicenter trial that randomly assigned 499 patients with septic shock to receive hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenously every 6 hours for 5 days, followed by a 6-day taper period) or placebo.19

Patients were eligible to be enrolled within 72 hours of onset of shock. Similar to previous studies, the CORTICUS trial classified patients on the basis of an ACTH stimulation test as having inadequate adrenal reserve (a cortisol increase of ≤ 9 μg/dL) or adequate adrenal reserve (a cortisol increase of > 9 μg/dL).

Faster reversal of shock with steroids

At baseline, the mean Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II (SAPS II) was 49 (the range of possible scores is 0 to 163; the higher the score the worse the organ dysfunction).

Hydrocortisone use resulted in a shorter duration of vasopressor use and a faster reversal of shock (3.3 days vs 5.8 days, P < .001).

This association was the same when patients were divided according to response to ACTH stimulation test. Time to reversal of shock in responders:

  • 2.8 days with hydrocortisone
  • 5.8 days with placebo (P < .001).

Time to reversal of shock in nonresponders:

  • 3.9 days with hydrocortisone
  • 6.0 days with placebo (P = .06).

Nevertheless, the treatment did not reduce the mortality rate at 28 days overall (34.3% vs 31.5% P = .51), or in the subgroups based on response to ACTH, or at any other time point. A post hoc analysis suggested that patients who had a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg within 30 minutes of enrollment had a greater benefit in terms of mortality rate, but the effect was not statistically significant: the absolute difference was −11.2% (P = 0.28). Similarly, post hoc analyses also revealed a higher rate of death at 28 days in patients who received etomidate (Amidate) before randomization in both groups (P = .03).

Importantly, patients who received corticosteroids had a higher incidence of superinfections, including new episodes of sepsis or septic shock, with a combined odds ratio of 1.37 (95% CI 1.05–1.79).

Length of stay in the hospital or in the ICU was similar in patients who received corticosteroids and in those who received placebo. The ICU length of stay was 19 ± 31 days with hydrocortisone vs 18 ± 17 days with placebo (P = .51).

Comments

The CORTICUS trial showed that low-dose corticosteroid therapy results in faster reversal of shock in patients with severe septic shock. The hemodynamic benefits are present in all patients regardless of response to the ACTH stimulation test.

Nevertheless, contrary to previous findings,18 corticosteroid use was not associated with an improvement in mortality rates. Important differences exist between these two studies:

  • The mortality rates in the placebo groups were significantly different (> 50% in the French study vs 30% in CORTICUS).
  • The SAPS II scores were different in these two trials (55 vs 49), suggesting a greater severity of illness in the French study.
  • The criteria for enrollment were different: the French study included patients who had a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mm Hg for more than 1 hour despite fluid administration and vasopressor use, whereas the CORTICUS trial included patients who had a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mm Hg for more than 1 hour despite fluid administration or vasopressor use.
  • The time of enrollment was different: patients were enrolled much faster in the French study (within 8 hours) than in the CORTICUS trial (within 72 hours).

A recent meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials (including the CORTICUS study), found that, compared with those who received placebo, patients who received corticosteroids had a small reduction in the 28-day mortality rate (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71–1.00, P < .05).20 Of note, this meta-analysis has been criticized for possible publication bias and also for a large degree of heterogeneity in its results.21

 

 

VASOPRESSOR THERAPY IN SHOCK

Key points

  • Vasopressin use in patients with severe septic shock is not associated with an improvement in mortality rates.
  • Vasopressin should not be used as a first-line agent in patients with septic shock.
  • Norepinephrine should be considered a first-line agent in patients with shock.
  • Compared with norepinephrine, the use of dopamine in patients with shock is associated with similar mortality rates, although its use may result in a greater number of cardiac adverse events.

Background

Vasopressin gained popularity in critical care in the last 10 years because several small studies showed that adding it improves hemodynamics and results in a reduction in the doses of catecholamines in patients with refractory septic shock.22 Furthermore, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommended the use of vasopressin in patients who have refractory shock despite fluid resuscitation and the use of other “conventional” vasopressors.23

Despite these positive findings, it remained unknown if the use of vasopressin increases the survival rate in patients with septic shock.

The Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST)

RUSSELL JA, WALLEY KR, SINGER J, ET AL; VASST INVESTIGATORS. VASOPRESSIN VERSUS NOREPINEPHRINE INFUSION IN PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:877–887.

The Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST)24 was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial that included 778 patients with refractory septic shock. Refractory shock was defined as the lack of a response to a normal saline fluid bolus of 500 mL or the need for vasopressors (norepinephrine in doses of at least 5 μg/minute or its equivalent for 6 hours or more in the 24 hours before randomization).

Two subgroups were identified: those with severe septic shock (requiring norepinephrine in doses of 15 μg/minute or higher) and those with less-severe septic shock (needing norepinephrine in doses of 5 to 14 μg/minute). Patients with unstable coronary artery disease (acute myocardial infarction, angina) and severe congestive heart failure were excluded.

Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of vasopressin (0.01–0.03 U/minute) or norepinephrine (5–15 mg/minute) in addition to open-labeled vasopressors (excluding vasopressin). The primary outcome was the all-cause mortality rate at 28 days.

Results

At 28 days, fewer patients had died in the vasopressin group than in the norepinephrine group (35.4% vs 39.3%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .26). The trend was the same at 90 days (mortality rate 43.9% vs 49.6%, P = .11).

Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with less-severe septic shock, those who received vasopressin had a lower mortality rate at 28 days (26.5% vs 35.7%, P = .05; relative risk 0.74; 95% CI 0.55–1.01) and at 90 days (35.8% vs 46.1%, P = .04; relative risk 0.78, 95% CI 0.61–0.99).

There were no statistically significant differences in any of the other secondary outcomes or in serious adverse events.

Comments

The study has been criticized for several reasons:

  • The mean arterial blood pressure at baseline before initiation of vasopressin was 72 mm Hg (and some argue that vasopressin was therefore not needed by the time it was started).
  • The time from screening to infusion of the study drug was very long (12 hours).
  • The observed mortality rate was lower than expected (37%).

Despite these considerations, the VASST trial showed that vasopressin is not associated with an increased number of adverse events in patients without active cardiovascular disease. The possible benefit in terms of the mortality rate in the subgroup of patients with less-severe septic shock requires further investigation.

Is dopamine equivalent to norepinephrine?

Previously, the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) study, a multicenter, observational cohort study, found that dopamine use was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate in the ICU compared with no dopamine.25 This finding had not been reproduced, as few well-designed studies had compared the effects of dopamine and norepinephrine.

The SOAP II study

DE BACKER D, BISTON P, DEVRIENDT J, ET AL; SOAP II INVESTIGATORS.. COMPARISON OF DOPAMINE AND NOREPINEPHRINE IN THE TREATMENT OF SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2010; 362:779–789.

The SOAP II study,26 a multicenter, randomized trial, compared dopamine vs norepinephrine as first-line vasopressor therapy. In patients with refractory shock despite use of dopamine 20 μg/kg/minute or norepinephrine 0.19 μg/kg/minute, open-label norepinephrine, epinephrine, or vasopressin was added.

The primary outcome was the mortality rate at 28 days after randomization; secondary end points included the number of days without need for organ support and the occurrence of adverse events.

Results

A total of 1,679 patients were included; 858 were assigned to dopamine and 821 to norepinephrine. Most (1,044, 62%) of the patients had a diagnosis of septic shock.

No significant difference in mortality rates was noted at 28 days: 52.5% with dopamine vs 48.5% with norepinephrine (P = .10).

However, there were more arrhythmias in the patients treated with dopamine: 207 events (24.1%) vs 102 events (12.4%) (P < .001). The number of other adverse events such as renal failure, myocardial infarction, arterial occlusion, or skin necrosis was not different between the groups.

A subgroup analysis showed that dopamine was associated with more deaths at 28 days in patients with cardiogenic shock (P = .03) but not in patients with septic shock (P = .19) or with hypovolemic shock (P = .84).

Comments

The study was criticized because the patients may not have received adequate fluid resuscitation (the study considered adequate resuscitation to be equivalent to 1 L of crystalloids or 500 mL of colloids), as different degrees of volume depletion among patients make direct comparisons of vasopressor effects difficult.

Additionally, the study defined dopamine 20 μg/kg/minute as being equipotent with norepinephrine 0.19 μg/kg/minute. Comparisons of potency between drugs are difficult to establish, as there are no available data.

Nevertheless, this study further confirms previous findings suggesting that norepinephrine is not associated with more end-organ damage (such as renal failure or skin ischemia), and shows that dopamine may increase the number of adverse events, particularly in patients with cardiac disease.

References
  1. Shah MR, Hasselblad V, Stevenson LW, et al. Impact of the pulmonary artery catheter in critically ill patients: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA 2005; 294:16641670.
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network; Wiedemann HP, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, et al. Comparison of two fluid-management strategies in acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:25642575.
  3. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network; Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, Thompson BT, et al. Pulmonary-artery versus central venous catheter to guide treatment of acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:22132224.
  4. Bernard GR, Luce JM, Sprung CL, et al. High-dose corticosteroids in patients with the adult respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 1987; 317:15651570.
  5. Meduri GU, Headley AS, Golden E, et al. Effect of prolonged methylprednisolone therapy in unresolving acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1998; 280:159165.
  6. Steinberg KP, Hudson LD, Goodman RB, et al; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network. Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids for persistent acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:16711684.
  7. Meduri GU, Golden E, Freire AX, et al. Methylprednisolone infusion in early severe ARDS: results of a randomized controlled trial. Chest 2007; 131:954963.
  8. Meduri GU, Golden E, Freire AX, et al. Methylprednisolone infusion in early severe ARDS results of a randomized controlled trial. 2007. Chest 2009; 136(suppl 5):e30.
  9. Annane D, Sébille V, Bellissant E; Ger-Inf-05 Study Group. Effect of low doses of corticosteroids in septic shock patients with or without early acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:2230.
  10. Kollef MH, Levy NT, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G. The use of continuous i.v. sedation is associated with prolongation of mechanical ventilation. Chest 1998; 114:541548.
  11. Carson SS, Kress JP, Rodgers JE, et al. A randomized trial of intermittent lorazepam versus propofol with daily interruption in mechanically ventilated patients. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:13261332.
  12. Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, et al. Effect of a nursing-implemented sedation protocol on the duration of mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:26092615.
  13. Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O’Connor MF, Hall JB. Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:14711477.
  14. Girard TD, Kress JP, Fuchs BD, et al. Efficacy and safety of a paired sedation and ventilator weaning protocol for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care (Awakening and Breathing Controlled trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008; 371:126134.
  15. van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in the critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:13591367.
  16. NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators; Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:12831297.
  17. Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, et al; German Competence Network Sepsis (SepNet). Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:125139.
  18. Annane D, Sébille V, Charpentier C, et al. Effect of treatment with low doses of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone on mortality in patients with septic shock. JAMA 2002; 288:862871.
  19. Sprung CL, Annane D, Keh D, et al; CORTICUS Study Group. Hydrocortisone therapy for patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:111124.
  20. Annane D, Bellissant E, Bollaert PE, et al. Corticosteroids in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock in adults: a systematic review. JAMA 2009; 301:23622375.
  21. Minneci PC, Deans KJ, Natanson C. Corticosteroid therapy for severe sepsis and septic shock [letter]. JAMA 2009; 302:164431644.
  22. Kampmeier TG, Rehberg S, Westphal M, Lange M. Vasopressin in sepsis and septic shock. Minerva Anestesiol 2010; 76:844850.
  23. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, et al; International Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med 2008; 36:296327.
  24. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, et al; VASST Investigators. Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:877887.
  25. Sakr Y, Reinhart K, Vincent JL, et al. Does dopamine administration in shock influence outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:589597.
  26. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al; SOAP II Investigators. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:779789.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Enrique Diaz-Guzman, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Chief, Pulmonary Section, Lexington Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington

Juan Sanchez, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, Scott & White Health Center, and Texas A&M College of Medicine, Temple, TX

Alejandro C. Arroliga, MD, FCCP
Chairman and Professor, Dr. A. Ford Wolf and Brooksie Nell Boyd Wolf Centennial Chair of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Scott & White Health Center, and Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, TX

Address: Enrique Diaz-Guzman, MD, University of Kentucky, L543 Kentucky Clinic, 740 S. Limestone Street, Lexington, KY 40536-0284; e-mail enriquedgz@uky.edu

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
665-674
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Enrique Diaz-Guzman, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Chief, Pulmonary Section, Lexington Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington

Juan Sanchez, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, Scott & White Health Center, and Texas A&M College of Medicine, Temple, TX

Alejandro C. Arroliga, MD, FCCP
Chairman and Professor, Dr. A. Ford Wolf and Brooksie Nell Boyd Wolf Centennial Chair of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Scott & White Health Center, and Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, TX

Address: Enrique Diaz-Guzman, MD, University of Kentucky, L543 Kentucky Clinic, 740 S. Limestone Street, Lexington, KY 40536-0284; e-mail enriquedgz@uky.edu

Author and Disclosure Information

Enrique Diaz-Guzman, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Chief, Pulmonary Section, Lexington Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington

Juan Sanchez, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, Scott & White Health Center, and Texas A&M College of Medicine, Temple, TX

Alejandro C. Arroliga, MD, FCCP
Chairman and Professor, Dr. A. Ford Wolf and Brooksie Nell Boyd Wolf Centennial Chair of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Scott & White Health Center, and Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, TX

Address: Enrique Diaz-Guzman, MD, University of Kentucky, L543 Kentucky Clinic, 740 S. Limestone Street, Lexington, KY 40536-0284; e-mail enriquedgz@uky.edu

Article PDF
Article PDF

We have seen significant growth in clinical research in critical care medicine in the last decade. Advances have been made in many important areas in this field; of these, advances in treating septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and also in supportive therapies for critically ill patients (eg, sedatives, insulin), have perhaps received the most attention.

Of note, several once-established therapies in these areas have failed the test of time, as the result of evidence from more-recent clinical trials. For example, recent studies have shown that a pulmonary arterial catheter does not improve outcomes in patients with ARDS. Similarly, what used to be “optimal” fluid management in patients with ARDS is no longer considered appropriate.

In this review, we summarize eight major studies in critical care medicine published in the last 5 years, studies that have contributed to changes in our practice in the intensive care unit (ICU).

FLUID MANAGEMENT IN ARDS

Key points

  • In patients with acute lung injury (ALI) and ARDS, fluid restriction is associated with better outcomes than a liberal fluid policy.
  • A pulmonary arterial catheter is not necessary and, compared with a central venous catheter, may result in more complications in patients with ALI and ARDS.

Background

Fluid management practices in patients with ARDS have been extremely variable. Two different approaches are commonly used: the liberal or “wet” approach to optimize tissue perfusion and the “dry” approach, which focuses on reducing lung edema. Given that most deaths attributed to ARDS result from extrapulmonary organ failure, aggressive fluid restriction has been the less popular approach.

Additionally, although earlier studies and meta-analyses suggested that the use of a pulmonary arterial catheter was not associated with better outcomes in critically ill patients,1 controversy remained regarding the value of a pulmonary arterial catheter compared with a central venous catheter in guiding fluid management in patients with ARDS, and data were insufficient to prove one strategy better than the other.

The Fluids and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT)

NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK; WIEDEMANN HP, WHEELER AP, BERNARD GR, ET AL. COMPARISON OF TWO FLUID-MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES IN ACUTE LUNG INJURY. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:2564–2575.

NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK; WHEELER AP, BERNARD GR, THOMPSON BT, ET AL. PULMONARY-ARTERY VERSUS CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER TO GUIDE TREATMENT OF ACUTE LUNG INJURY. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:2213–2224.

The Fluids and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) compared two fluid strategies2 and also the utility of a pulmonary arterial catheter vs a central venous catheter3 in patients with ALI or ARDS.

This two-by-two factorial trial randomized 1,000 patients to be treated according to either a conservative (fluid-restrictive or “dry”) or a liberal (“wet”) fluid management strategy for 7 days. Additionally, they were randomly assigned to receive either a central venous catheter or a pulmonary arterial catheter. The trial thus had four treatment groups:

  • Fluid-restricted and a central venous catheter, with a goal of keeping the central venous pressure below 4 mm Hg
  • Fluid-restricted and a pulmonary arterial catheter: fluids were restricted and diuretics were given to keep the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure below 8 mm Hg
  • Fluid-liberal and a central venous catheter: fluids were given to keep the central venous pressure between 10 and 14 mm Hg
  • Fluid-liberal and a pulmonary arterial catheter: fluids were given to keep the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure between 14 and 18 mm Hg.

The primary end point was the mortality rate at 60 days. Secondary end points included the number of ventilator-free days and organ-failure-free days and parameters of lung physiology. All patients were managed with a low-tidal-volume strategy.

The ‘dry’ strategy was better

The cumulative fluid balance was −136 mL ± 491 mL in the “dry” group and 6,992 mL ± 502 mL in the “wet” group, a difference of more than 7 L (P < .0001). Of note, before randomization, the patients were already fluid-positive, with a mean total fluid balance of +2,700 mL).2

At 60 days, no statistically significant difference in mortality rate was seen between the fluid-management groups (25.5% in the dry group vs 28.4% in the wet group (P = .30). Nevertheless, patients in the dry group had better oxygenation indices and lung injury scores (including lower plateau airway pressure), resulting in more ventilator-free days (14.6 ± 0.5 vs 12.1 ± 0.5; P = .0002) and ICU-free days (13.4 ± 0.4 vs 11.2 ± 0.4; P = .0003).2

Although those in the dry-strategy group had a slightly lower cardiac index and mean arterial pressure, they did not have a higher incidence of shock.

More importantly, the dry group did not have a higher rate of nonpulmonary organ failure. Serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen concentrations were slightly higher in this group, but this was not associated with a higher incidence of renal failure or the use of dialysis: 10% in the dry-strategy group vs 14% in the wet-strategy group; P = .0642).2

No advantage with a pulmonary arterial catheter

The mortality rate did not differ between the catheter groups. However, the patients who received a pulmonary arterial catheter stayed in the ICU 0.2 days longer and had twice as many nonfatal cardiac arrhythmias as those who received a central venous catheter.3

Comments

The liberal fluid-strategy group had fluid balances similar to those seen in previous National Institutes of Health ARDS Network trials in which fluid management was not controlled. This suggests that the liberal fluid strategy reflects usual clinical practice.

Although the goals used in this study (central venous pressure < 4 mm Hg or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure < 8 mm Hg) could be difficult to achieve in clinical practice, a conservative strategy of fluid management is preferred in patients with ALI or ARDS, given the benefits observed in this trial.

A pulmonary arterial catheter is not indicated to guide hemodynamic management of patients with ARDS.

 

 

CORTICOSTEROID USE IN ARDS

Key points

  • In selected patients with ARDS, the prolonged use of corticosteroids may result in better oxygenation and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation.
  • Late use of corticosteroids in patients with ARDS (> 14 days after diagnosis) is not indicated and may increase the risk of death.
  • The role of corticosteroids in early ARDS (< 7 days after diagnosis) remains controversial.

Background

Systemic corticosteroid therapy was commonly used in ARDS patients in the 1970s and 1980s. However, a single-center study published in the late 1980s showed that a corticosteroid in high doses (methylprednisolone 30 mg/kg) resulted in more complications and was not associated with a lower mortality rate.4 On the other hand, a small study that included only patients with persistent ARDS (defined as ARDS lasting for more than 7 days) subsequently showed that oxygenation was significantly better and that fewer patients died while in the hospital with the use of methylprednisolone 2 mg/kg for 32 days.5

In view of these divergent findings, the ARDS Network decided to perform a study to help understand the role of corticosteroids in ARDS.

The Late Steroid Rescue Study (LaSRS)

STEINBERG KP, HUDSON LD, GOODMAN RB, ET AL; NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK. EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF CORTICOSTEROIDS FOR PERSISTENT ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:1671–1684.

The Late Steroid Rescue Study (LaSRS),6 a double-blind, multicenter trial, randomly assigned 180 patients with persistent ARDS (defined as ongoing disease 7–28 days after its onset) to receive methylprednisolone or placebo for 21 days.

Methylprednisolone was given in an initial dose of 2 mg/kg of predicted body weight followed by a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 6 hours for 14 days and then a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 12 hours for 7 days, and then it was tapered over 2 to 4 days and discontinued. It could be discontinued if 21 days of treatment were completed or if the patient was able to breathe without assistance.

The primary end point was the mortality rate at 60 days. Secondary end points included the number of ventilator-free days, organ-failure-free days, and complications and the levels of biomarkers of inflammation.

No reduction in mortality rates with steroids

The mortality rates did not differ significantly in the corticosteroid group vs the placebo group at 60 days:

  • 29.2% with methylprednisolone (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.8–39.4)
  • 28.6% with placebo (95% CI 20.3–38.6, P = 1.0).

Mortality rates at 180 days were also similar between the groups:

  • 31.5% with methylprednisolone (95% CI 22.8–41.7)
  • 31.9% with placebo (95% CI 23.2–42.0, P = 1.0).

In patients randomized between 7 and 13 days after the onset of ARDS, the mortality rates were lower in the methylprednisolone group than in the placebo group but the differences were not statistically significant. The mortality rate in this subgroup was 27% vs 36% (P = .26) at 60 days and was 27% vs 39% (P = .14) at 180 days.

However, in patients randomized more than 14 days after the onset of ARDS, the mortality rate was significantly higher in the methylprednisolone group than in the placebo group at 60 days (35% vs 8%, P = .02) and at 180 days (44% vs 12%, P = .01).

Some benefit in secondary outcomes

At day 28, methylprednisolone was associated with:

  • More ventilator-free days (11.2 ± 9.4 vs 6.8 ± 8.5, P < .001)
  • More shock-free days (20.7 ± 8.9 vs 17.9 ± 10.2, P = .04)
  • More ICU-free days (8.9 ± 8.2 vs 6.7 ± 7.8, P = .02).

Similarly, pulmonary physiologic indices were better with methylprednisolone, specifically:

  • The ratio of Pao2 to the fraction of inspired oxygen at days 3, 4, and 14 (P < .05)
  • Plateau pressure at days 4, 5, and 7 (P < .05)
  • Static compliance at days 7 and 14 (P < .05).

In terms of side effects, methylprednisolone was associated with more events associated with myopathy or neuropathy (9 vs 0, P = .001), but there were no differences in the number of serious infections or in glycemic control.

Comments

Although other recent studies suggested that corticosteroid use may be associated with a reduction in mortality rates,7–9 LaSRS did not confirm this effect. Although the doses and length of therapy were similar in these studies, LaSRS was much larger and included patients from the ARDS Network.

Nevertheless, LaSRS was criticized because of strict exclusion criteria and poor enrollment (only 5% of eligible patients were included). Additionally, it was conducted over a period of time when some ICU practices varied significantly (eg, low vs high tidal volume ventilation, tight vs loose glucose control).

The role of corticosteroids in early ARDS (< 7 days after diagnosis) remains controversial at best. Table 1 summarizes recent studies that evaluated the use of corticosteroids in patients with ARDS.

INTERRUPTING SEDATION DURING MECHANICAL VENTILATION

Key points

  • Daily awakening of mechanically ventilated patients is safe.
  • Daily interruption of sedation in mechanically ventilated patients is associated with a shorter length of mechanical ventilation.

Background

Sedatives are a central component of critical care. Continuous infusions of narcotics, benzodiazepines, and anesthetic agents are frequently used to promote comfort in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

Despite its widespread use in the ICU, there is little evidence that such sedation improves outcomes. Observational and randomized trials10–12 have shown that patients who receive continuous infusions of sedatives need to be on mechanical ventilation longer than those who receive intermittent dosing. Additionally, an earlier randomized controlled trial13 showed that daily interruption of sedative drug infusions decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation by almost 50% and resulted in a reduction in the length of stay in the ICU.

Despite these findings, many ICU physicians remain skeptical of the value of daily interruption of sedative medications and question the safety of this practice.

The Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) trial

GIRARD TD, KRESS JP, FUCHS BD, ET AL. EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF A PAIRED SEDATION AND VENTILATOR WEANING PROTOCOL FOR MECHANICALLY VENTILATED PATIENTS IN INTENSIVE CARE (AWAKENING AND BREATHING CONTROLLED TRIAL): A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL. LANCET 2008; 371:126–134.

The Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) trial14 was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that included 336 patients who required at least 12 consecutive hours of mechanical ventilation. All patients had to be receiving patient-targeted sedation.

Those in the intervention group (n = 168) had their sedation interrupted every day, followed by a clinical assessment to determine whether they could be allowed to try breathing spontaneously. The control group (n = 168) also received a clinical assessment for a trial of spontaneous breathing, while their sedation was continued as usual.

In patients in the intervention group who failed the screening for a spontaneous breathing trial, the sedatives were resumed at half the previous dose. Criteria for failure on the spontaneous breathing trial included any of the following: anxiety, agitation, respiratory rate more than 35 breaths per minute for 5 minutes or longer, cardiac arrhythmia, oxygen saturation less than 88% for 5 minutes or longer, or two or more signs of respiratory distress, tachycardia, bradycardia, paradoxical breathing, accessory muscle use, diaphoresis, or marked dyspnea.

 

 

Interrupting sedation was superior

The combination of sedation interruption and a spontaneous breathing trial was superior to a spontaneous breathing trial alone. The mean number of ventilator-free days:

  • 14.7 ± 0.9 with sedation interruption
  • 11.6 ± 0.9 days with usual care (P = .02).

The median time to ICU discharge:

  • 9.1 days with sedation interruption (interquartile range 5.1 to 17.8)
  • 12.9 days with usual care (interquartile range 6.0 to 24.2, P = .01).

The mortality rate at 28 days:

  • 28% with sedation interruption
  • 35% with usual care (P = .21).

The mortality rate at 1 year:

  • 44% with sedation interruption
  • 58% with usual care (hazard ratio [HR] in the intervention group 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.92, P = .01).

Of note, patients in the intervention group had a higher rate of self-extubation (9.6% vs 3.6%, P = .03), but the rate of reintubation was similar between the groups (14% vs 13%, P = .47).

Comments

The addition of daily awakenings to spontaneous breathing trials results in a further reduction in the number of ICU days and increases the number of ventilator-free days.

Of note, the protocol allowed patients in the control group to undergo a spontaneous breathing trial while on sedatives (69% of the patients were receiving sedation at the time). Therefore, a bias effect in favor of the intervention group cannot be excluded. However, both groups had to meet criteria for readiness for spontaneous breathing.

The study demonstrates the safety of daily awakenings and confirms previous findings suggesting that a daily trial of spontaneous breathing results in better ICU outcomes.

GLUCOSE CONTROL IN THE ICU

Key points

  • Although earlier studies suggested that intensive insulin therapy might be beneficial in critically ill patients, new findings show that strict glucose control can lead to complications without improving outcomes.

Background

A previous study15 found that intensive insulin therapy to maintain a blood glucose level between 80 and 110 mg/dL (compared with 180–200 mg/dL) reduced the mortality rate in surgical critical care patients. The mortality rate in the ICU was 4.6% with intensive insulin therapy vs 8.0% with conventional therapy (P < .04), and the effect was more robust for patients who remained longer than 5 days in the ICU (10.6% vs 20.2%).

Importantly, however, hypoglycemia (defined as blood glucose ≤ 40 mg/dL) occurred in 39 patients in the intensive-treatment group vs 6 patients in the conventional-treatment group.

The NICE-SUGAR trial

NICE-SUGAR STUDY INVESTIGATORS; FINFER S, CHITTOCK DR, SU SY, ET AL. INTENSIVE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL GLUCOSE CONTROL IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS. N ENGL J MED 2009; 360:1283–1297.

The Normoglycemia in Intensive Care Evaluation-Survival Using Glucose Algorithm Regulation (NICE-SUGAR) trial16 randomized 6,104 patients in medical and surgical ICUs to receive either intensive glucose control (blood glucose 81–108 mg/dL) with insulin therapy or conventional glucose control (blood glucose < 180 mg/dL). In the conventional-control group, insulin was discontinued if the blood glucose level dropped below 144 mg/dL.

A higher mortality rate with intensive glucose control

As expected, the intensive-control group achieved lower blood glucose levels: 115 vs 144 mg/dL.

Nevertheless, intensive glucose control was associated with a higher incidence of severe hypoglycemia, defined as a blood glucose level lower than 40 mg/dL: 6.8% vs 0.5%.

More importantly, compared with conventional insulin therapy, intensive glucose control was associated with a higher 90-day mortality rate: 27.5% vs 24.9% (odds ratio 1.14, 95% CI 1.02–1.28). These findings were similar in the subgroup of surgical patients (24.4% vs 19.8%, odds ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.07–1.61).

Comments

Of note, the conventional-control group had more patients who discontinued the treatment protocol prematurely. Additionally, more patients in this group received corticosteroids.

These results widely differ from those of a previous study by van den Berghe et al,15 which showed that tight glycemic control is associated with a survival benefit. The differences in outcomes are probably largely related to different patient populations, as van den Berghe et al included patients who had undergone cardiac surgery, who were more likely to benefit from strict blood glucose control.

The VISEP trial

BRUNKHORST FM, ENGEL C, BLOOS F, ET AL; GERMAN COMPETENCE NETWORK SEPSIS (SEPNET). INTENSIVE INSULIN THERAPY AND PENTASTARCH RESUSCITATION IN SEVERE SEPSIS. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:125–139.

The Volume Substitution and Insulin Therapy in Severe Sepsis (VISEP) trial was a multicenter study designed to compare intensive insulin therapy (target blood glucose level 80–110 mg/dL) and conventional glucose control (target blood glucose level 180–200 mg/dL) in patients with severe sepsis.17 It also compared two fluids for volume resuscitation: 10% pentastarch vs modified Ringer's lactate. It included both medical and surgical patients.

Trial halted early for safety reasons

The mean morning blood glucose level was significantly lower in the intensive insulin group (112 vs 151 mg/dL).

Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤ 40 mg/dL) was more common in the group that received intensive insulin therapy (17% vs 4.1%, P < .001).

Mortality rates at 28 days did not differ significantly: 24.7% with intensive control vs 26.0% with conventional glucose control. The mortality rate at 90 days was 39.7% in the intensive therapy group and 35.4% in the conventional therapy group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

The intensive insulin arm of the trial was stopped after 488 patients were enrolled because of a higher rate of hypoglycemia (12.1% vs 2.1%) and of serious adverse events (10.9% vs 5.2%).

Additionally, the fluid resuscitation arm of the study was suspended at the first planned interim analysis because of a higher risk of organ failure in the 10% pentastarch group.

 

 

CORTICOSTEROID THERAPY IN SEPTIC SHOCK

Key points

  • Corticosteroid therapy improves hemodynamic outcomes in patients with severe septic shock.
  • Although meta-analyses suggest the mortality rate is lower with corticosteroid therapy, there is not enough evidence from randomized controlled trials to prove that the use of low-dose corticosteroids lowers the mortality rate in patients with septic shock.
  • The corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test should not be used to determine the need for corticosteroids in patients with septic shock.

Background

A previous multicenter study,18 performed in France, found that the use of corticosteroids in patients with septic shock resulted in lower rates of death at 28 days, in the ICU, and in the hospital and a shorter time to vasopressor withdrawal. Nevertheless, the beneficial effects were not observed in patients with adequate adrenal reserve (based on an ACTH stimulation test).

This study was criticized because of a high mortality rate in the placebo group.

The CORTICUS study

SPRUNG CL, ANNANE D, KEH D, ET AL; CORTICUS STUDY GROUP. HYDROCORTISONE THERAPY FOR PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:111–124.

The Corticosteroid Therapy of Septic Shock (CORTICUS) study was a multicenter trial that randomly assigned 499 patients with septic shock to receive hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenously every 6 hours for 5 days, followed by a 6-day taper period) or placebo.19

Patients were eligible to be enrolled within 72 hours of onset of shock. Similar to previous studies, the CORTICUS trial classified patients on the basis of an ACTH stimulation test as having inadequate adrenal reserve (a cortisol increase of ≤ 9 μg/dL) or adequate adrenal reserve (a cortisol increase of > 9 μg/dL).

Faster reversal of shock with steroids

At baseline, the mean Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II (SAPS II) was 49 (the range of possible scores is 0 to 163; the higher the score the worse the organ dysfunction).

Hydrocortisone use resulted in a shorter duration of vasopressor use and a faster reversal of shock (3.3 days vs 5.8 days, P < .001).

This association was the same when patients were divided according to response to ACTH stimulation test. Time to reversal of shock in responders:

  • 2.8 days with hydrocortisone
  • 5.8 days with placebo (P < .001).

Time to reversal of shock in nonresponders:

  • 3.9 days with hydrocortisone
  • 6.0 days with placebo (P = .06).

Nevertheless, the treatment did not reduce the mortality rate at 28 days overall (34.3% vs 31.5% P = .51), or in the subgroups based on response to ACTH, or at any other time point. A post hoc analysis suggested that patients who had a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg within 30 minutes of enrollment had a greater benefit in terms of mortality rate, but the effect was not statistically significant: the absolute difference was −11.2% (P = 0.28). Similarly, post hoc analyses also revealed a higher rate of death at 28 days in patients who received etomidate (Amidate) before randomization in both groups (P = .03).

Importantly, patients who received corticosteroids had a higher incidence of superinfections, including new episodes of sepsis or septic shock, with a combined odds ratio of 1.37 (95% CI 1.05–1.79).

Length of stay in the hospital or in the ICU was similar in patients who received corticosteroids and in those who received placebo. The ICU length of stay was 19 ± 31 days with hydrocortisone vs 18 ± 17 days with placebo (P = .51).

Comments

The CORTICUS trial showed that low-dose corticosteroid therapy results in faster reversal of shock in patients with severe septic shock. The hemodynamic benefits are present in all patients regardless of response to the ACTH stimulation test.

Nevertheless, contrary to previous findings,18 corticosteroid use was not associated with an improvement in mortality rates. Important differences exist between these two studies:

  • The mortality rates in the placebo groups were significantly different (> 50% in the French study vs 30% in CORTICUS).
  • The SAPS II scores were different in these two trials (55 vs 49), suggesting a greater severity of illness in the French study.
  • The criteria for enrollment were different: the French study included patients who had a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mm Hg for more than 1 hour despite fluid administration and vasopressor use, whereas the CORTICUS trial included patients who had a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mm Hg for more than 1 hour despite fluid administration or vasopressor use.
  • The time of enrollment was different: patients were enrolled much faster in the French study (within 8 hours) than in the CORTICUS trial (within 72 hours).

A recent meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials (including the CORTICUS study), found that, compared with those who received placebo, patients who received corticosteroids had a small reduction in the 28-day mortality rate (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71–1.00, P < .05).20 Of note, this meta-analysis has been criticized for possible publication bias and also for a large degree of heterogeneity in its results.21

 

 

VASOPRESSOR THERAPY IN SHOCK

Key points

  • Vasopressin use in patients with severe septic shock is not associated with an improvement in mortality rates.
  • Vasopressin should not be used as a first-line agent in patients with septic shock.
  • Norepinephrine should be considered a first-line agent in patients with shock.
  • Compared with norepinephrine, the use of dopamine in patients with shock is associated with similar mortality rates, although its use may result in a greater number of cardiac adverse events.

Background

Vasopressin gained popularity in critical care in the last 10 years because several small studies showed that adding it improves hemodynamics and results in a reduction in the doses of catecholamines in patients with refractory septic shock.22 Furthermore, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommended the use of vasopressin in patients who have refractory shock despite fluid resuscitation and the use of other “conventional” vasopressors.23

Despite these positive findings, it remained unknown if the use of vasopressin increases the survival rate in patients with septic shock.

The Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST)

RUSSELL JA, WALLEY KR, SINGER J, ET AL; VASST INVESTIGATORS. VASOPRESSIN VERSUS NOREPINEPHRINE INFUSION IN PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:877–887.

The Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST)24 was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial that included 778 patients with refractory septic shock. Refractory shock was defined as the lack of a response to a normal saline fluid bolus of 500 mL or the need for vasopressors (norepinephrine in doses of at least 5 μg/minute or its equivalent for 6 hours or more in the 24 hours before randomization).

Two subgroups were identified: those with severe septic shock (requiring norepinephrine in doses of 15 μg/minute or higher) and those with less-severe septic shock (needing norepinephrine in doses of 5 to 14 μg/minute). Patients with unstable coronary artery disease (acute myocardial infarction, angina) and severe congestive heart failure were excluded.

Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of vasopressin (0.01–0.03 U/minute) or norepinephrine (5–15 mg/minute) in addition to open-labeled vasopressors (excluding vasopressin). The primary outcome was the all-cause mortality rate at 28 days.

Results

At 28 days, fewer patients had died in the vasopressin group than in the norepinephrine group (35.4% vs 39.3%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .26). The trend was the same at 90 days (mortality rate 43.9% vs 49.6%, P = .11).

Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with less-severe septic shock, those who received vasopressin had a lower mortality rate at 28 days (26.5% vs 35.7%, P = .05; relative risk 0.74; 95% CI 0.55–1.01) and at 90 days (35.8% vs 46.1%, P = .04; relative risk 0.78, 95% CI 0.61–0.99).

There were no statistically significant differences in any of the other secondary outcomes or in serious adverse events.

Comments

The study has been criticized for several reasons:

  • The mean arterial blood pressure at baseline before initiation of vasopressin was 72 mm Hg (and some argue that vasopressin was therefore not needed by the time it was started).
  • The time from screening to infusion of the study drug was very long (12 hours).
  • The observed mortality rate was lower than expected (37%).

Despite these considerations, the VASST trial showed that vasopressin is not associated with an increased number of adverse events in patients without active cardiovascular disease. The possible benefit in terms of the mortality rate in the subgroup of patients with less-severe septic shock requires further investigation.

Is dopamine equivalent to norepinephrine?

Previously, the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) study, a multicenter, observational cohort study, found that dopamine use was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate in the ICU compared with no dopamine.25 This finding had not been reproduced, as few well-designed studies had compared the effects of dopamine and norepinephrine.

The SOAP II study

DE BACKER D, BISTON P, DEVRIENDT J, ET AL; SOAP II INVESTIGATORS.. COMPARISON OF DOPAMINE AND NOREPINEPHRINE IN THE TREATMENT OF SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2010; 362:779–789.

The SOAP II study,26 a multicenter, randomized trial, compared dopamine vs norepinephrine as first-line vasopressor therapy. In patients with refractory shock despite use of dopamine 20 μg/kg/minute or norepinephrine 0.19 μg/kg/minute, open-label norepinephrine, epinephrine, or vasopressin was added.

The primary outcome was the mortality rate at 28 days after randomization; secondary end points included the number of days without need for organ support and the occurrence of adverse events.

Results

A total of 1,679 patients were included; 858 were assigned to dopamine and 821 to norepinephrine. Most (1,044, 62%) of the patients had a diagnosis of septic shock.

No significant difference in mortality rates was noted at 28 days: 52.5% with dopamine vs 48.5% with norepinephrine (P = .10).

However, there were more arrhythmias in the patients treated with dopamine: 207 events (24.1%) vs 102 events (12.4%) (P < .001). The number of other adverse events such as renal failure, myocardial infarction, arterial occlusion, or skin necrosis was not different between the groups.

A subgroup analysis showed that dopamine was associated with more deaths at 28 days in patients with cardiogenic shock (P = .03) but not in patients with septic shock (P = .19) or with hypovolemic shock (P = .84).

Comments

The study was criticized because the patients may not have received adequate fluid resuscitation (the study considered adequate resuscitation to be equivalent to 1 L of crystalloids or 500 mL of colloids), as different degrees of volume depletion among patients make direct comparisons of vasopressor effects difficult.

Additionally, the study defined dopamine 20 μg/kg/minute as being equipotent with norepinephrine 0.19 μg/kg/minute. Comparisons of potency between drugs are difficult to establish, as there are no available data.

Nevertheless, this study further confirms previous findings suggesting that norepinephrine is not associated with more end-organ damage (such as renal failure or skin ischemia), and shows that dopamine may increase the number of adverse events, particularly in patients with cardiac disease.

We have seen significant growth in clinical research in critical care medicine in the last decade. Advances have been made in many important areas in this field; of these, advances in treating septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and also in supportive therapies for critically ill patients (eg, sedatives, insulin), have perhaps received the most attention.

Of note, several once-established therapies in these areas have failed the test of time, as the result of evidence from more-recent clinical trials. For example, recent studies have shown that a pulmonary arterial catheter does not improve outcomes in patients with ARDS. Similarly, what used to be “optimal” fluid management in patients with ARDS is no longer considered appropriate.

In this review, we summarize eight major studies in critical care medicine published in the last 5 years, studies that have contributed to changes in our practice in the intensive care unit (ICU).

FLUID MANAGEMENT IN ARDS

Key points

  • In patients with acute lung injury (ALI) and ARDS, fluid restriction is associated with better outcomes than a liberal fluid policy.
  • A pulmonary arterial catheter is not necessary and, compared with a central venous catheter, may result in more complications in patients with ALI and ARDS.

Background

Fluid management practices in patients with ARDS have been extremely variable. Two different approaches are commonly used: the liberal or “wet” approach to optimize tissue perfusion and the “dry” approach, which focuses on reducing lung edema. Given that most deaths attributed to ARDS result from extrapulmonary organ failure, aggressive fluid restriction has been the less popular approach.

Additionally, although earlier studies and meta-analyses suggested that the use of a pulmonary arterial catheter was not associated with better outcomes in critically ill patients,1 controversy remained regarding the value of a pulmonary arterial catheter compared with a central venous catheter in guiding fluid management in patients with ARDS, and data were insufficient to prove one strategy better than the other.

The Fluids and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT)

NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK; WIEDEMANN HP, WHEELER AP, BERNARD GR, ET AL. COMPARISON OF TWO FLUID-MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES IN ACUTE LUNG INJURY. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:2564–2575.

NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK; WHEELER AP, BERNARD GR, THOMPSON BT, ET AL. PULMONARY-ARTERY VERSUS CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER TO GUIDE TREATMENT OF ACUTE LUNG INJURY. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:2213–2224.

The Fluids and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) compared two fluid strategies2 and also the utility of a pulmonary arterial catheter vs a central venous catheter3 in patients with ALI or ARDS.

This two-by-two factorial trial randomized 1,000 patients to be treated according to either a conservative (fluid-restrictive or “dry”) or a liberal (“wet”) fluid management strategy for 7 days. Additionally, they were randomly assigned to receive either a central venous catheter or a pulmonary arterial catheter. The trial thus had four treatment groups:

  • Fluid-restricted and a central venous catheter, with a goal of keeping the central venous pressure below 4 mm Hg
  • Fluid-restricted and a pulmonary arterial catheter: fluids were restricted and diuretics were given to keep the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure below 8 mm Hg
  • Fluid-liberal and a central venous catheter: fluids were given to keep the central venous pressure between 10 and 14 mm Hg
  • Fluid-liberal and a pulmonary arterial catheter: fluids were given to keep the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure between 14 and 18 mm Hg.

The primary end point was the mortality rate at 60 days. Secondary end points included the number of ventilator-free days and organ-failure-free days and parameters of lung physiology. All patients were managed with a low-tidal-volume strategy.

The ‘dry’ strategy was better

The cumulative fluid balance was −136 mL ± 491 mL in the “dry” group and 6,992 mL ± 502 mL in the “wet” group, a difference of more than 7 L (P < .0001). Of note, before randomization, the patients were already fluid-positive, with a mean total fluid balance of +2,700 mL).2

At 60 days, no statistically significant difference in mortality rate was seen between the fluid-management groups (25.5% in the dry group vs 28.4% in the wet group (P = .30). Nevertheless, patients in the dry group had better oxygenation indices and lung injury scores (including lower plateau airway pressure), resulting in more ventilator-free days (14.6 ± 0.5 vs 12.1 ± 0.5; P = .0002) and ICU-free days (13.4 ± 0.4 vs 11.2 ± 0.4; P = .0003).2

Although those in the dry-strategy group had a slightly lower cardiac index and mean arterial pressure, they did not have a higher incidence of shock.

More importantly, the dry group did not have a higher rate of nonpulmonary organ failure. Serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen concentrations were slightly higher in this group, but this was not associated with a higher incidence of renal failure or the use of dialysis: 10% in the dry-strategy group vs 14% in the wet-strategy group; P = .0642).2

No advantage with a pulmonary arterial catheter

The mortality rate did not differ between the catheter groups. However, the patients who received a pulmonary arterial catheter stayed in the ICU 0.2 days longer and had twice as many nonfatal cardiac arrhythmias as those who received a central venous catheter.3

Comments

The liberal fluid-strategy group had fluid balances similar to those seen in previous National Institutes of Health ARDS Network trials in which fluid management was not controlled. This suggests that the liberal fluid strategy reflects usual clinical practice.

Although the goals used in this study (central venous pressure < 4 mm Hg or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure < 8 mm Hg) could be difficult to achieve in clinical practice, a conservative strategy of fluid management is preferred in patients with ALI or ARDS, given the benefits observed in this trial.

A pulmonary arterial catheter is not indicated to guide hemodynamic management of patients with ARDS.

 

 

CORTICOSTEROID USE IN ARDS

Key points

  • In selected patients with ARDS, the prolonged use of corticosteroids may result in better oxygenation and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation.
  • Late use of corticosteroids in patients with ARDS (> 14 days after diagnosis) is not indicated and may increase the risk of death.
  • The role of corticosteroids in early ARDS (< 7 days after diagnosis) remains controversial.

Background

Systemic corticosteroid therapy was commonly used in ARDS patients in the 1970s and 1980s. However, a single-center study published in the late 1980s showed that a corticosteroid in high doses (methylprednisolone 30 mg/kg) resulted in more complications and was not associated with a lower mortality rate.4 On the other hand, a small study that included only patients with persistent ARDS (defined as ARDS lasting for more than 7 days) subsequently showed that oxygenation was significantly better and that fewer patients died while in the hospital with the use of methylprednisolone 2 mg/kg for 32 days.5

In view of these divergent findings, the ARDS Network decided to perform a study to help understand the role of corticosteroids in ARDS.

The Late Steroid Rescue Study (LaSRS)

STEINBERG KP, HUDSON LD, GOODMAN RB, ET AL; NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK. EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF CORTICOSTEROIDS FOR PERSISTENT ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME. N ENGL J MED 2006; 354:1671–1684.

The Late Steroid Rescue Study (LaSRS),6 a double-blind, multicenter trial, randomly assigned 180 patients with persistent ARDS (defined as ongoing disease 7–28 days after its onset) to receive methylprednisolone or placebo for 21 days.

Methylprednisolone was given in an initial dose of 2 mg/kg of predicted body weight followed by a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 6 hours for 14 days and then a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 12 hours for 7 days, and then it was tapered over 2 to 4 days and discontinued. It could be discontinued if 21 days of treatment were completed or if the patient was able to breathe without assistance.

The primary end point was the mortality rate at 60 days. Secondary end points included the number of ventilator-free days, organ-failure-free days, and complications and the levels of biomarkers of inflammation.

No reduction in mortality rates with steroids

The mortality rates did not differ significantly in the corticosteroid group vs the placebo group at 60 days:

  • 29.2% with methylprednisolone (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.8–39.4)
  • 28.6% with placebo (95% CI 20.3–38.6, P = 1.0).

Mortality rates at 180 days were also similar between the groups:

  • 31.5% with methylprednisolone (95% CI 22.8–41.7)
  • 31.9% with placebo (95% CI 23.2–42.0, P = 1.0).

In patients randomized between 7 and 13 days after the onset of ARDS, the mortality rates were lower in the methylprednisolone group than in the placebo group but the differences were not statistically significant. The mortality rate in this subgroup was 27% vs 36% (P = .26) at 60 days and was 27% vs 39% (P = .14) at 180 days.

However, in patients randomized more than 14 days after the onset of ARDS, the mortality rate was significantly higher in the methylprednisolone group than in the placebo group at 60 days (35% vs 8%, P = .02) and at 180 days (44% vs 12%, P = .01).

Some benefit in secondary outcomes

At day 28, methylprednisolone was associated with:

  • More ventilator-free days (11.2 ± 9.4 vs 6.8 ± 8.5, P < .001)
  • More shock-free days (20.7 ± 8.9 vs 17.9 ± 10.2, P = .04)
  • More ICU-free days (8.9 ± 8.2 vs 6.7 ± 7.8, P = .02).

Similarly, pulmonary physiologic indices were better with methylprednisolone, specifically:

  • The ratio of Pao2 to the fraction of inspired oxygen at days 3, 4, and 14 (P < .05)
  • Plateau pressure at days 4, 5, and 7 (P < .05)
  • Static compliance at days 7 and 14 (P < .05).

In terms of side effects, methylprednisolone was associated with more events associated with myopathy or neuropathy (9 vs 0, P = .001), but there were no differences in the number of serious infections or in glycemic control.

Comments

Although other recent studies suggested that corticosteroid use may be associated with a reduction in mortality rates,7–9 LaSRS did not confirm this effect. Although the doses and length of therapy were similar in these studies, LaSRS was much larger and included patients from the ARDS Network.

Nevertheless, LaSRS was criticized because of strict exclusion criteria and poor enrollment (only 5% of eligible patients were included). Additionally, it was conducted over a period of time when some ICU practices varied significantly (eg, low vs high tidal volume ventilation, tight vs loose glucose control).

The role of corticosteroids in early ARDS (< 7 days after diagnosis) remains controversial at best. Table 1 summarizes recent studies that evaluated the use of corticosteroids in patients with ARDS.

INTERRUPTING SEDATION DURING MECHANICAL VENTILATION

Key points

  • Daily awakening of mechanically ventilated patients is safe.
  • Daily interruption of sedation in mechanically ventilated patients is associated with a shorter length of mechanical ventilation.

Background

Sedatives are a central component of critical care. Continuous infusions of narcotics, benzodiazepines, and anesthetic agents are frequently used to promote comfort in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

Despite its widespread use in the ICU, there is little evidence that such sedation improves outcomes. Observational and randomized trials10–12 have shown that patients who receive continuous infusions of sedatives need to be on mechanical ventilation longer than those who receive intermittent dosing. Additionally, an earlier randomized controlled trial13 showed that daily interruption of sedative drug infusions decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation by almost 50% and resulted in a reduction in the length of stay in the ICU.

Despite these findings, many ICU physicians remain skeptical of the value of daily interruption of sedative medications and question the safety of this practice.

The Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) trial

GIRARD TD, KRESS JP, FUCHS BD, ET AL. EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF A PAIRED SEDATION AND VENTILATOR WEANING PROTOCOL FOR MECHANICALLY VENTILATED PATIENTS IN INTENSIVE CARE (AWAKENING AND BREATHING CONTROLLED TRIAL): A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL. LANCET 2008; 371:126–134.

The Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) trial14 was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that included 336 patients who required at least 12 consecutive hours of mechanical ventilation. All patients had to be receiving patient-targeted sedation.

Those in the intervention group (n = 168) had their sedation interrupted every day, followed by a clinical assessment to determine whether they could be allowed to try breathing spontaneously. The control group (n = 168) also received a clinical assessment for a trial of spontaneous breathing, while their sedation was continued as usual.

In patients in the intervention group who failed the screening for a spontaneous breathing trial, the sedatives were resumed at half the previous dose. Criteria for failure on the spontaneous breathing trial included any of the following: anxiety, agitation, respiratory rate more than 35 breaths per minute for 5 minutes or longer, cardiac arrhythmia, oxygen saturation less than 88% for 5 minutes or longer, or two or more signs of respiratory distress, tachycardia, bradycardia, paradoxical breathing, accessory muscle use, diaphoresis, or marked dyspnea.

 

 

Interrupting sedation was superior

The combination of sedation interruption and a spontaneous breathing trial was superior to a spontaneous breathing trial alone. The mean number of ventilator-free days:

  • 14.7 ± 0.9 with sedation interruption
  • 11.6 ± 0.9 days with usual care (P = .02).

The median time to ICU discharge:

  • 9.1 days with sedation interruption (interquartile range 5.1 to 17.8)
  • 12.9 days with usual care (interquartile range 6.0 to 24.2, P = .01).

The mortality rate at 28 days:

  • 28% with sedation interruption
  • 35% with usual care (P = .21).

The mortality rate at 1 year:

  • 44% with sedation interruption
  • 58% with usual care (hazard ratio [HR] in the intervention group 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.92, P = .01).

Of note, patients in the intervention group had a higher rate of self-extubation (9.6% vs 3.6%, P = .03), but the rate of reintubation was similar between the groups (14% vs 13%, P = .47).

Comments

The addition of daily awakenings to spontaneous breathing trials results in a further reduction in the number of ICU days and increases the number of ventilator-free days.

Of note, the protocol allowed patients in the control group to undergo a spontaneous breathing trial while on sedatives (69% of the patients were receiving sedation at the time). Therefore, a bias effect in favor of the intervention group cannot be excluded. However, both groups had to meet criteria for readiness for spontaneous breathing.

The study demonstrates the safety of daily awakenings and confirms previous findings suggesting that a daily trial of spontaneous breathing results in better ICU outcomes.

GLUCOSE CONTROL IN THE ICU

Key points

  • Although earlier studies suggested that intensive insulin therapy might be beneficial in critically ill patients, new findings show that strict glucose control can lead to complications without improving outcomes.

Background

A previous study15 found that intensive insulin therapy to maintain a blood glucose level between 80 and 110 mg/dL (compared with 180–200 mg/dL) reduced the mortality rate in surgical critical care patients. The mortality rate in the ICU was 4.6% with intensive insulin therapy vs 8.0% with conventional therapy (P < .04), and the effect was more robust for patients who remained longer than 5 days in the ICU (10.6% vs 20.2%).

Importantly, however, hypoglycemia (defined as blood glucose ≤ 40 mg/dL) occurred in 39 patients in the intensive-treatment group vs 6 patients in the conventional-treatment group.

The NICE-SUGAR trial

NICE-SUGAR STUDY INVESTIGATORS; FINFER S, CHITTOCK DR, SU SY, ET AL. INTENSIVE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL GLUCOSE CONTROL IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS. N ENGL J MED 2009; 360:1283–1297.

The Normoglycemia in Intensive Care Evaluation-Survival Using Glucose Algorithm Regulation (NICE-SUGAR) trial16 randomized 6,104 patients in medical and surgical ICUs to receive either intensive glucose control (blood glucose 81–108 mg/dL) with insulin therapy or conventional glucose control (blood glucose < 180 mg/dL). In the conventional-control group, insulin was discontinued if the blood glucose level dropped below 144 mg/dL.

A higher mortality rate with intensive glucose control

As expected, the intensive-control group achieved lower blood glucose levels: 115 vs 144 mg/dL.

Nevertheless, intensive glucose control was associated with a higher incidence of severe hypoglycemia, defined as a blood glucose level lower than 40 mg/dL: 6.8% vs 0.5%.

More importantly, compared with conventional insulin therapy, intensive glucose control was associated with a higher 90-day mortality rate: 27.5% vs 24.9% (odds ratio 1.14, 95% CI 1.02–1.28). These findings were similar in the subgroup of surgical patients (24.4% vs 19.8%, odds ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.07–1.61).

Comments

Of note, the conventional-control group had more patients who discontinued the treatment protocol prematurely. Additionally, more patients in this group received corticosteroids.

These results widely differ from those of a previous study by van den Berghe et al,15 which showed that tight glycemic control is associated with a survival benefit. The differences in outcomes are probably largely related to different patient populations, as van den Berghe et al included patients who had undergone cardiac surgery, who were more likely to benefit from strict blood glucose control.

The VISEP trial

BRUNKHORST FM, ENGEL C, BLOOS F, ET AL; GERMAN COMPETENCE NETWORK SEPSIS (SEPNET). INTENSIVE INSULIN THERAPY AND PENTASTARCH RESUSCITATION IN SEVERE SEPSIS. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:125–139.

The Volume Substitution and Insulin Therapy in Severe Sepsis (VISEP) trial was a multicenter study designed to compare intensive insulin therapy (target blood glucose level 80–110 mg/dL) and conventional glucose control (target blood glucose level 180–200 mg/dL) in patients with severe sepsis.17 It also compared two fluids for volume resuscitation: 10% pentastarch vs modified Ringer's lactate. It included both medical and surgical patients.

Trial halted early for safety reasons

The mean morning blood glucose level was significantly lower in the intensive insulin group (112 vs 151 mg/dL).

Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤ 40 mg/dL) was more common in the group that received intensive insulin therapy (17% vs 4.1%, P < .001).

Mortality rates at 28 days did not differ significantly: 24.7% with intensive control vs 26.0% with conventional glucose control. The mortality rate at 90 days was 39.7% in the intensive therapy group and 35.4% in the conventional therapy group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

The intensive insulin arm of the trial was stopped after 488 patients were enrolled because of a higher rate of hypoglycemia (12.1% vs 2.1%) and of serious adverse events (10.9% vs 5.2%).

Additionally, the fluid resuscitation arm of the study was suspended at the first planned interim analysis because of a higher risk of organ failure in the 10% pentastarch group.

 

 

CORTICOSTEROID THERAPY IN SEPTIC SHOCK

Key points

  • Corticosteroid therapy improves hemodynamic outcomes in patients with severe septic shock.
  • Although meta-analyses suggest the mortality rate is lower with corticosteroid therapy, there is not enough evidence from randomized controlled trials to prove that the use of low-dose corticosteroids lowers the mortality rate in patients with septic shock.
  • The corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test should not be used to determine the need for corticosteroids in patients with septic shock.

Background

A previous multicenter study,18 performed in France, found that the use of corticosteroids in patients with septic shock resulted in lower rates of death at 28 days, in the ICU, and in the hospital and a shorter time to vasopressor withdrawal. Nevertheless, the beneficial effects were not observed in patients with adequate adrenal reserve (based on an ACTH stimulation test).

This study was criticized because of a high mortality rate in the placebo group.

The CORTICUS study

SPRUNG CL, ANNANE D, KEH D, ET AL; CORTICUS STUDY GROUP. HYDROCORTISONE THERAPY FOR PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:111–124.

The Corticosteroid Therapy of Septic Shock (CORTICUS) study was a multicenter trial that randomly assigned 499 patients with septic shock to receive hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenously every 6 hours for 5 days, followed by a 6-day taper period) or placebo.19

Patients were eligible to be enrolled within 72 hours of onset of shock. Similar to previous studies, the CORTICUS trial classified patients on the basis of an ACTH stimulation test as having inadequate adrenal reserve (a cortisol increase of ≤ 9 μg/dL) or adequate adrenal reserve (a cortisol increase of > 9 μg/dL).

Faster reversal of shock with steroids

At baseline, the mean Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II (SAPS II) was 49 (the range of possible scores is 0 to 163; the higher the score the worse the organ dysfunction).

Hydrocortisone use resulted in a shorter duration of vasopressor use and a faster reversal of shock (3.3 days vs 5.8 days, P < .001).

This association was the same when patients were divided according to response to ACTH stimulation test. Time to reversal of shock in responders:

  • 2.8 days with hydrocortisone
  • 5.8 days with placebo (P < .001).

Time to reversal of shock in nonresponders:

  • 3.9 days with hydrocortisone
  • 6.0 days with placebo (P = .06).

Nevertheless, the treatment did not reduce the mortality rate at 28 days overall (34.3% vs 31.5% P = .51), or in the subgroups based on response to ACTH, or at any other time point. A post hoc analysis suggested that patients who had a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg within 30 minutes of enrollment had a greater benefit in terms of mortality rate, but the effect was not statistically significant: the absolute difference was −11.2% (P = 0.28). Similarly, post hoc analyses also revealed a higher rate of death at 28 days in patients who received etomidate (Amidate) before randomization in both groups (P = .03).

Importantly, patients who received corticosteroids had a higher incidence of superinfections, including new episodes of sepsis or septic shock, with a combined odds ratio of 1.37 (95% CI 1.05–1.79).

Length of stay in the hospital or in the ICU was similar in patients who received corticosteroids and in those who received placebo. The ICU length of stay was 19 ± 31 days with hydrocortisone vs 18 ± 17 days with placebo (P = .51).

Comments

The CORTICUS trial showed that low-dose corticosteroid therapy results in faster reversal of shock in patients with severe septic shock. The hemodynamic benefits are present in all patients regardless of response to the ACTH stimulation test.

Nevertheless, contrary to previous findings,18 corticosteroid use was not associated with an improvement in mortality rates. Important differences exist between these two studies:

  • The mortality rates in the placebo groups were significantly different (> 50% in the French study vs 30% in CORTICUS).
  • The SAPS II scores were different in these two trials (55 vs 49), suggesting a greater severity of illness in the French study.
  • The criteria for enrollment were different: the French study included patients who had a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mm Hg for more than 1 hour despite fluid administration and vasopressor use, whereas the CORTICUS trial included patients who had a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mm Hg for more than 1 hour despite fluid administration or vasopressor use.
  • The time of enrollment was different: patients were enrolled much faster in the French study (within 8 hours) than in the CORTICUS trial (within 72 hours).

A recent meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials (including the CORTICUS study), found that, compared with those who received placebo, patients who received corticosteroids had a small reduction in the 28-day mortality rate (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71–1.00, P < .05).20 Of note, this meta-analysis has been criticized for possible publication bias and also for a large degree of heterogeneity in its results.21

 

 

VASOPRESSOR THERAPY IN SHOCK

Key points

  • Vasopressin use in patients with severe septic shock is not associated with an improvement in mortality rates.
  • Vasopressin should not be used as a first-line agent in patients with septic shock.
  • Norepinephrine should be considered a first-line agent in patients with shock.
  • Compared with norepinephrine, the use of dopamine in patients with shock is associated with similar mortality rates, although its use may result in a greater number of cardiac adverse events.

Background

Vasopressin gained popularity in critical care in the last 10 years because several small studies showed that adding it improves hemodynamics and results in a reduction in the doses of catecholamines in patients with refractory septic shock.22 Furthermore, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommended the use of vasopressin in patients who have refractory shock despite fluid resuscitation and the use of other “conventional” vasopressors.23

Despite these positive findings, it remained unknown if the use of vasopressin increases the survival rate in patients with septic shock.

The Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST)

RUSSELL JA, WALLEY KR, SINGER J, ET AL; VASST INVESTIGATORS. VASOPRESSIN VERSUS NOREPINEPHRINE INFUSION IN PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2008; 358:877–887.

The Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST)24 was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial that included 778 patients with refractory septic shock. Refractory shock was defined as the lack of a response to a normal saline fluid bolus of 500 mL or the need for vasopressors (norepinephrine in doses of at least 5 μg/minute or its equivalent for 6 hours or more in the 24 hours before randomization).

Two subgroups were identified: those with severe septic shock (requiring norepinephrine in doses of 15 μg/minute or higher) and those with less-severe septic shock (needing norepinephrine in doses of 5 to 14 μg/minute). Patients with unstable coronary artery disease (acute myocardial infarction, angina) and severe congestive heart failure were excluded.

Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of vasopressin (0.01–0.03 U/minute) or norepinephrine (5–15 mg/minute) in addition to open-labeled vasopressors (excluding vasopressin). The primary outcome was the all-cause mortality rate at 28 days.

Results

At 28 days, fewer patients had died in the vasopressin group than in the norepinephrine group (35.4% vs 39.3%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .26). The trend was the same at 90 days (mortality rate 43.9% vs 49.6%, P = .11).

Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with less-severe septic shock, those who received vasopressin had a lower mortality rate at 28 days (26.5% vs 35.7%, P = .05; relative risk 0.74; 95% CI 0.55–1.01) and at 90 days (35.8% vs 46.1%, P = .04; relative risk 0.78, 95% CI 0.61–0.99).

There were no statistically significant differences in any of the other secondary outcomes or in serious adverse events.

Comments

The study has been criticized for several reasons:

  • The mean arterial blood pressure at baseline before initiation of vasopressin was 72 mm Hg (and some argue that vasopressin was therefore not needed by the time it was started).
  • The time from screening to infusion of the study drug was very long (12 hours).
  • The observed mortality rate was lower than expected (37%).

Despite these considerations, the VASST trial showed that vasopressin is not associated with an increased number of adverse events in patients without active cardiovascular disease. The possible benefit in terms of the mortality rate in the subgroup of patients with less-severe septic shock requires further investigation.

Is dopamine equivalent to norepinephrine?

Previously, the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) study, a multicenter, observational cohort study, found that dopamine use was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate in the ICU compared with no dopamine.25 This finding had not been reproduced, as few well-designed studies had compared the effects of dopamine and norepinephrine.

The SOAP II study

DE BACKER D, BISTON P, DEVRIENDT J, ET AL; SOAP II INVESTIGATORS.. COMPARISON OF DOPAMINE AND NOREPINEPHRINE IN THE TREATMENT OF SHOCK. N ENGL J MED 2010; 362:779–789.

The SOAP II study,26 a multicenter, randomized trial, compared dopamine vs norepinephrine as first-line vasopressor therapy. In patients with refractory shock despite use of dopamine 20 μg/kg/minute or norepinephrine 0.19 μg/kg/minute, open-label norepinephrine, epinephrine, or vasopressin was added.

The primary outcome was the mortality rate at 28 days after randomization; secondary end points included the number of days without need for organ support and the occurrence of adverse events.

Results

A total of 1,679 patients were included; 858 were assigned to dopamine and 821 to norepinephrine. Most (1,044, 62%) of the patients had a diagnosis of septic shock.

No significant difference in mortality rates was noted at 28 days: 52.5% with dopamine vs 48.5% with norepinephrine (P = .10).

However, there were more arrhythmias in the patients treated with dopamine: 207 events (24.1%) vs 102 events (12.4%) (P < .001). The number of other adverse events such as renal failure, myocardial infarction, arterial occlusion, or skin necrosis was not different between the groups.

A subgroup analysis showed that dopamine was associated with more deaths at 28 days in patients with cardiogenic shock (P = .03) but not in patients with septic shock (P = .19) or with hypovolemic shock (P = .84).

Comments

The study was criticized because the patients may not have received adequate fluid resuscitation (the study considered adequate resuscitation to be equivalent to 1 L of crystalloids or 500 mL of colloids), as different degrees of volume depletion among patients make direct comparisons of vasopressor effects difficult.

Additionally, the study defined dopamine 20 μg/kg/minute as being equipotent with norepinephrine 0.19 μg/kg/minute. Comparisons of potency between drugs are difficult to establish, as there are no available data.

Nevertheless, this study further confirms previous findings suggesting that norepinephrine is not associated with more end-organ damage (such as renal failure or skin ischemia), and shows that dopamine may increase the number of adverse events, particularly in patients with cardiac disease.

References
  1. Shah MR, Hasselblad V, Stevenson LW, et al. Impact of the pulmonary artery catheter in critically ill patients: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA 2005; 294:16641670.
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network; Wiedemann HP, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, et al. Comparison of two fluid-management strategies in acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:25642575.
  3. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network; Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, Thompson BT, et al. Pulmonary-artery versus central venous catheter to guide treatment of acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:22132224.
  4. Bernard GR, Luce JM, Sprung CL, et al. High-dose corticosteroids in patients with the adult respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 1987; 317:15651570.
  5. Meduri GU, Headley AS, Golden E, et al. Effect of prolonged methylprednisolone therapy in unresolving acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1998; 280:159165.
  6. Steinberg KP, Hudson LD, Goodman RB, et al; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network. Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids for persistent acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:16711684.
  7. Meduri GU, Golden E, Freire AX, et al. Methylprednisolone infusion in early severe ARDS: results of a randomized controlled trial. Chest 2007; 131:954963.
  8. Meduri GU, Golden E, Freire AX, et al. Methylprednisolone infusion in early severe ARDS results of a randomized controlled trial. 2007. Chest 2009; 136(suppl 5):e30.
  9. Annane D, Sébille V, Bellissant E; Ger-Inf-05 Study Group. Effect of low doses of corticosteroids in septic shock patients with or without early acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:2230.
  10. Kollef MH, Levy NT, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G. The use of continuous i.v. sedation is associated with prolongation of mechanical ventilation. Chest 1998; 114:541548.
  11. Carson SS, Kress JP, Rodgers JE, et al. A randomized trial of intermittent lorazepam versus propofol with daily interruption in mechanically ventilated patients. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:13261332.
  12. Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, et al. Effect of a nursing-implemented sedation protocol on the duration of mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:26092615.
  13. Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O’Connor MF, Hall JB. Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:14711477.
  14. Girard TD, Kress JP, Fuchs BD, et al. Efficacy and safety of a paired sedation and ventilator weaning protocol for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care (Awakening and Breathing Controlled trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008; 371:126134.
  15. van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in the critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:13591367.
  16. NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators; Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:12831297.
  17. Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, et al; German Competence Network Sepsis (SepNet). Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:125139.
  18. Annane D, Sébille V, Charpentier C, et al. Effect of treatment with low doses of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone on mortality in patients with septic shock. JAMA 2002; 288:862871.
  19. Sprung CL, Annane D, Keh D, et al; CORTICUS Study Group. Hydrocortisone therapy for patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:111124.
  20. Annane D, Bellissant E, Bollaert PE, et al. Corticosteroids in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock in adults: a systematic review. JAMA 2009; 301:23622375.
  21. Minneci PC, Deans KJ, Natanson C. Corticosteroid therapy for severe sepsis and septic shock [letter]. JAMA 2009; 302:164431644.
  22. Kampmeier TG, Rehberg S, Westphal M, Lange M. Vasopressin in sepsis and septic shock. Minerva Anestesiol 2010; 76:844850.
  23. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, et al; International Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med 2008; 36:296327.
  24. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, et al; VASST Investigators. Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:877887.
  25. Sakr Y, Reinhart K, Vincent JL, et al. Does dopamine administration in shock influence outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:589597.
  26. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al; SOAP II Investigators. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:779789.
References
  1. Shah MR, Hasselblad V, Stevenson LW, et al. Impact of the pulmonary artery catheter in critically ill patients: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA 2005; 294:16641670.
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network; Wiedemann HP, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, et al. Comparison of two fluid-management strategies in acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:25642575.
  3. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network; Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, Thompson BT, et al. Pulmonary-artery versus central venous catheter to guide treatment of acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:22132224.
  4. Bernard GR, Luce JM, Sprung CL, et al. High-dose corticosteroids in patients with the adult respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 1987; 317:15651570.
  5. Meduri GU, Headley AS, Golden E, et al. Effect of prolonged methylprednisolone therapy in unresolving acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1998; 280:159165.
  6. Steinberg KP, Hudson LD, Goodman RB, et al; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network. Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids for persistent acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:16711684.
  7. Meduri GU, Golden E, Freire AX, et al. Methylprednisolone infusion in early severe ARDS: results of a randomized controlled trial. Chest 2007; 131:954963.
  8. Meduri GU, Golden E, Freire AX, et al. Methylprednisolone infusion in early severe ARDS results of a randomized controlled trial. 2007. Chest 2009; 136(suppl 5):e30.
  9. Annane D, Sébille V, Bellissant E; Ger-Inf-05 Study Group. Effect of low doses of corticosteroids in septic shock patients with or without early acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:2230.
  10. Kollef MH, Levy NT, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G. The use of continuous i.v. sedation is associated with prolongation of mechanical ventilation. Chest 1998; 114:541548.
  11. Carson SS, Kress JP, Rodgers JE, et al. A randomized trial of intermittent lorazepam versus propofol with daily interruption in mechanically ventilated patients. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:13261332.
  12. Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, et al. Effect of a nursing-implemented sedation protocol on the duration of mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:26092615.
  13. Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O’Connor MF, Hall JB. Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:14711477.
  14. Girard TD, Kress JP, Fuchs BD, et al. Efficacy and safety of a paired sedation and ventilator weaning protocol for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care (Awakening and Breathing Controlled trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008; 371:126134.
  15. van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in the critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:13591367.
  16. NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators; Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:12831297.
  17. Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, et al; German Competence Network Sepsis (SepNet). Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:125139.
  18. Annane D, Sébille V, Charpentier C, et al. Effect of treatment with low doses of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone on mortality in patients with septic shock. JAMA 2002; 288:862871.
  19. Sprung CL, Annane D, Keh D, et al; CORTICUS Study Group. Hydrocortisone therapy for patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:111124.
  20. Annane D, Bellissant E, Bollaert PE, et al. Corticosteroids in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock in adults: a systematic review. JAMA 2009; 301:23622375.
  21. Minneci PC, Deans KJ, Natanson C. Corticosteroid therapy for severe sepsis and septic shock [letter]. JAMA 2009; 302:164431644.
  22. Kampmeier TG, Rehberg S, Westphal M, Lange M. Vasopressin in sepsis and septic shock. Minerva Anestesiol 2010; 76:844850.
  23. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, et al; International Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med 2008; 36:296327.
  24. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, et al; VASST Investigators. Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:877887.
  25. Sakr Y, Reinhart K, Vincent JL, et al. Does dopamine administration in shock influence outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:589597.
  26. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al; SOAP II Investigators. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:779789.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
665-674
Page Number
665-674
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Update in intensive care medicine: Studies that challenged our practice in the last 5 years
Display Headline
Update in intensive care medicine: Studies that challenged our practice in the last 5 years
Sections
Inside the Article

KEY POINTS

  • In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), fluid restriction is associated with better outcomes. A pulmonary arterial catheter is not indicated in the routine management of ARDS. Corticosteroid use can result in improved oxygenation but may be associated with worse outcomes if treatment is started late, ie, more than 14 days after the onset of the disease.
  • Intensive insulin therapy is associated with hypoglycemia and may be associated with complications in medical patients.
  • In patients with septic shock, corticosteroid therapy is associated with faster shock reversal, but its effects on mortality rates remain controversial. Vasopressin improves hemodynamic variables but is not associated with a lower mortality rate.
  • Daily interruption of sedation and early awakening of mechanically ventilated patients result in better outcomes.
  • Compared with norepinephrine, dopamine is associated with more cardiac adverse events in patients with shock.
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Dabigatran: Will it change clinical practice?

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/10/2017 - 08:17
Display Headline
Dabigatran: Will it change clinical practice?

Dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa) is a new oral anticoagulant that has distinct advantages over warfarin (Coumadin) in terms of its ease of administration, efficacy, and safety.

In the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY trial),1 in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, dabigatran 110 mg twice a day was found to be as good as warfarin in preventing systemic embolization and stroke (the primary outcome of the study), and at 150 mg twice a day it was superior.1 It has also shown efficacy in treating acute deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and in preventing these complications in orthopedic surgical patients.2–4

Dabigatran has been approved in 75 countries. It carries the trade name Pradaxa in Europe and the United States and Pradax in Canada. In October 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee endorsed two twice-daily doses (75 mg and 150 mg) of dabigatran for the prevention of systemic embolization and stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

However, dabigatran is relatively expensive, and its current high cost might be a barrier to its wider use.

MANY PATIENTS NEED ANTICOAGULATION

Anticoagulation plays a vital role in the primary and secondary prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and of pulmonary embolism in patients with venous thromboembolism. It is also used during cardiothoracic and vascular surgery, endovascular procedures, and dialysis and in patients with mechanical heart valves and hypercoagulable conditions.

Atrial fibrillation affects 3.03 million people in the United States (2005 figures), and this number is predicted to be as high as 7.56 million by 2050.5 More than 10% of people over the age of 80 years have it, and the lifetime risk of developing it is approximately 25%.6,7 Its most serious complication is ischemic stroke (the risk of which increases with age) and systemic embolization.5,8

Until the recent introduction of dabigatran, the only oral anticoagulant available in the United States for treating patients with atrial fibrillation was warfarin. Although warfarin has a number of disadvantages (see below), it is actually very effective for preventing ischemic stroke, reducing the incidence by as much as 65%.9,10

Venous thromboembolism is the third most common cardiovascular disorder after myocardial infarction and stroke.11 Although its exact incidence is unknown, nearly 1 million cases of it (incident or recurrent, fatal and nonfatal events) occur in the United States each year.12 Many patients with venous thromboembolism need oral anticoagulation long-term, and currently warfarin remains the only option for them as well.

NEEDED: A BETTER ANTICOAGULANT

Warfarin has been the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant in the United States for more than 60 years. As of 2004, more than 30 million outpatient prescriptions for it were filled annually in this country alone.13 However, warfarin has several important limitations.

Warfarin has a narrow therapeutic index. Patients taking it require monitoring of their international normalized ratio (INR) and frequent dose adjustments, and this is time-consuming and inconvenient. The target INR for patients with venous thromboembolism and atrial fibrillation is 2.0 to 3.0, whereas patients with a mechanical heart valve need a higher INR (2.5 to 3.5). If the INR is below these ranges, warfarin is less effective, with a risk of new thrombosis. On the other hand, if the INR is too high, there is a risk of bleeding.14 In fact, the most important side effect of warfarin is the risk of major and minor bleeding.13 However, even in well-designed clinical trials in which patients are closely managed, only 55% to 60% of patients regularly achieve their therapeutic target INR.1,2,14,15

Warfarin also interacts with many drugs and with some foods. Compliance is difficult. It has a slow onset of action. Genetic variations require dose adjustments. When switching from a parenteral anticoagulant, overlapping is required. Skin necrosis is a possible side effect. And warfarin is teratogenic.

Despite these limitations, the American College of Chest Physicians endorses warfarin to prevent or treat venous thromboembolism, and to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.16

Recently, a number of new oral and parenteral anticoagulants have been developed (Table 1) with the aim of overcoming some of the drawbacks of warfarin and the other currently available agents, and to improve the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders.

DABIGATRAN, A THROMBIN INHIBITOR

Dabigatran, developed by Boehringer Ingelheim, is a potent, competitive, and reversible inhibitor of both free and clot-bound thrombin, inhibiting both thrombin activity and generation (Table 2).17,18

A prodrug, dabigatran is rapidly absorbed and converted to its active form. Its plasma concentration reaches a peak 1.5 to 3 hours after an oral dose, and it has an elimination half-life of 12 to 14 hours. About 80% of its excretion is by the kidneys and the remaining 20% is through bile.

Dabigatran is not metabolized by cytochrome P450 isoenzymes, and therefore it has few major interactions with other drugs. An exception is rifampin, a P-glycoprotein inducer that blocks dabigatran’s absorption in the gut, so this combination should be avoided. Another is quinidine, a strong P-glycoprotein inhibitor that is contraindicated for use with dabigatran. Also, amiodarone (Cordarone), another P-glycoprotein inhibitor, increases blood levels of dabigatran, and therefore a lower dose of dabigatran is recommended if these drugs are given together.18–20

 

 

DOES DABIGATRAN NEED MONITORING? CAN IT EVEN BE MONITORED?

Dabigatran has a predictable pharmacodynamic effect, and current data indicate it does not need regular monitoring.18–20 However, one may need to be able to measure the drug’s activity in certain situations, such as suspected overdose, bleeding, need for emergency surgery, impaired renal function, pregnancy, and obesity, and in children.20

Dabigatran has little effect on the prothrombin time or the INR, even at therapeutic concentrations.19 Further, its effect on the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) is neither linear nor dose-dependent, and the aPTT reaches a plateau and becomes less sensitive at very high concentrations. Therefore, the aPTT does not appear to be an appropriate test to monitor dabigatran’s therapeutic anticoagulant effect, although it does provide a qualitative indication of anticoagulant activity.18,19

The thrombin time is a very sensitive method for determining if dabigatran is present, but the test lacks standardization; the ecarin clotting time provides better evidence of the dose but is not readily available at most institutions.18,19,21

EVALUATED IN CLINICAL TRIALS

Dabigatran has been evaluated in a number of trials for its ability to prevent ischemic stroke and systemic embolization in patients with atrial fibrillation and to prevent and treat venous thromboembolism in surgical orthopedic patients, and in patients with acute coronary syndrome (Table 3).1–4,22–25

DABIGATRAN IS EXPENSIVE BUT MAY BE COST-EFFECTIVE

The estimated price of dabigatran 150 mg twice a day in the United States is about $6.75 to $8.00 per day.26,27

Warfarin, in contrast, costs as little as $50 per year.28 However, this low price does not include the cost of monitoring the INR (office visits and laboratory testing), and these combined expenses are much higher than the price of the warfarin itself.29 In addition, warfarin requires time-consuming management when bridging to a parenteral anticoagulant (for reversal of its anticoagulant action) before routine health maintenance procedures such as dental work and colonoscopy and interventional procedures and surgery. Any bleeding complication will also add to its cost and will be associated with a decrease in the patient’s perceived health and quality of life, but this is true for both drugs.30

In today’s health care environment, controlling costs is a universal priority, but it may be unfair to compare the cost of dabigatran with that of warfarin alone. The expense and morbidity associated with stroke and intracranial bleeding are high, and if patients on dabigatran have fewer strokes (as seen in the RE-LY trial with dabigatran 150 mg twice a day) and no added expense of monitoring, then dabigatran may be cost-effective.

Freeman et al31 analyzed the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran, using an estimated cost of $13.70 per day and data from the RE-LY trial. They concluded that dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin in preventing ischemic stroke in patients considered at higher risk for ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage, ie, those with a CHADS2 score of 1 or higher or equivalent. (The CHADS2 score is calculated as 1 point each for congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 or older, and diabetes mellitus; 2 points for prior stroke or transient ischemic attack.)

As more new-generation oral anticoagulants become available (see below), the price of dabigatran will undoubtedly decrease. Until then, warfarin will remain a cost-effective and cost-saving drug that cannot yet be considered obsolete.

WHO SHOULD RECEIVE DABIGATRAN?

The ideal patient for dabigatran treatment is not yet defined. The decision to convert a patient’s treatment from warfarin to dabigatran will likely depend on several factors, including the patient’s response to warfarin and the physician’s comfort with this new drug.

Many patients do extremely well with warfarin, requiring infrequent monitoring to maintain a therapeutic INR and having no bleeding complications. For them, it would be more practical to continue warfarin. Another reason for staying with warfarin would be if twice-a-day dosing would pose a problem.

Dabigatran would be a reasonable choice for a patient whose INR is erratic, who requires more frequent monitoring, for whom cost is not an issue, and for whom there is concern about dietary or drug interactions.

Another consideration is whether the patient has access to a health care facility for warfarin monitoring: this is difficult for those who cannot drive, who depend on others for transportation, and who live in rural areas.

Additionally, dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin for a patient with a high CHADS2 score who is considered at a higher risk for stroke.31

In all cases, the option should be considered only after an open discussion with the patient about the risks and benefits of this new drug.

WHO SHOULD NOT RECEIVE IT?

Dabigatran is a twice-daily drug with a short half-life. No patient with a history of poor compliance will be a good candidate for dabigatran. Since there are no practical laboratory tests for monitoring compliance, one will have to reinforce at every visit the importance of taking this medication according to instructions.

Patients with underlying kidney disease will need close monitoring of their creatinine clearance, with dose adjustment if renal function deteriorates.

Additionally, one should use caution when prescribing dabigatran to obese patients, pregnant women, or children until more is known about its use in these populations.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DABIGATRAN

In addition to its pharmacologic advantages, dabigatran demonstrated two other major advantages over warfarin in the RE-LY trial in patients with atrial fibrillation (Table 4). First, the rate of intracranial bleeding, a major devastating complication of warfarin, was 60% lower with dabigatran 150 mg twice a day than with warfarin—and lower still with dabigatran 110 mg twice a day.1 Second, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 34% lower in the group that got dabigatran 150 mg twice a day than in the group that got warfarin.

A reason may be that patients with atrial fibrillation and poor INR control have higher rates of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding.14 In most clinical trials, only 55% to 60% of patients achieve a therapeutic INR on warfarin, leaving them at risk of thrombosis or, conversely, bleeding.1,2,15,32 Dabigatran has predictable pharmacokinetics, and its twice-daily dosing allows for less variability in its anticoagulant effect, making it more consistently therapeutic with less potential for bleeding or thrombosis.1

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society included dabigatran in its 2010 guidelines on atrial fibrillation, recommending it or warfarin.33 The American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and the Heart Rhythm Society now give dabigatran a class I B recommendation (benefit greater than risk, but limited populations studied) in secondary stroke prevention.34

On the other hand, major concerns are the lack of an antidote for dabigatran and a lack of experience in treating bleeding complications. Since dabigatran is not monitored, physicians may be uncertain if we are overdosing or undertreating. As we gain experience, we will learn how to treat bleeding complications. Until then, it will be important to anticipate this problem and to develop an algorithm based on the best available evidence in managing this complication.

Although the overall rates of bleeding in the RE-LY trial were lower with dabigatran than with warfarin, there were more gastrointestinal bleeding events with the 150-mg dose of dabigatran, which was not readily explained.

Further, the rate of dyspepsia was almost twice as high with dabigatran than with warfarin, regardless of the dose of dabigatran. There were also more dropouts in the 2nd year of follow-up in the dabigatran groups, with gastrointestinal intolerance being one of the major reasons. Therefore, dyspepsia may cause intolerance and noncompliance.1

Dabigatran must be taken twice a day and has a relatively short half-life. For a noncompliant patient, missing one or two doses will cause a reversal of its anticoagulation effect, leaving the patient susceptible to thrombosis. In comparison, warfarin has a longer half-life and is taken once a day, so missing a dose is less likely to result in a similar reversal of its anticoagulant effect.

 

 

SPECIAL CONDITIONS

Switching from other anticoagulants to dabigatran

When making the transition from a subcutaneously administered anticoagulant, ie, a low-molecular-weight heparin or the anti-Xa inhibitor fondaparinux (Arixtra), dabigatran should be started 0 to 2 hours before the next subcutaneous dose of the parenteral anticoagulant was to be given.21,35

When switching from unfractionated heparin given by continuous intravenous infusion, the first dose of dabigatran should be given at the time the infusion is stopped.

When switching from warfarin, dabigatran should be started once the patient’s INR is less than 2.0.

Switching from dabigatran to a parenteral anticoagulant

When switching from dabigatran back to a parenteral anticoagulant, allow 12 to 24 hours after the last dabigatran dose before starting the parenteral agent.21,35

Elective surgery or invasive procedures

The manufacturer recommends stopping dabigatran 1 to 2 days before elective surgery for patients who have normal renal function and a low risk of bleeding, or 3 to 5 days before surgery for patients who have a creatinine clearance of 50 mL/min or less. Before major surgery or placement of a spinal or epidural catheter, the manufacturer recommends that dabigatran be held even longer.35

If emergency surgery is needed

If emergency surgery is needed, the clinician must use his or her judgment as to the risks of bleeding vs those of postponing the surgery.21,35

Overdose or bleeding

No antidote for dabigatran is currently available. It has a short half-life (12–14 hours), and the treatment for overdose or bleeding is to discontinue it immediately, maintain adequate diuresis, and transfuse fresh-frozen plasma or red blood cells as indicated.

The role of activated charcoal given orally to reduce absorption is under evaluation, but the charcoal must be given within 1 to 2 hours after the overdose is taken.21

Dabigatran does not bind very much to plasma proteins and hence is dialyzable—an approach that may be necessary in cases of persistent or life-threatening bleeding.

Recombinant activated factor VII or prothrombin complex concentrates may be additional options in cases of severe bleeding.18,21

TOPICS OF FUTURE RESEARCH

A limitation of the dabigatran trials was that they did not enroll patients who had renal or liver impairment, cancer, or other comorbidities; pregnant women; or children. Other topics of future research include its use in patients weighing less than 48 kg or more than 110 kg, its efficacy in patients with thrombophilia, in patients with mechanical heart valves, and in long-term follow-up and the use of thrombolytics in patients with acute stroke who are on dabigatran.

WILL DABIGATRAN CHANGE CLINICAL PRACTICE?

Despite some of the challenges listed above, we believe that dabigatran is likely to change medical practice in patients requiring anticoagulation.

Dabigatran’s biggest use will most likely be in patients with atrial fibrillation, mainly because this is the largest group of people receiving anticoagulation. In addition, the incidence of atrial fibrillation rises with age, the US population is living longer, and patients generally require life-long anticoagulation once this condition develops.

Dabigatran may be approved for additional indications in the near future. It has already shown efficacy in primary and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism. Other important areas to be studied include its use in patients with mechanical heart valves and thrombophilia.

Whether dabigatran will be a worthy substitute for the parenteral anticoagulants (heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, or factor Xa inhibitors) is not yet known, but it will have an enormous impact on anticoagulation management if proved efficacious.

If dabigatran becomes a major substitute for warfarin, it will affect the anticoagulation clinics, with their well-trained staff, that are currently monitoring millions of patients in the United States. These clinics would no longer be needed, and laboratory and technical costs could be saved. A downside is that patients on dabigatran will not be as closely supervised and reminded to take their medication as patients on warfarin are now at these clinics. Instead, they will likely be supervised by their own physician (or assistants), who will need to become familiar with this anticoagulant. This may affect compliance with dabigatran.

OTHER NEW ORAL ANTICOAGULANTS ARE ON THE WAY

Other oral anticoagulants, including rivaroxaban (Xarelto) and apixaban (Eliquis), have been under study and show promise in preventing both thrombotic stroke and venous thromboembolism. They will likely compete with dabigatran once they are approved.

Rivaroxaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, is being investigated for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. It has also been shown to be not inferior to (and to be less expensive than) enoxaparin in treating and preventing venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.32,36,37 Rivaroxaban has recently been approved by the FDA for this indication.

Apixaban, another direct factor Xa inhibitor, is also being studied for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. To date, there are no head-to-head trials comparing dabigatran with either of these new oral anticoagulants.

References
  1. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:11391151.
  2. Schulman S, Kearon C, Kakkar AK, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:23422352.
  3. RE-MOBILIZE Writing Committee; Ginsberg JS, Davidson BL, Comp PC, et al. Oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate vs North American enoxaparin regimen for prevention of venous thromboembolism after knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24:19.
  4. Wolowacz SE, Roskell NS, Plumb JM, Caprini JA, Eriksson BI. Efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee arthroplasty. A meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101:7785.
  5. Naccarelli GV, Varker H, Lin J, Schulman KL. Increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation and flutter in the United States. Am J Cardiol 2009; 104:15341539.
  6. Krahn AD, Manfreda J, Tate RB, Mathewson FA, Cuddy TE. The natural history of atrial fibrillation: incidence, risk factors, and prognosis in the Manitoba follow-up study. Am J Med 1995; 98:476484.
  7. Lloyd-Jones DM, Wang TJ, Leip EP, et al. Lifetime risk for development of atrial fibrillation: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2004; 110:10421046.
  8. Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham study. Stroke 1991; 22:983988.
  9. Go AS, Hylek EM, Chang Y, et al. Anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how well do randomized trials translate into clinical practice? JAMA 2003; 290:26852692.
  10. Singer DE, Chang Y, Fang MC, et al. The net clinical benefit of warfarin anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:297305.
  11. Goldhaber SZ. Pulmonary embolism thrombolysis: a clarion call for international collaboration. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19:246247.
  12. Heit JA. The epidemiology of venous thromboembolism in the community. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2008; 28:370372.
  13. Wysowski DK, Nourjah P, Swartz L. Bleeding complications with warfarin use: a prevalent adverse effect resulting in regulatory action. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:14141419.
  14. White HD, Gruber M, Feyzi J, et al. Comparison of outcomes among patients randomized to warfarin therapy according to anticoagulant control: results from SPORTIF III and V. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:239245.
  15. ACTIVE Writing Group of the ACTIVE Investigators; Connolly S, Pogue J, Hart R, et al. Clopidogrel plus aspirin versus oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for prevention of Vascular Events (ACTIVE W): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2006; 367:19031912.
  16. Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th edition). Chest 2008; 133(6 suppl):381S453S.
  17. Mungall D. BIBR-1048 Boehringer Ingelheim. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2002; 3:905907.
  18. Stangier J, Clemens A. Pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of dabigatran etexilate, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2009; 15(suppl 1):9S16S.
  19. Eisert WG, Hauel N, Stangier J, Wienen W, Clemens A, van Ryn J. Dabigatran: an oral novel potent reversible nonpeptide inhibitor of thrombin. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2010; 30:18851889.
  20. Bounameaux H, Reber G. New oral antithrombotics: a need for laboratory monitoring. Against. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8:627630.
  21. van Ryn J, Stangier J, Haertter S, et al. Dabigatran etexilate—a novel, reversible, oral direct thrombin inhibitor: interpretation of coagulation assays and reversal of anticoagulant activity. Thromb Haemost 2010; 103:11161127.
  22. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Buller HR, et al. A new oral direct thrombin inhibitor, dabigatran etexilate, compared with enoxaparin for prevention of thromboembolic events following total hip or knee replacement: the BISTRO II randomized trial. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3:103111.
  23. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Rosencher N, et al. Dabigatran etexilate versus enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip replacement: a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2007; 370:949956.
  24. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Rosencher N, et al. Oral dabigatran etexilate vs. subcutaneous enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement: the RE-MODEL randomized trial. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5:21782185.
  25. Ezekowitz MD, Reilly PA, Nehmiz G, et al. Dabigatran with or without concomitant aspirin compared with warfarin alone in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (PETRO study). Am J Cardiol 2007; 100:14191426.
  26. Burger L. Bayer rival Boehringer prices blood pill at $6.75. Reuters, October 26, 2010. Available at http://www.reuters.com. Accessed September 12, 2011.
  27. Drugstore.com. Pradaxa. http://www.drugstore.com/pradaxa/bottle-60-150mg-capsules/qxn00597013554. Accessed September 10, 2011.
  28. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Retail Prescription Program Drug List. http://i.walmartimages.com/i/if/hmp/fusion/customer_list.pdf. Accessed September 10, 2011.
  29. Teachey DT. Dabigatran versus warfarin for venous thromboembolism (letter). N Engl J Med 2010; 362:1050; author reply10501051.
  30. Lancaster TR, Singer DE, Sheehan MA, et al. The impact of long-term warfarin therapy on quality of life. Evidence from a randomized trial. Boston Area Anticoagulation Trial for Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Arch Intern Med 1991; 151:19441949.
  31. Freeman JV, Zhu RP, Owens DK, et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2011; 154:111.
  32. EINSTEIN Investigators; Bauersachs R, Berkowitz SD, Brenner B, et al. Oral rivaroxaban for symptomatic venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:24992510.
  33. Cairns JA, Connolly S, McMurtry S, Stephenson M, Talajic M; CCS Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee. Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines 2010: prevention of stroke and systemic embolization in atrial fibrillation and flutter. Can J Cardiol 2011; 27:7490.
  34. Wann LS, Curtis AB, January CT, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS focused update on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (update on dabigatran): a Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2011; 123:11441150.
  35. Boehringer Ingelheim. Pradaxa prescribing information. http://www.pradaxa.com. Accessed September 8, 2011.
  36. Huisman MV, Quinlan DJ, Dahl OE, Schulman S. Enoxaparin versus dabigatran or rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis after hip or knee arthroplasty: results of separate pooled analyses of phase III multicenter randomized trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010; 3:652660.
  37. McCullagh L, Tilson L, Walsh C, Barry M. A cost-effectiveness model comparing rivaroxaban and dabigatran etexilate with enoxaparin sodium as thromboprophylaxis after total hip and total knee replacement in the Irish healthcare setting. Pharmacoeconomics 2009; 27:829846.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Siddharth A. Wartak, MD
Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

John R. Bartholomew, MD, FACC
Professor of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; Head, Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Address: John R. Bartholomew, MD, FACC, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, J3-5, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail barthoj@ccf.org

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
657-664
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Siddharth A. Wartak, MD
Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

John R. Bartholomew, MD, FACC
Professor of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; Head, Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Address: John R. Bartholomew, MD, FACC, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, J3-5, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail barthoj@ccf.org

Author and Disclosure Information

Siddharth A. Wartak, MD
Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

John R. Bartholomew, MD, FACC
Professor of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; Head, Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Address: John R. Bartholomew, MD, FACC, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, J3-5, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail barthoj@ccf.org

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa) is a new oral anticoagulant that has distinct advantages over warfarin (Coumadin) in terms of its ease of administration, efficacy, and safety.

In the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY trial),1 in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, dabigatran 110 mg twice a day was found to be as good as warfarin in preventing systemic embolization and stroke (the primary outcome of the study), and at 150 mg twice a day it was superior.1 It has also shown efficacy in treating acute deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and in preventing these complications in orthopedic surgical patients.2–4

Dabigatran has been approved in 75 countries. It carries the trade name Pradaxa in Europe and the United States and Pradax in Canada. In October 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee endorsed two twice-daily doses (75 mg and 150 mg) of dabigatran for the prevention of systemic embolization and stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

However, dabigatran is relatively expensive, and its current high cost might be a barrier to its wider use.

MANY PATIENTS NEED ANTICOAGULATION

Anticoagulation plays a vital role in the primary and secondary prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and of pulmonary embolism in patients with venous thromboembolism. It is also used during cardiothoracic and vascular surgery, endovascular procedures, and dialysis and in patients with mechanical heart valves and hypercoagulable conditions.

