Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective cohort study reveals outcomes of tiered care for vasopressor-induced limb ischemia in critically ill patients, suggesting structured protocols balance survival and limb salvage.
PURPOSE: We evaluated a cohort of patients who developed vasopressor-induced limb ischemia and the management options to prevent progression or minimize morbidity of digital necrosis. METHODS: We reviewed all current literature on pressor-induced limb ischemia and report options for the management of patients requiring vasopressors who developed limb ischemia. We then retrospectively reviewed presentation, treatment, and short-term outcomes for patients at our tertiary referral academic medical center that developed this complication. Finally, we recommend guidelines for the tiered management of these complex patients. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were included. Twenty-six patients (72%) required resuscitation with more than one vasopressor. Vasopressors were initiated for septic-shock (52.7%), cardiogenic-shock (16.7%), hypovolemic-shock (13.9%), acute transplant rejection (13.9%), and neurogenic-shock (2.8%). According to the tiered management recommendations, patients were managed with phase 1 care (19%), phase 2 care (8.3%), phase 3 care (50%) or phase 4 care (5.6%). The patient expired in the acute setting in 13.9% of cases. CONCLUSION: Life-saving vasopressors risk digital ischemia and necrosis. Early recognition, reporting, and treatment of this complication are important in minimizing morbidity. Using a tiered approach helps organize the healthcare team's management of this iatrogenic complication while respecting the treatment paradigm of "life over limb," and may be safely performed with acceptable outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Livesey et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: