Milrinone and esmolol decrease cardiac damage after resuscitation from prolonged cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Long-term survival after cardiac arrest (CA) due to shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation (VF) is low. Clearly, there is a need for new pharmacological interventions in the setting of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to improve outcome. Here, hemodynamic parameters and cardiac damage are compared between the treatment group (milrinone, esmolol and vasopressin) and controls (vasopressin only) during resuscitation from prolonged CA in piglets. METHODS: A total of 26 immature male piglets were subjected to 12-min VF followed by 8-min CPR. The treatment group (n=13) received i.v. (intravenous) boluses vasopressin 0.4 U/kg, esmolol 250 µg/kg and milrinone 25 µg/kg after 13 min, followed by i.v. boluses esmolol 375 µg/kg and milrinone 25 µg/kg after 18 min and continuous esmolol 15 µg/kg/h infusion during 180 min reperfusion, whereas controls (n=13) received equal amounts of vasopressin and saline. A 200 J monophasic counter-shock was delivered to achieve resumption of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after 8 min CPR. If ROSC was not achieved, another 200 J defibrillation and bolus vasopressin 0.4 U/kg would be administered in both groups. Direct current shocks at 360 J were applied as one shot per minute over maximally 5 min. Hemodynamic variables and troponin I as a marker of cardiac injury were recorded. RESULTS: Troponin I levels after 180 min reperfusion were lower in the treatment group than in controls (P<0.05). The treatment group received less norepinephrine (P<0.01) and had greater diuresis (P<0.01). There was no difference in survival between groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of milrinone, esmolol and vasopressin decreased cardiac injury compared with vasopressin alone.

Improved neuroprotective effect of methylene blue with hypothermia after porcine cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Induced mild hypothermia and administration of methylene blue (MB) have proved to have neuroprotective effects in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); however, induction of hypothermia takes time. We set out to determine if MB administered during CPR could add to the histologic neuroprotective effect of hypothermia. METHODS: A piglet model of extended cardiac arrest (12 min of untreated cardiac arrest and 8 min of CPR) was used to assess possible additional neuroprotective effects of MB when administered during CPR before mild therapeutic hypothermia induced 30 min after restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Three groups were compared: C group (n = 8) received standard CPR; PH group (n = 8) received standard CPR but 30 min after ROSC these piglets were cooled to 34°C; the PH+MB group (n = 8) received an MB infusion 1 min after commencement of CPR and the same cooling protocol as the PH group. Three hours later, the animals were killed. Immediately after death, the brains were harvested pending histological and immunohistological analysis. RESULTS: Circulatory variables were similar in the groups except that cardiac output was greater in the PH+MB group 2-3 h after ROSC. Cerebral cortical neuronal injury and blood-brain barrier disruption was greatest in the C group and least in the MB group. The neuroprotective effect of MB and hypothermia was significantly greater than that of delayed hypothermia alone. CONCLUSION: Administration of MB during CPR added to the short term neuroprotective effects of induced mild hypothermia induced 30 min after ROSC.