Atrial fibrillation affects 3.03 million people in the United States (2005 figures), and this number is predicted to be as high as 7.56 million by 2050.5 More than 10% of people over the age of 80 years have it, and the lifetime risk of developing it is approximately 25%.6,7 Its most serious complication is ischemic stroke (the risk of which increases with age) and systemic embolization.5,8

Until the recent introduction of dabigatran, the only oral anticoagulant available in the United States for treating patients with atrial fibrillation was warfarin. Although warfarin has a number of disadvantages (see below), it is actually very effective for preventing ischemic stroke, reducing the incidence by as much as 65%.9,10

Venous thromboembolism is the third most common cardiovascular disorder after myocardial infarction and stroke.11 Although its exact incidence is unknown, nearly 1 million cases of it (incident or recurrent, fatal and nonfatal events) occur in the United States each year.12 Many patients with venous thromboembolism need oral anticoagulation long-term, and currently warfarin remains the only option for them as well.

NEEDED: A BETTER ANTICOAGULANT

Warfarin has been the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant in the United States for more than 60 years. As of 2004, more than 30 million outpatient prescriptions for it were filled annually in this country alone.13 However, warfarin has several important limitations.

Warfarin has a narrow therapeutic index. Patients taking it require monitoring of their international normalized ratio (INR) and frequent dose adjustments, and this is time-consuming and inconvenient. The target INR for patients with venous thromboembolism and atrial fibrillation is 2.0 to 3.0, whereas patients with a mechanical heart valve need a higher INR (2.5 to 3.5). If the INR is below these ranges, warfarin is less effective, with a risk of new thrombosis. On the other hand, if the INR is too high, there is a risk of bleeding.14 In fact, the most important side effect of warfarin is the risk of major and minor bleeding.13 However, even in well-designed clinical trials in which patients are closely managed, only 55% to 60% of patients regularly achieve their therapeutic target INR.1,2,14,15

Warfarin also interacts with many drugs and with some foods. Compliance is difficult. It has a slow onset of action. Genetic variations require dose adjustments. When switching from a parenteral anticoagulant, overlapping is required. Skin necrosis is a possible side effect. And warfarin is teratogenic.

Despite these limitations, the American College of Chest Physicians endorses warfarin to prevent or treat venous thromboembolism, and to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.16

Recently, a number of new oral and parenteral anticoagulants have been developed (Table 1) with the aim of overcoming some of the drawbacks of warfarin and the other currently available agents, and to improve the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders.

DABIGATRAN, A THROMBIN INHIBITOR

Dabigatran, developed by Boehringer Ingelheim, is a potent, competitive, and reversible inhibitor of both free and clot-bound thrombin, inhibiting both thrombin activity and generation (Table 2).17,18

A prodrug, dabigatran is rapidly absorbed and converted to its active form. Its plasma concentration reaches a peak 1.5 to 3 hours after an oral dose, and it has an elimination half-life of 12 to 14 hours. About 80% of its excretion is by the kidneys and the remaining 20% is through bile.

Dabigatran is not metabolized by cytochrome P450 isoenzymes, and therefore it has few major interactions with other drugs. An exception is rifampin, a P-glycoprotein inducer that blocks dabigatran’s absorption in the gut, so this combination should be avoided. Another is quinidine, a strong P-glycoprotein inhibitor that is contraindicated for use with dabigatran. Also, amiodarone (Cordarone), another P-glycoprotein inhibitor, increases blood levels of dabigatran, and therefore a lower dose of dabigatran is recommended if these drugs are given together.18–20

 

 

DOES DABIGATRAN NEED MONITORING? CAN IT EVEN BE MONITORED?

Dabigatran has a predictable pharmacodynamic effect, and current data indicate it does not need regular monitoring.18–20 However, one may need to be able to measure the drug’s activity in certain situations, such as suspected overdose, bleeding, need for emergency surgery, impaired renal function, pregnancy, and obesity, and in children.20

Dabigatran has little effect on the prothrombin time or the INR, even at therapeutic concentrations.19 Further, its effect on the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) is neither linear nor dose-dependent, and the aPTT reaches a plateau and becomes less sensitive at very high concentrations. Therefore, the aPTT does not appear to be an appropriate test to monitor dabigatran’s therapeutic anticoagulant effect, although it does provide a qualitative indication of anticoagulant activity.18,19

The thrombin time is a very sensitive method for determining if dabigatran is present, but the test lacks standardization; the ecarin clotting time provides better evidence of the dose but is not readily available at most institutions.18,19,21

EVALUATED IN CLINICAL TRIALS

Dabigatran has been evaluated in a number of trials for its ability to prevent ischemic stroke and systemic embolization in patients with atrial fibrillation and to prevent and treat venous thromboembolism in surgical orthopedic patients, and in patients with acute coronary syndrome (Table 3).1–4,22–25

DABIGATRAN IS EXPENSIVE BUT MAY BE COST-EFFECTIVE

The estimated price of dabigatran 150 mg twice a day in the United States is about $6.75 to $8.00 per day.26,27

Warfarin, in contrast, costs as little as $50 per year.28 However, this low price does not include the cost of monitoring the INR (office visits and laboratory testing), and these combined expenses are much higher than the price of the warfarin itself.29 In addition, warfarin requires time-consuming management when bridging to a parenteral anticoagulant (for reversal of its anticoagulant action) before routine health maintenance procedures such as dental work and colonoscopy and interventional procedures and surgery. Any bleeding complication will also add to its cost and will be associated with a decrease in the patient’s perceived health and quality of life, but this is true for both drugs.30

In today’s health care environment, controlling costs is a universal priority, but it may be unfair to compare the cost of dabigatran with that of warfarin alone. The expense and morbidity associated with stroke and intracranial bleeding are high, and if patients on dabigatran have fewer strokes (as seen in the RE-LY trial with dabigatran 150 mg twice a day) and no added expense of monitoring, then dabigatran may be cost-effective.

Freeman et al31 analyzed the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran, using an estimated cost of $13.70 per day and data from the RE-LY trial. They concluded that dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin in preventing ischemic stroke in patients considered at higher risk for ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage, ie, those with a CHADS2 score of 1 or higher or equivalent. (The CHADS2 score is calculated as 1 point each for congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 or older, and diabetes mellitus; 2 points for prior stroke or transient ischemic attack.)

As more new-generation oral anticoagulants become available (see below), the price of dabigatran will undoubtedly decrease. Until then, warfarin will remain a cost-effective and cost-saving drug that cannot yet be considered obsolete.

WHO SHOULD RECEIVE DABIGATRAN?

The ideal patient for dabigatran treatment is not yet defined. The decision to convert a patient’s treatment from warfarin to dabigatran will likely depend on several factors, including the patient’s response to warfarin and the physician’s comfort with this new drug.

Many patients do extremely well with warfarin, requiring infrequent monitoring to maintain a therapeutic INR and having no bleeding complications. For them, it would be more practical to continue warfarin. Another reason for staying with warfarin would be if twice-a-day dosing would pose a problem.

Dabigatran would be a reasonable choice for a patient whose INR is erratic, who requires more frequent monitoring, for whom cost is not an issue, and for whom there is concern about dietary or drug interactions.

Another consideration is whether the patient has access to a health care facility for warfarin monitoring: this is difficult for those who cannot drive, who depend on others for transportation, and who live in rural areas.

Additionally, dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin for a patient with a high CHADS2 score who is considered at a higher risk for stroke.31

In all cases, the option should be considered only after an open discussion with the patient about the risks and benefits of this new drug.

WHO SHOULD NOT RECEIVE IT?

Dabigatran is a twice-daily drug with a short half-life. No patient with a history of poor compliance will be a good candidate for dabigatran. Since there are no practical laboratory tests for monitoring compliance, one will have to reinforce at every visit the importance of taking this medication according to instructions.

Patients with underlying kidney disease will need close monitoring of their creatinine clearance, with dose adjustment if renal function deteriorates.

Additionally, one should use caution when prescribing dabigatran to obese patients, pregnant women, or children until more is known about its use in these populations.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DABIGATRAN

In addition to its pharmacologic advantages, dabigatran demonstrated two other major advantages over warfarin in the RE-LY trial in patients with atrial fibrillation (Table 4). First, the rate of intracranial bleeding, a major devastating complication of warfarin, was 60% lower with dabigatran 150 mg twice a day than with warfarin—and lower still with dabigatran 110 mg twice a day.1 Second, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 34% lower in the group that got dabigatran 150 mg twice a day than in the group that got warfarin.

A reason may be that patients with atrial fibrillation and poor INR control have higher rates of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding.14 In most clinical trials, only 55% to 60% of patients achieve a therapeutic INR on warfarin, leaving them at risk of thrombosis or, conversely, bleeding.1,2,15,32 Dabigatran has predictable pharmacokinetics, and its twice-daily dosing allows for less variability in its anticoagulant effect, making it more consistently therapeutic with less potential for bleeding or thrombosis.1

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society included dabigatran in its 2010 guidelines on atrial fibrillation, recommending it or warfarin.33 The American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and the Heart Rhythm Society now give dabigatran a class I B recommendation (benefit greater than risk, but limited populations studied) in secondary stroke prevention.34

On the other hand, major concerns are the lack of an antidote for dabigatran and a lack of experience in treating bleeding complications. Since dabigatran is not monitored, physicians may be uncertain if we are overdosing or undertreating. As we gain experience, we will learn how to treat bleeding complications. Until then, it will be important to anticipate this problem and to develop an algorithm based on the best available evidence in managing this complication.

Although the overall rates of bleeding in the RE-LY trial were lower with dabigatran than with warfarin, there were more gastrointestinal bleeding events with the 150-mg dose of dabigatran, which was not readily explained.

Further, the rate of dyspepsia was almost twice as high with dabigatran than with warfarin, regardless of the dose of dabigatran. There were also more dropouts in the 2nd year of follow-up in the dabigatran groups, with gastrointestinal intolerance being one of the major reasons. Therefore, dyspepsia may cause intolerance and noncompliance.1

Dabigatran must be taken twice a day and has a relatively short half-life. For a noncompliant patient, missing one or two doses will cause a reversal of its anticoagulation effect, leaving the patient susceptible to thrombosis. In comparison, warfarin has a longer half-life and is taken once a day, so missing a dose is less likely to result in a similar reversal of its anticoagulant effect.

 

 

SPECIAL CONDITIONS

Switching from other anticoagulants to dabigatran

When making the transition from a subcutaneously administered anticoagulant, ie, a low-molecular-weight heparin or the anti-Xa inhibitor fondaparinux (Arixtra), dabigatran should be started 0 to 2 hours before the next subcutaneous dose of the parenteral anticoagulant was to be given.21,35

When switching from unfractionated heparin given by continuous intravenous infusion, the first dose of dabigatran should be given at the time the infusion is stopped.

When switching from warfarin, dabigatran should be started once the patient’s INR is less than 2.0.

Switching from dabigatran to a parenteral anticoagulant

When switching from dabigatran back to a parenteral anticoagulant, allow 12 to 24 hours after the last dabigatran dose before starting the parenteral agent.21,35

Elective surgery or invasive procedures

The manufacturer recommends stopping dabigatran 1 to 2 days before elective surgery for patients who have normal renal function and a low risk of bleeding, or 3 to 5 days before surgery for patients who have a creatinine clearance of 50 mL/min or less. Before major surgery or placement of a spinal or epidural catheter, the manufacturer recommends that dabigatran be held even longer.35

If emergency surgery is needed

If emergency surgery is needed, the clinician must use his or her judgment as to the risks of bleeding vs those of postponing the surgery.21,35

Overdose or bleeding

No antidote for dabigatran is currently available. It has a short half-life (12–14 hours), and the treatment for overdose or bleeding is to discontinue it immediately, maintain adequate diuresis, and transfuse fresh-frozen plasma or red blood cells as indicated.

The role of activated charcoal given orally to reduce absorption is under evaluation, but the charcoal must be given within 1 to 2 hours after the overdose is taken.21

Dabigatran does not bind very much to plasma proteins and hence is dialyzable—an approach that may be necessary in cases of persistent or life-threatening bleeding.

Recombinant activated factor VII or prothrombin complex concentrates may be additional options in cases of severe bleeding.18,21

TOPICS OF FUTURE RESEARCH

A limitation of the dabigatran trials was that they did not enroll patients who had renal or liver impairment, cancer, or other comorbidities; pregnant women; or children. Other topics of future research include its use in patients weighing less than 48 kg or more than 110 kg, its efficacy in patients with thrombophilia, in patients with mechanical heart valves, and in long-term follow-up and the use of thrombolytics in patients with acute stroke who are on dabigatran.

WILL DABIGATRAN CHANGE CLINICAL PRACTICE?

Despite some of the challenges listed above, we believe that dabigatran is likely to change medical practice in patients requiring anticoagulation.

Dabigatran’s biggest use will most likely be in patients with atrial fibrillation, mainly because this is the largest group of people receiving anticoagulation. In addition, the incidence of atrial fibrillation rises with age, the US population is living longer, and patients generally require life-long anticoagulation once this condition develops.

Dabigatran may be approved for additional indications in the near future. It has already shown efficacy in primary and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism. Other important areas to be studied include its use in patients with mechanical heart valves and thrombophilia.

Whether dabigatran will be a worthy substitute for the parenteral anticoagulants (heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, or factor Xa inhibitors) is not yet known, but it will have an enormous impact on anticoagulation management if proved efficacious.

If dabigatran becomes a major substitute for warfarin, it will affect the anticoagulation clinics, with their well-trained staff, that are currently monitoring millions of patients in the United States. These clinics would no longer be needed, and laboratory and technical costs could be saved. A downside is that patients on dabigatran will not be as closely supervised and reminded to take their medication as patients on warfarin are now at these clinics. Instead, they will likely be supervised by their own physician (or assistants), who will need to become familiar with this anticoagulant. This may affect compliance with dabigatran.

OTHER NEW ORAL ANTICOAGULANTS ARE ON THE WAY

Other oral anticoagulants, including rivaroxaban (Xarelto) and apixaban (Eliquis), have been under study and show promise in preventing both thrombotic stroke and venous thromboembolism. They will likely compete with dabigatran once they are approved.

Rivaroxaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, is being investigated for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. It has also been shown to be not inferior to (and to be less expensive than) enoxaparin in treating and preventing venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.32,36,37 Rivaroxaban has recently been approved by the FDA for this indication.

Apixaban, another direct factor Xa inhibitor, is also being studied for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. To date, there are no head-to-head trials comparing dabigatran with either of these new oral anticoagulants.

Dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa) is a new oral anticoagulant that has distinct advantages over warfarin (Coumadin) in terms of its ease of administration, efficacy, and safety.

In the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY trial),1 in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, dabigatran 110 mg twice a day was found to be as good as warfarin in preventing systemic embolization and stroke (the primary outcome of the study), and at 150 mg twice a day it was superior.1 It has also shown efficacy in treating acute deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and in preventing these complications in orthopedic surgical patients.2–4

Dabigatran has been approved in 75 countries. It carries the trade name Pradaxa in Europe and the United States and Pradax in Canada. In October 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee endorsed two twice-daily doses (75 mg and 150 mg) of dabigatran for the prevention of systemic embolization and stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

However, dabigatran is relatively expensive, and its current high cost might be a barrier to its wider use.

MANY PATIENTS NEED ANTICOAGULATION

Anticoagulation plays a vital role in the primary and secondary prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and of pulmonary embolism in patients with venous thromboembolism. It is also used during cardiothoracic and vascular surgery, endovascular procedures, and dialysis and in patients with mechanical heart valves and hypercoagulable conditions.

Atrial fibrillation affects 3.03 million people in the United States (2005 figures), and this number is predicted to be as high as 7.56 million by 2050.5 More than 10% of people over the age of 80 years have it, and the lifetime risk of developing it is approximately 25%.6,7 Its most serious complication is ischemic stroke (the risk of which increases with age) and systemic embolization.5,8

Until the recent introduction of dabigatran, the only oral anticoagulant available in the United States for treating patients with atrial fibrillation was warfarin. Although warfarin has a number of disadvantages (see below), it is actually very effective for preventing ischemic stroke, reducing the incidence by as much as 65%.9,10

Venous thromboembolism is the third most common cardiovascular disorder after myocardial infarction and stroke.11 Although its exact incidence is unknown, nearly 1 million cases of it (incident or recurrent, fatal and nonfatal events) occur in the United States each year.12 Many patients with venous thromboembolism need oral anticoagulation long-term, and currently warfarin remains the only option for them as well.

NEEDED: A BETTER ANTICOAGULANT

Warfarin has been the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant in the United States for more than 60 years. As of 2004, more than 30 million outpatient prescriptions for it were filled annually in this country alone.13 However, warfarin has several important limitations.

Warfarin has a narrow therapeutic index. Patients taking it require monitoring of their international normalized ratio (INR) and frequent dose adjustments, and this is time-consuming and inconvenient. The target INR for patients with venous thromboembolism and atrial fibrillation is 2.0 to 3.0, whereas patients with a mechanical heart valve need a higher INR (2.5 to 3.5). If the INR is below these ranges, warfarin is less effective, with a risk of new thrombosis. On the other hand, if the INR is too high, there is a risk of bleeding.14 In fact, the most important side effect of warfarin is the risk of major and minor bleeding.13 However, even in well-designed clinical trials in which patients are closely managed, only 55% to 60% of patients regularly achieve their therapeutic target INR.1,2,14,15

Warfarin also interacts with many drugs and with some foods. Compliance is difficult. It has a slow onset of action. Genetic variations require dose adjustments. When switching from a parenteral anticoagulant, overlapping is required. Skin necrosis is a possible side effect. And warfarin is teratogenic.

Despite these limitations, the American College of Chest Physicians endorses warfarin to prevent or treat venous thromboembolism, and to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.16

Recently, a number of new oral and parenteral anticoagulants have been developed (Table 1) with the aim of overcoming some of the drawbacks of warfarin and the other currently available agents, and to improve the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders.

DABIGATRAN, A THROMBIN INHIBITOR

Dabigatran, developed by Boehringer Ingelheim, is a potent, competitive, and reversible inhibitor of both free and clot-bound thrombin, inhibiting both thrombin activity and generation (Table 2).17,18

A prodrug, dabigatran is rapidly absorbed and converted to its active form. Its plasma concentration reaches a peak 1.5 to 3 hours after an oral dose, and it has an elimination half-life of 12 to 14 hours. About 80% of its excretion is by the kidneys and the remaining 20% is through bile.

Dabigatran is not metabolized by cytochrome P450 isoenzymes, and therefore it has few major interactions with other drugs. An exception is rifampin, a P-glycoprotein inducer that blocks dabigatran’s absorption in the gut, so this combination should be avoided. Another is quinidine, a strong P-glycoprotein inhibitor that is contraindicated for use with dabigatran. Also, amiodarone (Cordarone), another P-glycoprotein inhibitor, increases blood levels of dabigatran, and therefore a lower dose of dabigatran is recommended if these drugs are given together.18–20

 

 

DOES DABIGATRAN NEED MONITORING? CAN IT EVEN BE MONITORED?

Dabigatran has a predictable pharmacodynamic effect, and current data indicate it does not need regular monitoring.18–20 However, one may need to be able to measure the drug’s activity in certain situations, such as suspected overdose, bleeding, need for emergency surgery, impaired renal function, pregnancy, and obesity, and in children.20

Dabigatran has little effect on the prothrombin time or the INR, even at therapeutic concentrations.19 Further, its effect on the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) is neither linear nor dose-dependent, and the aPTT reaches a plateau and becomes less sensitive at very high concentrations. Therefore, the aPTT does not appear to be an appropriate test to monitor dabigatran’s therapeutic anticoagulant effect, although it does provide a qualitative indication of anticoagulant activity.18,19

The thrombin time is a very sensitive method for determining if dabigatran is present, but the test lacks standardization; the ecarin clotting time provides better evidence of the dose but is not readily available at most institutions.18,19,21

EVALUATED IN CLINICAL TRIALS

Dabigatran has been evaluated in a number of trials for its ability to prevent ischemic stroke and systemic embolization in patients with atrial fibrillation and to prevent and treat venous thromboembolism in surgical orthopedic patients, and in patients with acute coronary syndrome (Table 3).1–4,22–25

DABIGATRAN IS EXPENSIVE BUT MAY BE COST-EFFECTIVE

The estimated price of dabigatran 150 mg twice a day in the United States is about $6.75 to $8.00 per day.26,27

Warfarin, in contrast, costs as little as $50 per year.28 However, this low price does not include the cost of monitoring the INR (office visits and laboratory testing), and these combined expenses are much higher than the price of the warfarin itself.29 In addition, warfarin requires time-consuming management when bridging to a parenteral anticoagulant (for reversal of its anticoagulant action) before routine health maintenance procedures such as dental work and colonoscopy and interventional procedures and surgery. Any bleeding complication will also add to its cost and will be associated with a decrease in the patient’s perceived health and quality of life, but this is true for both drugs.30

In today’s health care environment, controlling costs is a universal priority, but it may be unfair to compare the cost of dabigatran with that of warfarin alone. The expense and morbidity associated with stroke and intracranial bleeding are high, and if patients on dabigatran have fewer strokes (as seen in the RE-LY trial with dabigatran 150 mg twice a day) and no added expense of monitoring, then dabigatran may be cost-effective.

Freeman et al31 analyzed the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran, using an estimated cost of $13.70 per day and data from the RE-LY trial. They concluded that dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin in preventing ischemic stroke in patients considered at higher risk for ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage, ie, those with a CHADS2 score of 1 or higher or equivalent. (The CHADS2 score is calculated as 1 point each for congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 or older, and diabetes mellitus; 2 points for prior stroke or transient ischemic attack.)

As more new-generation oral anticoagulants become available (see below), the price of dabigatran will undoubtedly decrease. Until then, warfarin will remain a cost-effective and cost-saving drug that cannot yet be considered obsolete.

WHO SHOULD RECEIVE DABIGATRAN?

The ideal patient for dabigatran treatment is not yet defined. The decision to convert a patient’s treatment from warfarin to dabigatran will likely depend on several factors, including the patient’s response to warfarin and the physician’s comfort with this new drug.

Many patients do extremely well with warfarin, requiring infrequent monitoring to maintain a therapeutic INR and having no bleeding complications. For them, it would be more practical to continue warfarin. Another reason for staying with warfarin would be if twice-a-day dosing would pose a problem.

Dabigatran would be a reasonable choice for a patient whose INR is erratic, who requires more frequent monitoring, for whom cost is not an issue, and for whom there is concern about dietary or drug interactions.

Another consideration is whether the patient has access to a health care facility for warfarin monitoring: this is difficult for those who cannot drive, who depend on others for transportation, and who live in rural areas.

Additionally, dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin for a patient with a high CHADS2 score who is considered at a higher risk for stroke.31

In all cases, the option should be considered only after an open discussion with the patient about the risks and benefits of this new drug.

WHO SHOULD NOT RECEIVE IT?

Dabigatran is a twice-daily drug with a short half-life. No patient with a history of poor compliance will be a good candidate for dabigatran. Since there are no practical laboratory tests for monitoring compliance, one will have to reinforce at every visit the importance of taking this medication according to instructions.

Patients with underlying kidney disease will need close monitoring of their creatinine clearance, with dose adjustment if renal function deteriorates.

Additionally, one should use caution when prescribing dabigatran to obese patients, pregnant women, or children until more is known about its use in these populations.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DABIGATRAN

In addition to its pharmacologic advantages, dabigatran demonstrated two other major advantages over warfarin in the RE-LY trial in patients with atrial fibrillation (Table 4). First, the rate of intracranial bleeding, a major devastating complication of warfarin, was 60% lower with dabigatran 150 mg twice a day than with warfarin—and lower still with dabigatran 110 mg twice a day.1 Second, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 34% lower in the group that got dabigatran 150 mg twice a day than in the group that got warfarin.

