Search

Angiotensin II is a recently introduced vasopressor, which has been available since 2017. The novelty and the relatively high cost of angiotensin II currently limit its broader application. It induces vasoconstriction by activating the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system and is currently the sole vasopressor functioning through this pathway. Beyond vasoconstriction, angiotensin II also affects various other physiological processes. Current evidence supports its use in managing vasoplegic and cardiogenic shock in patients who are unresponsive to catecholamines and vasopressin. However, due to limited data, the optimal timing for initiating therapy with angiotensin II, strategies for combining it with other vasopressors, and strategies for its discontinuation remain unclear. Ongoing and planned studies aim to address some of these uncertainties. This article reviews the physiological and pathophysiological effects of angiotensin II, describes its pharmacology, and provides a narrative review of the current literature.

Background: Cardiac arrest remains one of the leading causes of death. After successful resuscitation of patients in cardiac arrest, post-cardiac arrest syndrome develops, part of it being an impaired cerebral blood flow autoregulation. Monitoring cerebral blood flow autoregulation after cardiac arrest is important for optimizing patient care and prognosticating patients’ survival, yet remains a challenge. There are still gaps in clinical implications and everyday use. In this article, we present a systematic review of studies with different methods of monitoring cerebral blood flow autoregulation after non-traumatic cardiac arrest. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed from 1 June 2024 to 27 June 2024 by using multiple databases: PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Inclusion criteria were studies with an included description of the measurement of cerebral blood flow autoregulation in adult patients after non-traumatic cardiac arrest. Results: A total of 16 studies met inclusion criteria. Our data show that the most used methods in the reviewed studies were near-infrared spectroscopy and transcranial Doppler. The most used mathematical methods for calculating cerebral autoregulation were cerebral oximetry index, tissue oxygenation reactivity index, and mean flow index. Conclusions: The use of various monitoring and mathematical methods for calculating cerebral blood flow autoregulation poses a challenge for standardization, validation, and daily use in clinical practice. In the future studies, focus should be considered on clinical validation and transitioning autoregulation monitoring techniques to everyday clinical practice, which could improve the survival outcomes of patients after cardiac arrest.

Background and Objectives: Survival with favorable neurologic outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains elusive. Post-cardiac arrest syndrome (PCAS) involves myocardial and neurological injury, ischemia-reperfusion response, and underlying pathology. Neurologic injury is a crucial determinant of survival and functional outcomes, with damage caused by free radicals among the responsible mechanisms. This study explores the feasibility of adding intravenous vitamin C to the treatment of OHCA survivors, aiming to mitigate PCAS. Vitamin C, a nutrient with antioxidative and free radical-scavenging properties, is often depleted in critically ill patients. Materials and Methods: This randomized, double-blinded trial was conducted at a tertiary-level university hospital with adult OHCA survivors. Participants received either standard care or the addition of 1.5 g of intravenous vitamin C every 12 h for eight consecutive doses. Neurologic injury was assessed using neuron-specific enolase (NSE) levels, with additional clinical and laboratory outcomes, such as enhanced neuroprognostication factors, inflammatory markers, and cardiac parameters. Results: NSE levels were non-significantly higher in patients who received vitamin C compared to the placebo group (55.05 µg/L [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.7–124.0] vs. 39.4 µg/L [95% CI 22.6–61.9], p > 0.05). Similarly, a non-significantly greater proportion of patients in the vitamin C group developed myoclonus in the first 72 h. We also observed a non-significantly shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, fewer arrhythmias, and reduced length of stay in the intensive care unit in the group of patients who received vitamin C (p = 0.031). However, caution is warranted in interpretation of our results due to the small number of participants. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that intravenous vitamin C should not be used outside of clinical trials for OHCA survivors. Due to the small sample size and conflicting results, further research is needed to determine the potential role of vitamin C in post-cardiac arrest care.

Background and Objectives: Insertion of an intraosseous access device enables intravascular access for critically ill patients in a prehospital and emergency department setting even when intravenous access is not possible. The aim of our study was to assess the attitudes of prehospital and emergency department nursing staff towards the utilization of intraosseous access devices. Materials and Methods: We performed quantitative research using a closed-ended structured questionnaire distributed to prehospital unit and associated emergency department nursing staff serving a population of around 200,000 inhabitants. Results: We distributed 140 questionnaires, and 106 were returned and completed. Of these, 69 (65.1%) respondents needed more than three attempts to achieve peripheral intravenous access at least once in the last year and 29 (27.4%) required central venous access because of impossible intravenous access. In the last five years, 8 (7.5%) respondents used endotracheal route for administration of medications. Despite this, only 48 (45.3%) of respondents have ever used the intraosseous route. Also, 79 (74.5%) respondents received at least some training in obtaining IO access; however, 46 (43.4%) answered that education regarding intraosseous access is not sufficient, and 92 (86.8%) answered that they wanted additional training regarding intraosseous access. Conclusions: Prehospital and emergency department nursing staff are aware of the importance of intraosseous access and understand the need for additional education and certification in this field.