Proof-of-concept randomized controlled trial of single-session nitrous oxide treatment for refractory bipolar depression: Focus on cerebrovascular target engagement.

BACKGROUND: There remain few efficacious treatments for bipolar depression, which dominates the course of bipolar disorder (BD). Despite multiple studies reporting associations between depression and cerebral blood flow (CBF), little is known regarding CBF as a treatment target, or predictor and/or indicator of treatment response, in BD. Nitrous oxide, an anesthetic gas with vasoactive and putative antidepressant properties, has a long history as a neuroimaging probe. We undertook an experimental medicine paradigm, coupling in-scanner single-session nitrous oxide treatment of bipolar depression with repeated measures of CBF. METHODS: In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, 25 adults with BD I/II and current treatment-refractory depression received either: (1) nitrous oxide (20 min at 25% concentration) plus intravenous saline (n = 12), or (2) medical air plus intravenous midazolam (2 mg total; n = 13). Study outcomes included changes in depression severity (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores, primary) and changes in CBF (via arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging). RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in 24-h post-treatment MADRS change or treatment response. However, the nitrous oxide group had significantly greater same-day reductions in depression severity. Lower baseline regional CBF predicted greater 24-h post-treatment MADRS reductions with nitrous oxide but not midazolam. In region-of-interest and voxel-wise analyses, there was a pattern of regional CBF reductions following treatment with midazolam versus nitrous oxide. CONCLUSIONS: Present findings, while tentative and based on secondary endpoints, suggest differential associations of nitrous oxide versus midazolam with bipolar depression severity and cerebral hemodynamics. Larger studies integrating neuroimaging targets and repeated nitrous oxide treatment sessions are warranted.

Nitrous oxide as a putative novel dual-mechanism treatment for bipolar depression: Proof-of-concept study design and methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Depressive symptoms predominate in the course of bipolar disorder (BD) and there is an urgent need to evaluate novel application of repurposed compounds that act on pre-specified treatment targets. Several lines of reasoning suggest that nitrous oxide (N2O) is an ideal medication to study as a potential treatment and as a strategy to identify the underlying pathophysiology of bipolar depression. N2O is a potent cerebral vasodilator and there is compelling evidence of reduced frontal cerebral blood flow (CBF; i.e. hypoperfusion) in depression. Therefore, N2O may increase CBF and thereby improve symptoms of depression. The goal of this randomized, double-blind trial is to study the effect of a single administration of N2O versus the active comparator midazolam on mood and CBF in adults with treatment-resistant bipolar depression. METHODS: Participants with BD-I/-II currently experiencing a major depressive episode will be randomized to one of two conditions (n = 20/group): 1) inhaled N2O plus intravenous saline, or 2) inhaled room air plus intravenous midazolam. Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores will serve as the primary endpoint. CBF will be measured via arterial spin labelling magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS: N2O is a potential novel treatment for bipolar depression, as it causes cerebral vasodilation. This proof-of-concept study will provide valuable information regarding the acute impact of N2O on mood and on CBF. If N2O proves to be efficacious in future larger-scale trials, its ubiquity, safety, low cost, and ease of use suggest that it has great potential to become a game-changing acute treatment for bipolar depression.

Opening the discussion on a closed intubation box.

Background: Airway management for patients with COVID-19 poses a significant infection risk to clinicians. As such, some providers have adopted the "COVID intubation box", a cuboid barrier which which separates the clinician from the airway. While this device has limitations, there is promising evidence on its effectiveness. Aim: To summarize the history, evidence, and limitations of the popular intubation box design. Furthermore, we share our modified design and experiences from airway simulations. Methods: Using our prototyping and validation facilities, our team designed and iteratively improved our device to arrive at a final design. The expert panel, consisting of anesthesiologists, infection control staff, and emergency clinicians, trialed the device using airway simulation mannequins and provided feedback. Results: Our final device features a dome shape, increased height, wider arm port diameter, additional side port for assistants, and drapes to reduce viral escape. Feedback from simulations was overall positive, especially noting that the height and arm port diameter facilitated arm motion within the box. The infection control team preferred the unique dome shape for safe disinfection. Conclusion: Our intubation box overcomes several challenges and criticisms of the popular intubation box. This device is an important harm reduction tool for clinicians during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Case report: profound hypotension associated with labetalol therapy in a patient with cerebral aneurysms and subarachnoid hemorrhage.

PURPOSE: Labetalol is an effective antihypertensive medication frequently used to treat systemic hypertension in acute care settings, including the management of hypertension associated with a subarachnoid hemorrhage. We present a case of profound hypotension, refractory to inotropic and vasopressor therapy following an iv infusion of labetalol. CLINICAL FEATURES: Initiation of an iv labetalol infusion resulted in good blood pressure control in a patient suffering from a Fisher grade 3 subarachnoid hemorrhage with an initial Glascow coma scale of 14/15 and mild hydrocephalus. Progressive deterioration of neurological symptoms and evidence of worsening hydrocephalus preceded the sudden development of profound hypotension (60/35 mmHg) and bradycardia with a minimum heart rate of 40 beats.min(-1). Initial resuscitative efforts included administration of intravascular fluid, hypertonic saline, atropine, adrenalin (more than 10 mg in divided doses) and noradrenalin. These measures restored the blood pressure to 80/45 with a HR of 98 beats.min(-1). Intraoperative placement of an intraventricular drain released cerebrospinal fluid under pressure with an initial intracranial pressure of 15 cm H(2)O. A combination of adrenalin, noradrenalin, dopamine and vasopressin infusions were required to restore the blood pressure to 130/65 mmHg after an additional two hours. All inotropic and vasopressor support was weaned off after the 14th hr (about two drug half-lives). The patient was awake and responsive the following day, with no obvious neurological consequences. No evidence of neurological injury, drug administration error or myocardial dysfunction was documented. CONCLUSION: The episode of profound hypotension which occurred after initiating a labetolol infusion required maximal combined vasopressor therapy to restore the blood pressure suggesting that this patient demonstrated an extreme sensitivity to labetalol. Combination therapy with adrenergic and nonadrenergic agonists may be required for optimal treatment of profound hypotension associated with labetalol-induced vasoplegia.