A reason may be that patients with atrial fibrillation and poor INR control have higher rates of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding.14 In most clinical trials, only 55% to 60% of patients achieve a therapeutic INR on warfarin, leaving them at risk of thrombosis or, conversely, bleeding.1,2,15,32 Dabigatran has predictable pharmacokinetics, and its twice-daily dosing allows for less variability in its anticoagulant effect, making it more consistently therapeutic with less potential for bleeding or thrombosis.1

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society included dabigatran in its 2010 guidelines on atrial fibrillation, recommending it or warfarin.33 The American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and the Heart Rhythm Society now give dabigatran a class I B recommendation (benefit greater than risk, but limited populations studied) in secondary stroke prevention.34

On the other hand, major concerns are the lack of an antidote for dabigatran and a lack of experience in treating bleeding complications. Since dabigatran is not monitored, physicians may be uncertain if we are overdosing or undertreating. As we gain experience, we will learn how to treat bleeding complications. Until then, it will be important to anticipate this problem and to develop an algorithm based on the best available evidence in managing this complication.

Although the overall rates of bleeding in the RE-LY trial were lower with dabigatran than with warfarin, there were more gastrointestinal bleeding events with the 150-mg dose of dabigatran, which was not readily explained.

Further, the rate of dyspepsia was almost twice as high with dabigatran than with warfarin, regardless of the dose of dabigatran. There were also more dropouts in the 2nd year of follow-up in the dabigatran groups, with gastrointestinal intolerance being one of the major reasons. Therefore, dyspepsia may cause intolerance and noncompliance.1

Dabigatran must be taken twice a day and has a relatively short half-life. For a noncompliant patient, missing one or two doses will cause a reversal of its anticoagulation effect, leaving the patient susceptible to thrombosis. In comparison, warfarin has a longer half-life and is taken once a day, so missing a dose is less likely to result in a similar reversal of its anticoagulant effect.

 

 

SPECIAL CONDITIONS

Switching from other anticoagulants to dabigatran

When making the transition from a subcutaneously administered anticoagulant, ie, a low-molecular-weight heparin or the anti-Xa inhibitor fondaparinux (Arixtra), dabigatran should be started 0 to 2 hours before the next subcutaneous dose of the parenteral anticoagulant was to be given.21,35

When switching from unfractionated heparin given by continuous intravenous infusion, the first dose of dabigatran should be given at the time the infusion is stopped.

When switching from warfarin, dabigatran should be started once the patient’s INR is less than 2.0.

Switching from dabigatran to a parenteral anticoagulant

When switching from dabigatran back to a parenteral anticoagulant, allow 12 to 24 hours after the last dabigatran dose before starting the parenteral agent.21,35

Elective surgery or invasive procedures

The manufacturer recommends stopping dabigatran 1 to 2 days before elective surgery for patients who have normal renal function and a low risk of bleeding, or 3 to 5 days before surgery for patients who have a creatinine clearance of 50 mL/min or less. Before major surgery or placement of a spinal or epidural catheter, the manufacturer recommends that dabigatran be held even longer.35

If emergency surgery is needed

If emergency surgery is needed, the clinician must use his or her judgment as to the risks of bleeding vs those of postponing the surgery.21,35

Overdose or bleeding

No antidote for dabigatran is currently available. It has a short half-life (12–14 hours), and the treatment for overdose or bleeding is to discontinue it immediately, maintain adequate diuresis, and transfuse fresh-frozen plasma or red blood cells as indicated.

The role of activated charcoal given orally to reduce absorption is under evaluation, but the charcoal must be given within 1 to 2 hours after the overdose is taken.21

Dabigatran does not bind very much to plasma proteins and hence is dialyzable—an approach that may be necessary in cases of persistent or life-threatening bleeding.

Recombinant activated factor VII or prothrombin complex concentrates may be additional options in cases of severe bleeding.18,21

TOPICS OF FUTURE RESEARCH

A limitation of the dabigatran trials was that they did not enroll patients who had renal or liver impairment, cancer, or other comorbidities; pregnant women; or children. Other topics of future research include its use in patients weighing less than 48 kg or more than 110 kg, its efficacy in patients with thrombophilia, in patients with mechanical heart valves, and in long-term follow-up and the use of thrombolytics in patients with acute stroke who are on dabigatran.

WILL DABIGATRAN CHANGE CLINICAL PRACTICE?

Despite some of the challenges listed above, we believe that dabigatran is likely to change medical practice in patients requiring anticoagulation.

Dabigatran’s biggest use will most likely be in patients with atrial fibrillation, mainly because this is the largest group of people receiving anticoagulation. In addition, the incidence of atrial fibrillation rises with age, the US population is living longer, and patients generally require life-long anticoagulation once this condition develops.

Dabigatran may be approved for additional indications in the near future. It has already shown efficacy in primary and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism. Other important areas to be studied include its use in patients with mechanical heart valves and thrombophilia.

Whether dabigatran will be a worthy substitute for the parenteral anticoagulants (heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, or factor Xa inhibitors) is not yet known, but it will have an enormous impact on anticoagulation management if proved efficacious.

If dabigatran becomes a major substitute for warfarin, it will affect the anticoagulation clinics, with their well-trained staff, that are currently monitoring millions of patients in the United States. These clinics would no longer be needed, and laboratory and technical costs could be saved. A downside is that patients on dabigatran will not be as closely supervised and reminded to take their medication as patients on warfarin are now at these clinics. Instead, they will likely be supervised by their own physician (or assistants), who will need to become familiar with this anticoagulant. This may affect compliance with dabigatran.

OTHER NEW ORAL ANTICOAGULANTS ARE ON THE WAY

Other oral anticoagulants, including rivaroxaban (Xarelto) and apixaban (Eliquis), have been under study and show promise in preventing both thrombotic stroke and venous thromboembolism. They will likely compete with dabigatran once they are approved.

Rivaroxaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, is being investigated for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. It has also been shown to be not inferior to (and to be less expensive than) enoxaparin in treating and preventing venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.32,36,37 Rivaroxaban has recently been approved by the FDA for this indication.

Apixaban, another direct factor Xa inhibitor, is also being studied for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. To date, there are no head-to-head trials comparing dabigatran with either of these new oral anticoagulants.

References
  1. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:11391151.
  2. Schulman S, Kearon C, Kakkar AK, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:23422352.
  3. RE-MOBILIZE Writing Committee; Ginsberg JS, Davidson BL, Comp PC, et al. Oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate vs North American enoxaparin regimen for prevention of venous thromboembolism after knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24:19.
  4. Wolowacz SE, Roskell NS, Plumb JM, Caprini JA, Eriksson BI. Efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee arthroplasty. A meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101:7785.
  5. Naccarelli GV, Varker H, Lin J, Schulman KL. Increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation and flutter in the United States. Am J Cardiol 2009; 104:15341539.
  6. Krahn AD, Manfreda J, Tate RB, Mathewson FA, Cuddy TE. The natural history of atrial fibrillation: incidence, risk factors, and prognosis in the Manitoba follow-up study. Am J Med 1995; 98:476484.
  7. Lloyd-Jones DM, Wang TJ, Leip EP, et al. Lifetime risk for development of atrial fibrillation: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2004; 110:10421046.
  8. Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham study. Stroke 1991; 22:983988.
  9. Go AS, Hylek EM, Chang Y, et al. Anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how well do randomized trials translate into clinical practice? JAMA 2003; 290:26852692.
  10. Singer DE, Chang Y, Fang MC, et al. The net clinical benefit of warfarin anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:297305.
  11. Goldhaber SZ. Pulmonary embolism thrombolysis: a clarion call for international collaboration. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19:246247.
  12. Heit JA. The epidemiology of venous thromboembolism in the community. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2008; 28:370372.
  13. Wysowski DK, Nourjah P, Swartz L. Bleeding complications with warfarin use: a prevalent adverse effect resulting in regulatory action. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:14141419.
  14. White HD, Gruber M, Feyzi J, et al. Comparison of outcomes among patients randomized to warfarin therapy according to anticoagulant control: results from SPORTIF III and V. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:239245.
  15. ACTIVE Writing Group of the ACTIVE Investigators; Connolly S, Pogue J, Hart R, et al. Clopidogrel plus aspirin versus oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for prevention of Vascular Events (ACTIVE W): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2006; 367:19031912.
  16. Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th edition). Chest 2008; 133(6 suppl):381S453S.
  17. Mungall D. BIBR-1048 Boehringer Ingelheim. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2002; 3:905907.
  18. Stangier J, Clemens A. Pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of dabigatran etexilate, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2009; 15(suppl 1):9S16S.
  19. Eisert WG, Hauel N, Stangier J, Wienen W, Clemens A, van Ryn J. Dabigatran: an oral novel potent reversible nonpeptide inhibitor of thrombin. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2010; 30:18851889.
  20. Bounameaux H, Reber G. New oral antithrombotics: a need for laboratory monitoring. Against. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8:627630.
  21. van Ryn J, Stangier J, Haertter S, et al. Dabigatran etexilate—a novel, reversible, oral direct thrombin inhibitor: interpretation of coagulation assays and reversal of anticoagulant activity. Thromb Haemost 2010; 103:11161127.
  22. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Buller HR, et al. A new oral direct thrombin inhibitor, dabigatran etexilate, compared with enoxaparin for prevention of thromboembolic events following total hip or knee replacement: the BISTRO II randomized trial. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3:103111.
  23. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Rosencher N, et al. Dabigatran etexilate versus enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip replacement: a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2007; 370:949956.
  24. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Rosencher N, et al. Oral dabigatran etexilate vs. subcutaneous enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement: the RE-MODEL randomized trial. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5:21782185.
  25. Ezekowitz MD, Reilly PA, Nehmiz G, et al. Dabigatran with or without concomitant aspirin compared with warfarin alone in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (PETRO study). Am J Cardiol 2007; 100:14191426.
  26. Burger L. Bayer rival Boehringer prices blood pill at $6.75. Reuters, October 26, 2010. Available at http://www.reuters.com. Accessed September 12, 2011.
  27. Drugstore.com. Pradaxa. http://www.drugstore.com/pradaxa/bottle-60-150mg-capsules/qxn00597013554. Accessed September 10, 2011.
  28. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Retail Prescription Program Drug List. http://i.walmartimages.com/i/if/hmp/fusion/customer_list.pdf. Accessed September 10, 2011.
  29. Teachey DT. Dabigatran versus warfarin for venous thromboembolism (letter). N Engl J Med 2010; 362:1050; author reply10501051.
  30. Lancaster TR, Singer DE, Sheehan MA, et al. The impact of long-term warfarin therapy on quality of life. Evidence from a randomized trial. Boston Area Anticoagulation Trial for Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Arch Intern Med 1991; 151:19441949.
  31. Freeman JV, Zhu RP, Owens DK, et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2011; 154:111.
  32. EINSTEIN Investigators; Bauersachs R, Berkowitz SD, Brenner B, et al. Oral rivaroxaban for symptomatic venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:24992510.
  33. Cairns JA, Connolly S, McMurtry S, Stephenson M, Talajic M; CCS Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee. Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines 2010: prevention of stroke and systemic embolization in atrial fibrillation and flutter. Can J Cardiol 2011; 27:7490.
  34. Wann LS, Curtis AB, January CT, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS focused update on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (update on dabigatran): a Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2011; 123:11441150.
  35. Boehringer Ingelheim. Pradaxa prescribing information. http://www.pradaxa.com. Accessed September 8, 2011.
  36. Huisman MV, Quinlan DJ, Dahl OE, Schulman S. Enoxaparin versus dabigatran or rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis after hip or knee arthroplasty: results of separate pooled analyses of phase III multicenter randomized trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010; 3:652660.
  37. McCullagh L, Tilson L, Walsh C, Barry M. A cost-effectiveness model comparing rivaroxaban and dabigatran etexilate with enoxaparin sodium as thromboprophylaxis after total hip and total knee replacement in the Irish healthcare setting. Pharmacoeconomics 2009; 27:829846.
References
  1. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:11391151.
  2. Schulman S, Kearon C, Kakkar AK, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:23422352.
  3. RE-MOBILIZE Writing Committee; Ginsberg JS, Davidson BL, Comp PC, et al. Oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate vs North American enoxaparin regimen for prevention of venous thromboembolism after knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24:19.
  4. Wolowacz SE, Roskell NS, Plumb JM, Caprini JA, Eriksson BI. Efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee arthroplasty. A meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101:7785.
  5. Naccarelli GV, Varker H, Lin J, Schulman KL. Increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation and flutter in the United States. Am J Cardiol 2009; 104:15341539.
  6. Krahn AD, Manfreda J, Tate RB, Mathewson FA, Cuddy TE. The natural history of atrial fibrillation: incidence, risk factors, and prognosis in the Manitoba follow-up study. Am J Med 1995; 98:476484.
  7. Lloyd-Jones DM, Wang TJ, Leip EP, et al. Lifetime risk for development of atrial fibrillation: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2004; 110:10421046.
  8. Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham study. Stroke 1991; 22:983988.
  9. Go AS, Hylek EM, Chang Y, et al. Anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how well do randomized trials translate into clinical practice? JAMA 2003; 290:26852692.
  10. Singer DE, Chang Y, Fang MC, et al. The net clinical benefit of warfarin anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:297305.
  11. Goldhaber SZ. Pulmonary embolism thrombolysis: a clarion call for international collaboration. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19:246247.
  12. Heit JA. The epidemiology of venous thromboembolism in the community. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2008; 28:370372.
  13. Wysowski DK, Nourjah P, Swartz L. Bleeding complications with warfarin use: a prevalent adverse effect resulting in regulatory action. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:14141419.
  14. White HD, Gruber M, Feyzi J, et al. Comparison of outcomes among patients randomized to warfarin therapy according to anticoagulant control: results from SPORTIF III and V. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:239245.
  15. ACTIVE Writing Group of the ACTIVE Investigators; Connolly S, Pogue J, Hart R, et al. Clopidogrel plus aspirin versus oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for prevention of Vascular Events (ACTIVE W): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2006; 367:19031912.
  16. Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th edition). Chest 2008; 133(6 suppl):381S453S.
  17. Mungall D. BIBR-1048 Boehringer Ingelheim. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2002; 3:905907.
  18. Stangier J, Clemens A. Pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of dabigatran etexilate, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2009; 15(suppl 1):9S16S.
  19. Eisert WG, Hauel N, Stangier J, Wienen W, Clemens A, van Ryn J. Dabigatran: an oral novel potent reversible nonpeptide inhibitor of thrombin. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2010; 30:18851889.
  20. Bounameaux H, Reber G. New oral antithrombotics: a need for laboratory monitoring. Against. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8:627630.
  21. van Ryn J, Stangier J, Haertter S, et al. Dabigatran etexilate—a novel, reversible, oral direct thrombin inhibitor: interpretation of coagulation assays and reversal of anticoagulant activity. Thromb Haemost 2010; 103:11161127.
  22. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Buller HR, et al. A new oral direct thrombin inhibitor, dabigatran etexilate, compared with enoxaparin for prevention of thromboembolic events following total hip or knee replacement: the BISTRO II randomized trial. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3:103111.
  23. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Rosencher N, et al. Dabigatran etexilate versus enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip replacement: a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2007; 370:949956.
  24. Eriksson BI, Dahl OE, Rosencher N, et al. Oral dabigatran etexilate vs. subcutaneous enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement: the RE-MODEL randomized trial. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5:21782185.
  25. Ezekowitz MD, Reilly PA, Nehmiz G, et al. Dabigatran with or without concomitant aspirin compared with warfarin alone in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (PETRO study). Am J Cardiol 2007; 100:14191426.
  26. Burger L. Bayer rival Boehringer prices blood pill at $6.75. Reuters, October 26, 2010. Available at http://www.reuters.com. Accessed September 12, 2011.
  27. Drugstore.com. Pradaxa. http://www.drugstore.com/pradaxa/bottle-60-150mg-capsules/qxn00597013554. Accessed September 10, 2011.
  28. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Retail Prescription Program Drug List. http://i.walmartimages.com/i/if/hmp/fusion/customer_list.pdf. Accessed September 10, 2011.
  29. Teachey DT. Dabigatran versus warfarin for venous thromboembolism (letter). N Engl J Med 2010; 362:1050; author reply10501051.
  30. Lancaster TR, Singer DE, Sheehan MA, et al. The impact of long-term warfarin therapy on quality of life. Evidence from a randomized trial. Boston Area Anticoagulation Trial for Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Arch Intern Med 1991; 151:19441949.
  31. Freeman JV, Zhu RP, Owens DK, et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2011; 154:111.
  32. EINSTEIN Investigators; Bauersachs R, Berkowitz SD, Brenner B, et al. Oral rivaroxaban for symptomatic venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:24992510.
  33. Cairns JA, Connolly S, McMurtry S, Stephenson M, Talajic M; CCS Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee. Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines 2010: prevention of stroke and systemic embolization in atrial fibrillation and flutter. Can J Cardiol 2011; 27:7490.
  34. Wann LS, Curtis AB, January CT, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS focused update on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (update on dabigatran): a Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2011; 123:11441150.
  35. Boehringer Ingelheim. Pradaxa prescribing information. http://www.pradaxa.com. Accessed September 8, 2011.
  36. Huisman MV, Quinlan DJ, Dahl OE, Schulman S. Enoxaparin versus dabigatran or rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis after hip or knee arthroplasty: results of separate pooled analyses of phase III multicenter randomized trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010; 3:652660.
  37. McCullagh L, Tilson L, Walsh C, Barry M. A cost-effectiveness model comparing rivaroxaban and dabigatran etexilate with enoxaparin sodium as thromboprophylaxis after total hip and total knee replacement in the Irish healthcare setting. Pharmacoeconomics 2009; 27:829846.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
657-664
Page Number
657-664
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Dabigatran: Will it change clinical practice?
Display Headline
Dabigatran: Will it change clinical practice?
Sections
Inside the Article

KEY POINTS

  • Dabigatran is a potent, reversible, direct thrombin inhibitor. Available only in oral form, it has a rapid onset of action, a predictable anticoagulant response, and few major interactions.
  • Dabigatran does not require dose adjustments (except for renal insufficiency) or monitoring of its effect during treatment.
  • In trials in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, two different doses of dabigatran were compared with warfarin. Less bleeding occurred with the lower dose than with warfarin, while the higher dose was more effective than warfarin in preventing stroke and systemic embolization.
  • The American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and the Heart Rhythm Society have given dabigatran a class I B recommendation for secondary stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

What is the best questionnaire to screen for alcohol use disorder in an office practice?

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/10/2017 - 07:59
Display Headline
What is the best questionnaire to screen for alcohol use disorder in an office practice?

Popular questionnaires to screen for alcohol misuse include the CAGE, the TWEAK, and the short form of the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT-C). Any of these is recommended. The important thing is to be proactive about screening for this very common and underrecognized problem.

A COMMON PROBLEM, NOT OFTEN ADMITTED

Alcohol use disorder, which ranges from hazardous drinking to binge drinking and alcohol dependence, is more common than admitted and often goes undiagnosed. Its personal, societal, and economic consequences cannot be overemphasized. Alcohol use is responsible for 85,000 deaths each year in the United States, and it is linked to substantial medical and psychiatric consequences and injuries, especially motor vehicle accidents. The estimated annual cost of problems attributed to alcohol use is over $185 billion.1

About three in 10 US adults drink at levels that increase their risk for alcohol-related consequences, and about one in four adults currently abuses alcohol or is dependent on it.2 In 2009, 6.8% of the US population age 12 and above reported heavy drinking, with highest rates in those ages 21 to 29.3 The rate of alcohol use was higher in men than in women, but about 10% of pregnant women ages 15 to 44 reported current alcohol use.3

The prevalence of alcohol use disorder ranges from 2% to 29% in a typical ambulatory primary care medical practice.4 And only one-third of people with alcohol use disorder are diagnosed.

Studies and experience have shown that problem drinkers tend to not seek help until they have advanced dependence, often with associated medical and sociolegal complications. It is also well established that the earlier the diagnosis is made and appropriate intervention is offered, the better the prognosis.

WHAT IS THE GOAL OF SCREENING?

The goals of screening for alcohol use disorder are to estimate the patient’s risk level, to identify those at risk because they exceed defined limits, and to identify those with evidence of an active problem, ie, with adverse consequences related to their drinking. This screening paves the way for further assessment, definitive diagnosis, and a treatment plan.

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening and behavioral counseling interventions (such as a brief intervention) in the primary care setting to reduce alcohol misuse by adults, including pregnant women.5 In addition, most primary care patients who screen positive for heavy drinking or alcohol use disorder show motivation and readiness to change, and those with the most severe symptoms tend to be the most ready.6

THE IDEAL QUESTIONNAIRE: SENSITIVE, SPECIFIC, AND SHORT

The ideal alcohol screening questionnaire for a busy practice should be brief and highly sensitive and specific for identifying the spectrum of alcohol misuse. Also, it should be easy to recall so it can be part of routine face-to-face discussion with the patient during an office visit.

Further, it should include questions that focus on the consequences of drinking as well as on quantity and frequency. It should also take into account factors such as the patient’s age, sex, race or ethnicity, and pregnancy status, as these can influence the effectiveness of the screening method.

Problems with focusing on quantity alone

“Risky use” is defined (in a non-alcohol-dependent person or one with no alcohol-related consequences) as more than seven standard drinks per week or more than three per occasion for women, and more than 14 standard drinks per week or more than four per occasion for men.2

A standard drink in the United States contains about 12 to 14 g of ethanol: a 12-oz can or bottle of beer, a 5-oz glass of wine, or about 1.5 oz of 80-proof liquor.2

The common single-item screening test asks, “How many times in the past year have you had more than four drinks (for women) or five drinks (for men) in a day?” This is recommended by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism for brief screening in primary care. However, a positive answer (ie, one or more times in the past year) has a sensitivity of only 82% and a specificity of only 79% for detecting unhealthy alcohol use, and an even lower specificity (67%) for detecting current alcohol use disorder.7

The CAGE questionnaire

The four-item CAGE questionnaire8 focuses on the consequences of drinking:

  • C: Have you felt the need to cut down on your drinking?
  • A: Have you ever felt annoyed by someone criticizing your drinking?
  • G: Have you ever felt bad or guilty about your drinking?
  • E: Have you ever had an eye-opener—a drink the first thing in the morning to steady your nerves?

A yes to one or more of the questions denotes a need for further assessment.

The CAGE questionnaire is simple, non-threatening, brief, and easy to remember. A yes answer to two or more items has a sensitivity of 75% to 95% and a specificity of 84% to 97% for alcohol dependence.9 However, CAGE is less sensitive for identifying nonalcohol-dependent at-risk drinkers. The patient’s sex and ethnicity have also been found to affect its performance somewhat, with some studies showing a sensitivity as low as 50% in adult white women and as low as 40% in at-risk groups ages 60 and over.

 

 

The TWEAK questionnaire

The TWEAK is a modification of the CAGE and includes a question about tolerance; it has a sensitivity of 87% for harmful drinking and 84% for dependence, especially in trauma-related cases.9 It has also been found to be better than the CAGE for screening pregnant patients.

  • Tolerance: How many drinks can you hold without falling asleep or passing out? (2 points if six drinks or more)
  • Worried: Have friends or relatives worried about your drinking? (2 points if yes)
  • Eye-opener: Do you sometimes take a drink in the morning when you first get up? (1 point if yes)
  • Amnesia: Have friends or relatives told you about things you said or did while drinking that you could not remember? (1 point if yes)
  • Cut down: Do you sometimes feel the need to cut down on your drinking? (1 point if yes)

An answer of ≥ 6 to the first question or a total score of 3 or more denotes a problem with alcohol use and a need for further assessment.10

The AUDIT-C

The AUDIT-C, a shorter form of the 10-item AUDIT developed by the World Health Organization, uses only the first three questions of the full-length AUDIT. The three-item AUDIT-C has a sensitivity ranging from 85% in Hispanic women to 95% in white men.9,11 The questions center on the quantity and frequency of alcohol use:

  • How often do you have a drink containing alcohol? Answer choices: never; monthly or less often; 2 to 4 times a month; 2 to 3 times a week; 4 or more times a week.
  • How many standard drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when you are drinking? Answer choices: one or two; three or four; five or six; seven to nine; 10 or more.
  • How often do you have six or more drinks on one occasion? Answer choices: never, less than monthly; monthly; weekly; daily or almost.

Scoring is 0 for never, and 1, 2, 3, or 4 for the subsequent answer choices in each question.

The cut-off score for the AUDIT-C is usually a total of 3 points for women and 4 for men: ie, a score of 3 or higher for women and a score of 4 or higher for men indicate alcohol use disorder and the need for further assessment.

The AUDIT questionnaire has been found not only to have a high sensitivity (83%) and specificity (90%) for identifying alcohol dependence, but also to be more sensitive than the CAGE questionnaire (85% vs 75%) for identifying harmful drinking, hazardous drinking, and at-risk drinking. (Note: The full version of AUDIT performed similarly to the three-item AUDIT-C for detecting heavy drinking and active abuse or dependence.12) Furthermore, it has performed well as a screening test in many multinational trials of alcohol brief intervention. The questions about quantity of alcohol consumed may be even more suitable for adolescents and young adults, who tend to fall into the harmful-hazardous drinking category rather than the dependent category. In some studies, patients tended to reveal less with the CAGE questionnaire when it was preceded by direct and close-ended questions about the quantity and frequency of alcohol use, thus reducing its sensitivity.13

The AUDIT and TWEAK questionnaires showed greater sensitivity in both men and women than the CAGE questionnaire and were equally sensitive in African Americans.14

HOW TO FIT ALCOHOL SCREENING INTO AN OFFICE VISIT

A practical way to fit alcohol screening into an office visit is to include a questionnaire in the assessment papers completed by the patient while in the waiting room. In other settings, these questions may be asked by trained nursing staff as part of the initial assessment, ie, while obtaining the patient’s weight and vital statistics. This can be briefly reviewed by the physician during the face-to-face history and physical examination.

A concerted effort is needed to proactively screen for alcohol use. A combination of questions about the effect, the quantity, and the frequency of alcohol use is the best way to screen for the many different aspects of alcohol use disorder—many of which can be managed in the primary care setting through brief interventions without referral to a specialist.

When screening for alcohol misuse, it is also important to consider factors such as age, sex, race or ethnicity, pregnancy, and history of recent trauma or surgery.

References
  1. Saitz R. Clinical practice. Unhealthy alcohol use. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:596607.
  2. National institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). Helping patients who drink too much: A clinician’s guide and related professional support resources. http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/practitioner/cliniciansguide2005/clinicians_guide.htm. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  3. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Results from the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Volume I. Summary of National Findings. http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k9NSDUH/2k9ResultsP.pdf. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  4. Fiellin DA, Reid MC, O’Connor PG. Screening for alcohol problems in primary care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160:19771989.
  5. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse. Release date: April 2004. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsdrin.htm. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  6. Williams EC, Kivlahan DR, Saitz R, et al. Readiness to change in primary care patients who screened positive for alcohol misuse. Ann Fam Med 2006; 4:213220.
  7. Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, Saitz R. Primary care validation of a single-question alcohol screening test. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24:783788.
  8. Ewing JA. Detecting alcoholism. The CAGE questionnaire. JAMA 1984; 252:19051907.
  9. Cherpitel CJ. Screening for alcohol problems in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1995; 26:158166.
  10. Russell M, Martier SS, Sokol RJ, et al. Screening for pregnancy risk-drinking. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1994; 18:11561161.
  11. Frank D, DeBenedetti AF, Volk RJ, Williams EC, Kivlahan DR, Bradley KA. Effectiveness of the AUDIT-C as a screening test for alcohol misuse in three race/ethnic groups. J Gen Intern Med 2008; 23:781787.
  12. Bush K, Kivlahan DR, McDonell MB, Fihn SD, Bradley KA. The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): an effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158:17891795.
  13. Steinweg DL, Worth H. Alcoholism: the keys to the CAGE. Am J Med 1993; 94:520523.
  14. Cherpitel CJ. Brief screening instruments for alcoholism. Alcohol Health Res World 1997; 21:348351.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Keji Fagbemi, MD
Unit Chief, In-patient Detoxification Unit, Addiction Service, Department of Psychiatry, Bronx Lebanon Hospital, Bronx, NY, affiliated with Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY

Address: Keji Fagbemi, MD, In-Patient Detoxification Unit, Addiction Services, Department of Psychiatry, Bronx Lebanon Hospital, 1276 Fulton Avenue, Bronx, NY 10456; e-mail mfagbemi@bronxleb.org

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
649-651
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Keji Fagbemi, MD
Unit Chief, In-patient Detoxification Unit, Addiction Service, Department of Psychiatry, Bronx Lebanon Hospital, Bronx, NY, affiliated with Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY

Address: Keji Fagbemi, MD, In-Patient Detoxification Unit, Addiction Services, Department of Psychiatry, Bronx Lebanon Hospital, 1276 Fulton Avenue, Bronx, NY 10456; e-mail mfagbemi@bronxleb.org

Author and Disclosure Information

Keji Fagbemi, MD
Unit Chief, In-patient Detoxification Unit, Addiction Service, Department of Psychiatry, Bronx Lebanon Hospital, Bronx, NY, affiliated with Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY

Address: Keji Fagbemi, MD, In-Patient Detoxification Unit, Addiction Services, Department of Psychiatry, Bronx Lebanon Hospital, 1276 Fulton Avenue, Bronx, NY 10456; e-mail mfagbemi@bronxleb.org

Article PDF
Article PDF

Popular questionnaires to screen for alcohol misuse include the CAGE, the TWEAK, and the short form of the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT-C). Any of these is recommended. The important thing is to be proactive about screening for this very common and underrecognized problem.

A COMMON PROBLEM, NOT OFTEN ADMITTED

Alcohol use disorder, which ranges from hazardous drinking to binge drinking and alcohol dependence, is more common than admitted and often goes undiagnosed. Its personal, societal, and economic consequences cannot be overemphasized. Alcohol use is responsible for 85,000 deaths each year in the United States, and it is linked to substantial medical and psychiatric consequences and injuries, especially motor vehicle accidents. The estimated annual cost of problems attributed to alcohol use is over $185 billion.1

About three in 10 US adults drink at levels that increase their risk for alcohol-related consequences, and about one in four adults currently abuses alcohol or is dependent on it.2 In 2009, 6.8% of the US population age 12 and above reported heavy drinking, with highest rates in those ages 21 to 29.3 The rate of alcohol use was higher in men than in women, but about 10% of pregnant women ages 15 to 44 reported current alcohol use.3

The prevalence of alcohol use disorder ranges from 2% to 29% in a typical ambulatory primary care medical practice.4 And only one-third of people with alcohol use disorder are diagnosed.

Studies and experience have shown that problem drinkers tend to not seek help until they have advanced dependence, often with associated medical and sociolegal complications. It is also well established that the earlier the diagnosis is made and appropriate intervention is offered, the better the prognosis.

WHAT IS THE GOAL OF SCREENING?

The goals of screening for alcohol use disorder are to estimate the patient’s risk level, to identify those at risk because they exceed defined limits, and to identify those with evidence of an active problem, ie, with adverse consequences related to their drinking. This screening paves the way for further assessment, definitive diagnosis, and a treatment plan.

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening and behavioral counseling interventions (such as a brief intervention) in the primary care setting to reduce alcohol misuse by adults, including pregnant women.5 In addition, most primary care patients who screen positive for heavy drinking or alcohol use disorder show motivation and readiness to change, and those with the most severe symptoms tend to be the most ready.6

THE IDEAL QUESTIONNAIRE: SENSITIVE, SPECIFIC, AND SHORT

The ideal alcohol screening questionnaire for a busy practice should be brief and highly sensitive and specific for identifying the spectrum of alcohol misuse. Also, it should be easy to recall so it can be part of routine face-to-face discussion with the patient during an office visit.

Further, it should include questions that focus on the consequences of drinking as well as on quantity and frequency. It should also take into account factors such as the patient’s age, sex, race or ethnicity, and pregnancy status, as these can influence the effectiveness of the screening method.

Problems with focusing on quantity alone

“Risky use” is defined (in a non-alcohol-dependent person or one with no alcohol-related consequences) as more than seven standard drinks per week or more than three per occasion for women, and more than 14 standard drinks per week or more than four per occasion for men.2

A standard drink in the United States contains about 12 to 14 g of ethanol: a 12-oz can or bottle of beer, a 5-oz glass of wine, or about 1.5 oz of 80-proof liquor.2

The common single-item screening test asks, “How many times in the past year have you had more than four drinks (for women) or five drinks (for men) in a day?” This is recommended by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism for brief screening in primary care. However, a positive answer (ie, one or more times in the past year) has a sensitivity of only 82% and a specificity of only 79% for detecting unhealthy alcohol use, and an even lower specificity (67%) for detecting current alcohol use disorder.7

The CAGE questionnaire

The four-item CAGE questionnaire8 focuses on the consequences of drinking:

  • C: Have you felt the need to cut down on your drinking?
  • A: Have you ever felt annoyed by someone criticizing your drinking?
  • G: Have you ever felt bad or guilty about your drinking?
  • E: Have you ever had an eye-opener—a drink the first thing in the morning to steady your nerves?

A yes to one or more of the questions denotes a need for further assessment.

The CAGE questionnaire is simple, non-threatening, brief, and easy to remember. A yes answer to two or more items has a sensitivity of 75% to 95% and a specificity of 84% to 97% for alcohol dependence.9 However, CAGE is less sensitive for identifying nonalcohol-dependent at-risk drinkers. The patient’s sex and ethnicity have also been found to affect its performance somewhat, with some studies showing a sensitivity as low as 50% in adult white women and as low as 40% in at-risk groups ages 60 and over.

 

 

The TWEAK questionnaire

The TWEAK is a modification of the CAGE and includes a question about tolerance; it has a sensitivity of 87% for harmful drinking and 84% for dependence, especially in trauma-related cases.9 It has also been found to be better than the CAGE for screening pregnant patients.

  • Tolerance: How many drinks can you hold without falling asleep or passing out? (2 points if six drinks or more)
  • Worried: Have friends or relatives worried about your drinking? (2 points if yes)
  • Eye-opener: Do you sometimes take a drink in the morning when you first get up? (1 point if yes)
  • Amnesia: Have friends or relatives told you about things you said or did while drinking that you could not remember? (1 point if yes)
  • Cut down: Do you sometimes feel the need to cut down on your drinking? (1 point if yes)

An answer of ≥ 6 to the first question or a total score of 3 or more denotes a problem with alcohol use and a need for further assessment.10

The AUDIT-C

The AUDIT-C, a shorter form of the 10-item AUDIT developed by the World Health Organization, uses only the first three questions of the full-length AUDIT. The three-item AUDIT-C has a sensitivity ranging from 85% in Hispanic women to 95% in white men.9,11 The questions center on the quantity and frequency of alcohol use:

  • How often do you have a drink containing alcohol? Answer choices: never; monthly or less often; 2 to 4 times a month; 2 to 3 times a week; 4 or more times a week.
  • How many standard drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when you are drinking? Answer choices: one or two; three or four; five or six; seven to nine; 10 or more.
  • How often do you have six or more drinks on one occasion? Answer choices: never, less than monthly; monthly; weekly; daily or almost.

Scoring is 0 for never, and 1, 2, 3, or 4 for the subsequent answer choices in each question.

The cut-off score for the AUDIT-C is usually a total of 3 points for women and 4 for men: ie, a score of 3 or higher for women and a score of 4 or higher for men indicate alcohol use disorder and the need for further assessment.

The AUDIT questionnaire has been found not only to have a high sensitivity (83%) and specificity (90%) for identifying alcohol dependence, but also to be more sensitive than the CAGE questionnaire (85% vs 75%) for identifying harmful drinking, hazardous drinking, and at-risk drinking. (Note: The full version of AUDIT performed similarly to the three-item AUDIT-C for detecting heavy drinking and active abuse or dependence.12) Furthermore, it has performed well as a screening test in many multinational trials of alcohol brief intervention. The questions about quantity of alcohol consumed may be even more suitable for adolescents and young adults, who tend to fall into the harmful-hazardous drinking category rather than the dependent category. In some studies, patients tended to reveal less with the CAGE questionnaire when it was preceded by direct and close-ended questions about the quantity and frequency of alcohol use, thus reducing its sensitivity.13

The AUDIT and TWEAK questionnaires showed greater sensitivity in both men and women than the CAGE questionnaire and were equally sensitive in African Americans.14

HOW TO FIT ALCOHOL SCREENING INTO AN OFFICE VISIT

A practical way to fit alcohol screening into an office visit is to include a questionnaire in the assessment papers completed by the patient while in the waiting room. In other settings, these questions may be asked by trained nursing staff as part of the initial assessment, ie, while obtaining the patient’s weight and vital statistics. This can be briefly reviewed by the physician during the face-to-face history and physical examination.

A concerted effort is needed to proactively screen for alcohol use. A combination of questions about the effect, the quantity, and the frequency of alcohol use is the best way to screen for the many different aspects of alcohol use disorder—many of which can be managed in the primary care setting through brief interventions without referral to a specialist.

When screening for alcohol misuse, it is also important to consider factors such as age, sex, race or ethnicity, pregnancy, and history of recent trauma or surgery.

Popular questionnaires to screen for alcohol misuse include the CAGE, the TWEAK, and the short form of the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT-C). Any of these is recommended. The important thing is to be proactive about screening for this very common and underrecognized problem.

A COMMON PROBLEM, NOT OFTEN ADMITTED

Alcohol use disorder, which ranges from hazardous drinking to binge drinking and alcohol dependence, is more common than admitted and often goes undiagnosed. Its personal, societal, and economic consequences cannot be overemphasized. Alcohol use is responsible for 85,000 deaths each year in the United States, and it is linked to substantial medical and psychiatric consequences and injuries, especially motor vehicle accidents. The estimated annual cost of problems attributed to alcohol use is over $185 billion.1

About three in 10 US adults drink at levels that increase their risk for alcohol-related consequences, and about one in four adults currently abuses alcohol or is dependent on it.2 In 2009, 6.8% of the US population age 12 and above reported heavy drinking, with highest rates in those ages 21 to 29.3 The rate of alcohol use was higher in men than in women, but about 10% of pregnant women ages 15 to 44 reported current alcohol use.3

The prevalence of alcohol use disorder ranges from 2% to 29% in a typical ambulatory primary care medical practice.4 And only one-third of people with alcohol use disorder are diagnosed.

Studies and experience have shown that problem drinkers tend to not seek help until they have advanced dependence, often with associated medical and sociolegal complications. It is also well established that the earlier the diagnosis is made and appropriate intervention is offered, the better the prognosis.

WHAT IS THE GOAL OF SCREENING?

The goals of screening for alcohol use disorder are to estimate the patient’s risk level, to identify those at risk because they exceed defined limits, and to identify those with evidence of an active problem, ie, with adverse consequences related to their drinking. This screening paves the way for further assessment, definitive diagnosis, and a treatment plan.

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening and behavioral counseling interventions (such as a brief intervention) in the primary care setting to reduce alcohol misuse by adults, including pregnant women.5 In addition, most primary care patients who screen positive for heavy drinking or alcohol use disorder show motivation and readiness to change, and those with the most severe symptoms tend to be the most ready.6

THE IDEAL QUESTIONNAIRE: SENSITIVE, SPECIFIC, AND SHORT

The ideal alcohol screening questionnaire for a busy practice should be brief and highly sensitive and specific for identifying the spectrum of alcohol misuse. Also, it should be easy to recall so it can be part of routine face-to-face discussion with the patient during an office visit.

Further, it should include questions that focus on the consequences of drinking as well as on quantity and frequency. It should also take into account factors such as the patient’s age, sex, race or ethnicity, and pregnancy status, as these can influence the effectiveness of the screening method.

Problems with focusing on quantity alone

“Risky use” is defined (in a non-alcohol-dependent person or one with no alcohol-related consequences) as more than seven standard drinks per week or more than three per occasion for women, and more than 14 standard drinks per week or more than four per occasion for men.2

A standard drink in the United States contains about 12 to 14 g of ethanol: a 12-oz can or bottle of beer, a 5-oz glass of wine, or about 1.5 oz of 80-proof liquor.2

The common single-item screening test asks, “How many times in the past year have you had more than four drinks (for women) or five drinks (for men) in a day?” This is recommended by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism for brief screening in primary care. However, a positive answer (ie, one or more times in the past year) has a sensitivity of only 82% and a specificity of only 79% for detecting unhealthy alcohol use, and an even lower specificity (67%) for detecting current alcohol use disorder.7

The CAGE questionnaire

The four-item CAGE questionnaire8 focuses on the consequences of drinking:

  • C: Have you felt the need to cut down on your drinking?
  • A: Have you ever felt annoyed by someone criticizing your drinking?
  • G: Have you ever felt bad or guilty about your drinking?
  • E: Have you ever had an eye-opener—a drink the first thing in the morning to steady your nerves?

A yes to one or more of the questions denotes a need for further assessment.

The CAGE questionnaire is simple, non-threatening, brief, and easy to remember. A yes answer to two or more items has a sensitivity of 75% to 95% and a specificity of 84% to 97% for alcohol dependence.9 However, CAGE is less sensitive for identifying nonalcohol-dependent at-risk drinkers. The patient’s sex and ethnicity have also been found to affect its performance somewhat, with some studies showing a sensitivity as low as 50% in adult white women and as low as 40% in at-risk groups ages 60 and over.

 

 

The TWEAK questionnaire

The TWEAK is a modification of the CAGE and includes a question about tolerance; it has a sensitivity of 87% for harmful drinking and 84% for dependence, especially in trauma-related cases.9 It has also been found to be better than the CAGE for screening pregnant patients.

  • Tolerance: How many drinks can you hold without falling asleep or passing out? (2 points if six drinks or more)
  • Worried: Have friends or relatives worried about your drinking? (2 points if yes)
  • Eye-opener: Do you sometimes take a drink in the morning when you first get up? (1 point if yes)
  • Amnesia: Have friends or relatives told you about things you said or did while drinking that you could not remember? (1 point if yes)
  • Cut down: Do you sometimes feel the need to cut down on your drinking? (1 point if yes)

An answer of ≥ 6 to the first question or a total score of 3 or more denotes a problem with alcohol use and a need for further assessment.10

The AUDIT-C

The AUDIT-C, a shorter form of the 10-item AUDIT developed by the World Health Organization, uses only the first three questions of the full-length AUDIT. The three-item AUDIT-C has a sensitivity ranging from 85% in Hispanic women to 95% in white men.9,11 The questions center on the quantity and frequency of alcohol use:

  • How often do you have a drink containing alcohol? Answer choices: never; monthly or less often; 2 to 4 times a month; 2 to 3 times a week; 4 or more times a week.
  • How many standard drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when you are drinking? Answer choices: one or two; three or four; five or six; seven to nine; 10 or more.
  • How often do you have six or more drinks on one occasion? Answer choices: never, less than monthly; monthly; weekly; daily or almost.

Scoring is 0 for never, and 1, 2, 3, or 4 for the subsequent answer choices in each question.

The cut-off score for the AUDIT-C is usually a total of 3 points for women and 4 for men: ie, a score of 3 or higher for women and a score of 4 or higher for men indicate alcohol use disorder and the need for further assessment.

The AUDIT questionnaire has been found not only to have a high sensitivity (83%) and specificity (90%) for identifying alcohol dependence, but also to be more sensitive than the CAGE questionnaire (85% vs 75%) for identifying harmful drinking, hazardous drinking, and at-risk drinking. (Note: The full version of AUDIT performed similarly to the three-item AUDIT-C for detecting heavy drinking and active abuse or dependence.12) Furthermore, it has performed well as a screening test in many multinational trials of alcohol brief intervention. The questions about quantity of alcohol consumed may be even more suitable for adolescents and young adults, who tend to fall into the harmful-hazardous drinking category rather than the dependent category. In some studies, patients tended to reveal less with the CAGE questionnaire when it was preceded by direct and close-ended questions about the quantity and frequency of alcohol use, thus reducing its sensitivity.13

The AUDIT and TWEAK questionnaires showed greater sensitivity in both men and women than the CAGE questionnaire and were equally sensitive in African Americans.14

HOW TO FIT ALCOHOL SCREENING INTO AN OFFICE VISIT

A practical way to fit alcohol screening into an office visit is to include a questionnaire in the assessment papers completed by the patient while in the waiting room. In other settings, these questions may be asked by trained nursing staff as part of the initial assessment, ie, while obtaining the patient’s weight and vital statistics. This can be briefly reviewed by the physician during the face-to-face history and physical examination.

A concerted effort is needed to proactively screen for alcohol use. A combination of questions about the effect, the quantity, and the frequency of alcohol use is the best way to screen for the many different aspects of alcohol use disorder—many of which can be managed in the primary care setting through brief interventions without referral to a specialist.

When screening for alcohol misuse, it is also important to consider factors such as age, sex, race or ethnicity, pregnancy, and history of recent trauma or surgery.

References
  1. Saitz R. Clinical practice. Unhealthy alcohol use. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:596607.
  2. National institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). Helping patients who drink too much: A clinician’s guide and related professional support resources. http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/practitioner/cliniciansguide2005/clinicians_guide.htm. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  3. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Results from the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Volume I. Summary of National Findings. http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k9NSDUH/2k9ResultsP.pdf. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  4. Fiellin DA, Reid MC, O’Connor PG. Screening for alcohol problems in primary care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160:19771989.
  5. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse. Release date: April 2004. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsdrin.htm. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  6. Williams EC, Kivlahan DR, Saitz R, et al. Readiness to change in primary care patients who screened positive for alcohol misuse. Ann Fam Med 2006; 4:213220.
  7. Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, Saitz R. Primary care validation of a single-question alcohol screening test. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24:783788.
  8. Ewing JA. Detecting alcoholism. The CAGE questionnaire. JAMA 1984; 252:19051907.
  9. Cherpitel CJ. Screening for alcohol problems in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1995; 26:158166.
  10. Russell M, Martier SS, Sokol RJ, et al. Screening for pregnancy risk-drinking. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1994; 18:11561161.
  11. Frank D, DeBenedetti AF, Volk RJ, Williams EC, Kivlahan DR, Bradley KA. Effectiveness of the AUDIT-C as a screening test for alcohol misuse in three race/ethnic groups. J Gen Intern Med 2008; 23:781787.
  12. Bush K, Kivlahan DR, McDonell MB, Fihn SD, Bradley KA. The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): an effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158:17891795.
  13. Steinweg DL, Worth H. Alcoholism: the keys to the CAGE. Am J Med 1993; 94:520523.
  14. Cherpitel CJ. Brief screening instruments for alcoholism. Alcohol Health Res World 1997; 21:348351.
References
  1. Saitz R. Clinical practice. Unhealthy alcohol use. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:596607.
  2. National institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). Helping patients who drink too much: A clinician’s guide and related professional support resources. http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/practitioner/cliniciansguide2005/clinicians_guide.htm. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  3. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Results from the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Volume I. Summary of National Findings. http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k9NSDUH/2k9ResultsP.pdf. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  4. Fiellin DA, Reid MC, O’Connor PG. Screening for alcohol problems in primary care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160:19771989.
  5. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse. Release date: April 2004. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsdrin.htm. Accessed July 29, 2011.
  6. Williams EC, Kivlahan DR, Saitz R, et al. Readiness to change in primary care patients who screened positive for alcohol misuse. Ann Fam Med 2006; 4:213220.
  7. Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, Saitz R. Primary care validation of a single-question alcohol screening test. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24:783788.
  8. Ewing JA. Detecting alcoholism. The CAGE questionnaire. JAMA 1984; 252:19051907.
  9. Cherpitel CJ. Screening for alcohol problems in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1995; 26:158166.
  10. Russell M, Martier SS, Sokol RJ, et al. Screening for pregnancy risk-drinking. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1994; 18:11561161.
  11. Frank D, DeBenedetti AF, Volk RJ, Williams EC, Kivlahan DR, Bradley KA. Effectiveness of the AUDIT-C as a screening test for alcohol misuse in three race/ethnic groups. J Gen Intern Med 2008; 23:781787.
  12. Bush K, Kivlahan DR, McDonell MB, Fihn SD, Bradley KA. The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): an effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158:17891795.
  13. Steinweg DL, Worth H. Alcoholism: the keys to the CAGE. Am J Med 1993; 94:520523.
  14. Cherpitel CJ. Brief screening instruments for alcoholism. Alcohol Health Res World 1997; 21:348351.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
649-651
Page Number
649-651
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
What is the best questionnaire to screen for alcohol use disorder in an office practice?
Display Headline
What is the best questionnaire to screen for alcohol use disorder in an office practice?
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Necrotic skin lesions after hemodialysis

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/10/2017 - 07:55
Display Headline
Necrotic skin lesions after hemodialysis

Figure 1. The patient’s right lateral thigh shows the classic features of calciphylaxis: ischemia and necrosis in an area of increased adipose tissue.
A 44-year-old woman with end-stage liver disease presents with a painful, ischemic, necrotic lesion on her right lateral and medial thigh (Figure  1). Several months ago, while being evaluated in the hospital for liver transplantation, she developed bacteremia, anion-gap metabolic acidosis, hepatorenal syndrome, and acute renal failure. She began continuous hemodialysis, which lasted for about 1 month, ending 35 days after the renal failure resolved.

Current laboratory values:

  • Serum calcium concentration 7.8 mg/dL (reference range 8.5–10.5)
  • Phosphorus 6.4 mg/dL (2.5–4.5)
  • Corrected calcium-phosphorus product 55
  • Parathyroid hormone 275 pg/mL (10–60)
  • 25-hydroxyvitamin D 7.4 ng/mL (31–80).

Q: Given the patient’s history, which of the following does her skin lesion likely represent?

  • Necrotizing fasciitis
  • Calciphylaxis
  • Disseminated intravascular coagulation
  • Anticoagulant-induced skin necrosis

A: Calciphylaxis, or calcific uremic arteriolopathy, is the most likely. It is rare in people with normal renal function, and still rare but somewhat less so in end-stage renal disease patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis.

WHAT CAUSED IT IN OUR PATIENT?

The cause of calciphylaxis is unknown. Theories have focused on protein C and parathyroid hormone. Putative precipitating factors include acute tubular necrosis, albumin infusion with paracentesis, deficiency of protein C or S, hyperparathyroidism, hyperphosphatemia, hypercalcemia, vitamin D supplementation, steroids, trauma, and warfarin use.

Our patient had a history of hypothyroidism, ulcerative colitis, and end-stage liver disease due to primary sclerosing cholangitis, but no previous history of renal disease.

At the time of her acute renal failure, her calcium-phosphorus level was 55, parathyroid hormone level 274 pg/mL (normal 10–60), and protein C level 26% (normal 76%–147%). At the time the skin lesions were discovered, her protein C level had dropped to 14%; her parathyroid level had returned to normal.

Her home medications included furosemide (Lasix), levothyroxine (Synthroid), mesalamine (Pentasa), azathioprine (Imuran), ursodiol (Actigall), spironolactone (Aldactone), and omeprazole (Prilosec).

NONHEALING LESIONS

Figure 2. Histologic study of the biopsied skin lesions. (A) A low-power image of the punch biopsy shows necrotic epidermis (arrow) that has physically separated from the underlying unhealthy hemorrhagic dermis (arrowhead). (B) A higher-power view of the hemorrhagic dermis shows scattered foci of deeply basophilic material (arrowheads). A reasonable differential diagnosis for this finding is atypical hyperchromatic fibroblastic and endothelial nuclei vs calcium deposits. (C) Von Kossa stain was performed to evaluate for the presence of calcium deposits; brown-staining areas indicate calcium deposition. (D) A section of the same tissue seen in C. (E and F) Calcium deposits within the wall of the centrally placed small- to medium-sized vessel.
The skin lesions are characteristically erythematous and tender, with mottling of the skin early in the course. As the lesions progress, they develop central necrosis and deep ulcerations with eschar formation. The ulcers have irregular borders and do not heal. Histopathologic study typically shows epidermis with ischemic necrosis and calcium deposition along elastic fibers on Von Kossa calcium stains (Figure 2).

The skin lesions of calciphylaxis usually occur in areas of increased adipose tissue. The lesions may not manifest until several weeks after the initial insult (ie, the elevated calcium-phosphate level). Skin biopsy is recommended if a necrotic skin lesion is identified in a patient with an elevated calcium-phosphate level or in a patient with risk factors for renal, liver, or parathyroid disease.

PROGNOSIS IS POOR

Treatment is supportive. Intensive wound care (with surgical evaluation for skin grafting), hyperbaric oxygen, and possibly tissue plasminogen activator (if there is evidence of a hypercoagulable state and occlusive vasculopathy) may be the most beneficial. Identifying the underlying cause and regulating the calcium-phosphorus product level with diet, phosphate binders, bisphosphonates, and sodium thiosulfate are also important in wound healing. Cinacalcet (Sensipar) and parathyroidectomy should be considered in cases of secondary hyperparathyroidism.

Calciphylaxis is important to recognize early in its course and may require a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Its prognosis is poor, with death rates ranging from 40% to 60%.

Our patient developed recurrent hepatorenal syndrome and sepsis and eventually died of septic shock.

References
  1. Daudén E, Oñate MJ. Calciphylaxis. Dermatol Clin 2008; 26:557–568.
  2. Pliquett RU, Schwock J, Paschke R, Achenbach H. Calciphylaxis in chronic, non-dialysis-dependent renal disease. BMC Nephrol 2003; 4:8.
  3. Nigwekar SU, Wolf M, Sterns RH, Hix JK. Calciphylaxis from nonuremic causes: a systematic review. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2008; 3:1139–1143.

Suggested Reading

  1. Rogers NM, Coates PT. Calcific uraemic arteriolopathy:an update. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2008; 17:629–634.
  2. Weenig RH, Sewell LD, Davis MD, McCarthy JT, Pittelkow MR. Calciphylaxis: natural history, risk factor analysis, and outcome. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007; 56:569–579.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Christopher R. Newey, DO, MS
Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Aarti Sarwal, MD
Neurointensive Care Unit, Cerebrovascular Center, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Jeffrey Uchin, MD
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

Guy Mulligan, MD
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Christopher R. Newey, DO, MS, Department of Neurology, S90, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail neweyc@ccf.org

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
646-648
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Christopher R. Newey, DO, MS
Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Aarti Sarwal, MD
Neurointensive Care Unit, Cerebrovascular Center, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Jeffrey Uchin, MD
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

Guy Mulligan, MD
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Christopher R. Newey, DO, MS, Department of Neurology, S90, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail neweyc@ccf.org

Author and Disclosure Information

Christopher R. Newey, DO, MS
Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Aarti Sarwal, MD
Neurointensive Care Unit, Cerebrovascular Center, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Jeffrey Uchin, MD
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

Guy Mulligan, MD
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Christopher R. Newey, DO, MS, Department of Neurology, S90, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; e-mail neweyc@ccf.org

Article PDF
Article PDF

Figure 1. The patient’s right lateral thigh shows the classic features of calciphylaxis: ischemia and necrosis in an area of increased adipose tissue.
A 44-year-old woman with end-stage liver disease presents with a painful, ischemic, necrotic lesion on her right lateral and medial thigh (Figure  1). Several months ago, while being evaluated in the hospital for liver transplantation, she developed bacteremia, anion-gap metabolic acidosis, hepatorenal syndrome, and acute renal failure. She began continuous hemodialysis, which lasted for about 1 month, ending 35 days after the renal failure resolved.

Current laboratory values:

  • Serum calcium concentration 7.8 mg/dL (reference range 8.5–10.5)
  • Phosphorus 6.4 mg/dL (2.5–4.5)
  • Corrected calcium-phosphorus product 55
  • Parathyroid hormone 275 pg/mL (10–60)
  • 25-hydroxyvitamin D 7.4 ng/mL (31–80).

Q: Given the patient’s history, which of the following does her skin lesion likely represent?

  • Necrotizing fasciitis
  • Calciphylaxis
  • Disseminated intravascular coagulation
  • Anticoagulant-induced skin necrosis

A: Calciphylaxis, or calcific uremic arteriolopathy, is the most likely. It is rare in people with normal renal function, and still rare but somewhat less so in end-stage renal disease patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis.

WHAT CAUSED IT IN OUR PATIENT?

The cause of calciphylaxis is unknown. Theories have focused on protein C and parathyroid hormone. Putative precipitating factors include acute tubular necrosis, albumin infusion with paracentesis, deficiency of protein C or S, hyperparathyroidism, hyperphosphatemia, hypercalcemia, vitamin D supplementation, steroids, trauma, and warfarin use.

Our patient had a history of hypothyroidism, ulcerative colitis, and end-stage liver disease due to primary sclerosing cholangitis, but no previous history of renal disease.

At the time of her acute renal failure, her calcium-phosphorus level was 55, parathyroid hormone level 274 pg/mL (normal 10–60), and protein C level 26% (normal 76%–147%). At the time the skin lesions were discovered, her protein C level had dropped to 14%; her parathyroid level had returned to normal.

Her home medications included furosemide (Lasix), levothyroxine (Synthroid), mesalamine (Pentasa), azathioprine (Imuran), ursodiol (Actigall), spironolactone (Aldactone), and omeprazole (Prilosec).

NONHEALING LESIONS

Figure 2. Histologic study of the biopsied skin lesions. (A) A low-power image of the punch biopsy shows necrotic epidermis (arrow) that has physically separated from the underlying unhealthy hemorrhagic dermis (arrowhead). (B) A higher-power view of the hemorrhagic dermis shows scattered foci of deeply basophilic material (arrowheads). A reasonable differential diagnosis for this finding is atypical hyperchromatic fibroblastic and endothelial nuclei vs calcium deposits. (C) Von Kossa stain was performed to evaluate for the presence of calcium deposits; brown-staining areas indicate calcium deposition. (D) A section of the same tissue seen in C. (E and F) Calcium deposits within the wall of the centrally placed small- to medium-sized vessel.
The skin lesions are characteristically erythematous and tender, with mottling of the skin early in the course. As the lesions progress, they develop central necrosis and deep ulcerations with eschar formation. The ulcers have irregular borders and do not heal. Histopathologic study typically shows epidermis with ischemic necrosis and calcium deposition along elastic fibers on Von Kossa calcium stains (Figure 2).

The skin lesions of calciphylaxis usually occur in areas of increased adipose tissue. The lesions may not manifest until several weeks after the initial insult (ie, the elevated calcium-phosphate level). Skin biopsy is recommended if a necrotic skin lesion is identified in a patient with an elevated calcium-phosphate level or in a patient with risk factors for renal, liver, or parathyroid disease.

PROGNOSIS IS POOR

Treatment is supportive. Intensive wound care (with surgical evaluation for skin grafting), hyperbaric oxygen, and possibly tissue plasminogen activator (if there is evidence of a hypercoagulable state and occlusive vasculopathy) may be the most beneficial. Identifying the underlying cause and regulating the calcium-phosphorus product level with diet, phosphate binders, bisphosphonates, and sodium thiosulfate are also important in wound healing. Cinacalcet (Sensipar) and parathyroidectomy should be considered in cases of secondary hyperparathyroidism.

Calciphylaxis is important to recognize early in its course and may require a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Its prognosis is poor, with death rates ranging from 40% to 60%.

Our patient developed recurrent hepatorenal syndrome and sepsis and eventually died of septic shock.

Figure 1. The patient’s right lateral thigh shows the classic features of calciphylaxis: ischemia and necrosis in an area of increased adipose tissue.
A 44-year-old woman with end-stage liver disease presents with a painful, ischemic, necrotic lesion on her right lateral and medial thigh (Figure  1). Several months ago, while being evaluated in the hospital for liver transplantation, she developed bacteremia, anion-gap metabolic acidosis, hepatorenal syndrome, and acute renal failure. She began continuous hemodialysis, which lasted for about 1 month, ending 35 days after the renal failure resolved.

Current laboratory values:

  • Serum calcium concentration 7.8 mg/dL (reference range 8.5–10.5)
  • Phosphorus 6.4 mg/dL (2.5–4.5)
  • Corrected calcium-phosphorus product 55
  • Parathyroid hormone 275 pg/mL (10–60)
  • 25-hydroxyvitamin D 7.4 ng/mL (31–80).

Q: Given the patient’s history, which of the following does her skin lesion likely represent?

  • Necrotizing fasciitis
  • Calciphylaxis
  • Disseminated intravascular coagulation
  • Anticoagulant-induced skin necrosis

A: Calciphylaxis, or calcific uremic arteriolopathy, is the most likely. It is rare in people with normal renal function, and still rare but somewhat less so in end-stage renal disease patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis.

WHAT CAUSED IT IN OUR PATIENT?

The cause of calciphylaxis is unknown. Theories have focused on protein C and parathyroid hormone. Putative precipitating factors include acute tubular necrosis, albumin infusion with paracentesis, deficiency of protein C or S, hyperparathyroidism, hyperphosphatemia, hypercalcemia, vitamin D supplementation, steroids, trauma, and warfarin use.

Our patient had a history of hypothyroidism, ulcerative colitis, and end-stage liver disease due to primary sclerosing cholangitis, but no previous history of renal disease.

At the time of her acute renal failure, her calcium-phosphorus level was 55, parathyroid hormone level 274 pg/mL (normal 10–60), and protein C level 26% (normal 76%–147%). At the time the skin lesions were discovered, her protein C level had dropped to 14%; her parathyroid level had returned to normal.

Her home medications included furosemide (Lasix), levothyroxine (Synthroid), mesalamine (Pentasa), azathioprine (Imuran), ursodiol (Actigall), spironolactone (Aldactone), and omeprazole (Prilosec).

NONHEALING LESIONS

Figure 2. Histologic study of the biopsied skin lesions. (A) A low-power image of the punch biopsy shows necrotic epidermis (arrow) that has physically separated from the underlying unhealthy hemorrhagic dermis (arrowhead). (B) A higher-power view of the hemorrhagic dermis shows scattered foci of deeply basophilic material (arrowheads). A reasonable differential diagnosis for this finding is atypical hyperchromatic fibroblastic and endothelial nuclei vs calcium deposits. (C) Von Kossa stain was performed to evaluate for the presence of calcium deposits; brown-staining areas indicate calcium deposition. (D) A section of the same tissue seen in C. (E and F) Calcium deposits within the wall of the centrally placed small- to medium-sized vessel.
The skin lesions are characteristically erythematous and tender, with mottling of the skin early in the course. As the lesions progress, they develop central necrosis and deep ulcerations with eschar formation. The ulcers have irregular borders and do not heal. Histopathologic study typically shows epidermis with ischemic necrosis and calcium deposition along elastic fibers on Von Kossa calcium stains (Figure 2).

The skin lesions of calciphylaxis usually occur in areas of increased adipose tissue. The lesions may not manifest until several weeks after the initial insult (ie, the elevated calcium-phosphate level). Skin biopsy is recommended if a necrotic skin lesion is identified in a patient with an elevated calcium-phosphate level or in a patient with risk factors for renal, liver, or parathyroid disease.

PROGNOSIS IS POOR

Treatment is supportive. Intensive wound care (with surgical evaluation for skin grafting), hyperbaric oxygen, and possibly tissue plasminogen activator (if there is evidence of a hypercoagulable state and occlusive vasculopathy) may be the most beneficial. Identifying the underlying cause and regulating the calcium-phosphorus product level with diet, phosphate binders, bisphosphonates, and sodium thiosulfate are also important in wound healing. Cinacalcet (Sensipar) and parathyroidectomy should be considered in cases of secondary hyperparathyroidism.

Calciphylaxis is important to recognize early in its course and may require a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Its prognosis is poor, with death rates ranging from 40% to 60%.

Our patient developed recurrent hepatorenal syndrome and sepsis and eventually died of septic shock.

References
  1. Daudén E, Oñate MJ. Calciphylaxis. Dermatol Clin 2008; 26:557–568.
  2. Pliquett RU, Schwock J, Paschke R, Achenbach H. Calciphylaxis in chronic, non-dialysis-dependent renal disease. BMC Nephrol 2003; 4:8.
  3. Nigwekar SU, Wolf M, Sterns RH, Hix JK. Calciphylaxis from nonuremic causes: a systematic review. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2008; 3:1139–1143.

Suggested Reading

  1. Rogers NM, Coates PT. Calcific uraemic arteriolopathy:an update. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2008; 17:629–634.
  2. Weenig RH, Sewell LD, Davis MD, McCarthy JT, Pittelkow MR. Calciphylaxis: natural history, risk factor analysis, and outcome. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007; 56:569–579.
References
  1. Daudén E, Oñate MJ. Calciphylaxis. Dermatol Clin 2008; 26:557–568.
  2. Pliquett RU, Schwock J, Paschke R, Achenbach H. Calciphylaxis in chronic, non-dialysis-dependent renal disease. BMC Nephrol 2003; 4:8.
  3. Nigwekar SU, Wolf M, Sterns RH, Hix JK. Calciphylaxis from nonuremic causes: a systematic review. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2008; 3:1139–1143.

Suggested Reading

  1. Rogers NM, Coates PT. Calcific uraemic arteriolopathy:an update. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2008; 17:629–634.
  2. Weenig RH, Sewell LD, Davis MD, McCarthy JT, Pittelkow MR. Calciphylaxis: natural history, risk factor analysis, and outcome. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007; 56:569–579.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
646-648
Page Number
646-648
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Necrotic skin lesions after hemodialysis
Display Headline
Necrotic skin lesions after hemodialysis
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

A discussion of dissection

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/10/2017 - 07:41
Display Headline
A discussion of dissection

Few medical emergencies are as dramatic as an acutely rupturing aortic aneurysm. I recall a Thanksgiving in the emergency room about 25 years ago. We were evaluating a man who had suffered a syncopal episode at his holiday dinner table. It was an odd presentation in the ER: hypotension and bradycardia, no inferior myocardial infarction, and no obvious reason to be persistently “vagal.” Initial blood cell counts were normal. He described ill-defined back and then abdominal pain. As the chief surgical resident and I repeated the examination, the patient’s belly became distended, his breath sounds decreased on the left, and within minutes, the surgical team raced him to the operating room.

Dr. Alan C. Braverman, in this issue of the Journal, discusses thoracic aortic dissection. To most of us who do not routinely treat aortic disease, it may not seem that much has changed since that Thanksgiving in Philadelphia. Atherosclerosis is still a common risk, surgery is the treatment for ascending dissection, beta-blockers are useful for chronic descending dissections, and the mortality rate is enormously high when dissections bleed.

As internists, we consider the possibility of genetic disorders in patients with a family history of dissection or aneurysm, but we don’t really expect to find many, and most of us don’t often track advances in the understanding of these disorders at the molecular level. At the time I was working in that emergency room, Marfan syndrome was viewed as a connective tissue disorder, with a structurally weak aortic wall and variable other morphologic features. When the molecular defect was defined as fibrillin-1 deficiency, I didn’t think much more than that the weak link of the aorta’s fibrous belt was identified.

But it turns out that fibrillin is not just an aortic girdle; fibrillin lowers the concentration of the cytokine transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta in the aorta (and other organs) by promoting its sequestration in the extracellular matrix. Absence of fibrillin enhances TGF-beta activity, and excess TGF-beta can produce Marfan syndrome in young mice. In maybe the most striking consequence of this line of research, Dietz and colleagues1 have demonstrated that the specific antagonism of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor by the drug losartan (Cozaar) also blocks the effects of TGF-beta and consequently blocks the development of murine Marfan syndrome. And in a preliminary study, it slowed aneurysm progression in a small group of children with Marfan syndrome.

This does not imply that the same pathophysiology is at play in all aortic aneurysms. But at a time of new guidelines for screening for abdominal aneurysm, these observations offer a novel paradigm for developing drug therapies as an alternative to the mad rush for the vascular operating suite.

References
  1. Brooke BS, Habashi JP, Judge DP, Patel N, Loeys B, Dietz HC. Angiotensin II blockade and aortic-root dilation in Marfan’s syndrome. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:27872795.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Brian F. Mandell, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
644
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Brian F. Mandell, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Author and Disclosure Information

Brian F. Mandell, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Few medical emergencies are as dramatic as an acutely rupturing aortic aneurysm. I recall a Thanksgiving in the emergency room about 25 years ago. We were evaluating a man who had suffered a syncopal episode at his holiday dinner table. It was an odd presentation in the ER: hypotension and bradycardia, no inferior myocardial infarction, and no obvious reason to be persistently “vagal.” Initial blood cell counts were normal. He described ill-defined back and then abdominal pain. As the chief surgical resident and I repeated the examination, the patient’s belly became distended, his breath sounds decreased on the left, and within minutes, the surgical team raced him to the operating room.

Dr. Alan C. Braverman, in this issue of the Journal, discusses thoracic aortic dissection. To most of us who do not routinely treat aortic disease, it may not seem that much has changed since that Thanksgiving in Philadelphia. Atherosclerosis is still a common risk, surgery is the treatment for ascending dissection, beta-blockers are useful for chronic descending dissections, and the mortality rate is enormously high when dissections bleed.

As internists, we consider the possibility of genetic disorders in patients with a family history of dissection or aneurysm, but we don’t really expect to find many, and most of us don’t often track advances in the understanding of these disorders at the molecular level. At the time I was working in that emergency room, Marfan syndrome was viewed as a connective tissue disorder, with a structurally weak aortic wall and variable other morphologic features. When the molecular defect was defined as fibrillin-1 deficiency, I didn’t think much more than that the weak link of the aorta’s fibrous belt was identified.

But it turns out that fibrillin is not just an aortic girdle; fibrillin lowers the concentration of the cytokine transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta in the aorta (and other organs) by promoting its sequestration in the extracellular matrix. Absence of fibrillin enhances TGF-beta activity, and excess TGF-beta can produce Marfan syndrome in young mice. In maybe the most striking consequence of this line of research, Dietz and colleagues1 have demonstrated that the specific antagonism of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor by the drug losartan (Cozaar) also blocks the effects of TGF-beta and consequently blocks the development of murine Marfan syndrome. And in a preliminary study, it slowed aneurysm progression in a small group of children with Marfan syndrome.

This does not imply that the same pathophysiology is at play in all aortic aneurysms. But at a time of new guidelines for screening for abdominal aneurysm, these observations offer a novel paradigm for developing drug therapies as an alternative to the mad rush for the vascular operating suite.

Few medical emergencies are as dramatic as an acutely rupturing aortic aneurysm. I recall a Thanksgiving in the emergency room about 25 years ago. We were evaluating a man who had suffered a syncopal episode at his holiday dinner table. It was an odd presentation in the ER: hypotension and bradycardia, no inferior myocardial infarction, and no obvious reason to be persistently “vagal.” Initial blood cell counts were normal. He described ill-defined back and then abdominal pain. As the chief surgical resident and I repeated the examination, the patient’s belly became distended, his breath sounds decreased on the left, and within minutes, the surgical team raced him to the operating room.

Dr. Alan C. Braverman, in this issue of the Journal, discusses thoracic aortic dissection. To most of us who do not routinely treat aortic disease, it may not seem that much has changed since that Thanksgiving in Philadelphia. Atherosclerosis is still a common risk, surgery is the treatment for ascending dissection, beta-blockers are useful for chronic descending dissections, and the mortality rate is enormously high when dissections bleed.

As internists, we consider the possibility of genetic disorders in patients with a family history of dissection or aneurysm, but we don’t really expect to find many, and most of us don’t often track advances in the understanding of these disorders at the molecular level. At the time I was working in that emergency room, Marfan syndrome was viewed as a connective tissue disorder, with a structurally weak aortic wall and variable other morphologic features. When the molecular defect was defined as fibrillin-1 deficiency, I didn’t think much more than that the weak link of the aorta’s fibrous belt was identified.

But it turns out that fibrillin is not just an aortic girdle; fibrillin lowers the concentration of the cytokine transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta in the aorta (and other organs) by promoting its sequestration in the extracellular matrix. Absence of fibrillin enhances TGF-beta activity, and excess TGF-beta can produce Marfan syndrome in young mice. In maybe the most striking consequence of this line of research, Dietz and colleagues1 have demonstrated that the specific antagonism of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor by the drug losartan (Cozaar) also blocks the effects of TGF-beta and consequently blocks the development of murine Marfan syndrome. And in a preliminary study, it slowed aneurysm progression in a small group of children with Marfan syndrome.

This does not imply that the same pathophysiology is at play in all aortic aneurysms. But at a time of new guidelines for screening for abdominal aneurysm, these observations offer a novel paradigm for developing drug therapies as an alternative to the mad rush for the vascular operating suite.

References
  1. Brooke BS, Habashi JP, Judge DP, Patel N, Loeys B, Dietz HC. Angiotensin II blockade and aortic-root dilation in Marfan’s syndrome. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:27872795.
References
  1. Brooke BS, Habashi JP, Judge DP, Patel N, Loeys B, Dietz HC. Angiotensin II blockade and aortic-root dilation in Marfan’s syndrome. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:27872795.
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 78(10)
Page Number
644
Page Number
644
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
A discussion of dissection
Display Headline
A discussion of dissection
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media