"Novel Management of Depression Using Ketamine in the Intensive Care Unit".

BACKGROUND: Ketamine, a dissociative anesthetic, induces improvement in depressive symptoms by antagonizing glutaminergic NMDA receptors. Ketamine has been used previously in outpatient setting for treatment-resistant depression, but we showcase its utility in depression management at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Research Question: Can ketamine be used for depression treatment in ICU patients? Study Design and Methods: A retrospective chart review of ICU patients was done at a tertiary center from 2018 to 2021, to assess the ketamine usage. Among the patients reviewed, ketamine was used for depression in 12, and for analgesia & sedation in 2322 patients. Ketamine was administered in doses of 0.5mg/kg & 0.75mg/kg for depression. Each course consisted of 3 doses of ketamine administered over 3 days, and 7 in 12 patients received a single course of ketamine. The rest received 3-4 courses 1 week apart. Results: Ketamine was found to improve mood and affect in most of the patients with depression. 11 in 12 patients had a positive response with better sleep. It has a major advantage over conventional anti-depressants since it takes only a few hours to induce clinical improvement. Patients who were observably withdrawn from care team and family, were administered ketamine. Conclusion: A major drawback of ketamine is that the duration of clinical improvement is short, with the response lasting only up to seven days after a single dose. Hence, all the patients in our study were weaned off ketamine with a supporting antidepressant. Ketamine has been documented to cause cardio-neurotoxicity; however, only one patient had worsening lethargy in our study. To conclude, ketamine has a marked benefit in treating depression in the ICU. Although our study was associated with positive outcomes, there is a need for prospective studies with long-term follow-up assessments.

Comparing Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension Patients at a Pulmonary Hypertension Center versus Community Centers.

Once patients are diagnosed with pulmonary hypertension it is important to identify the correct diagnostic group as it will have implications on the disease state management. Pulmonary hypertension is increasingly diagnosed and treated in general medical practices; however, evidence-based guidelines recommend evaluation and treatment in pulmonary hypertension centers for accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment recommendations. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 509 random patients 18 years and older who were evaluated in our pulmonary hypertension clinic from January 2005 to December 2018. 68.4% (n = 348) had their diagnostic group clarified or changed. Pulmonary hypertension was deemed an incorrect diagnosis in 12.4% (n = 63). A total of 114 patients (22.4%) had been initiated on pulmonary hypertension specific treatment prior to presentation. Pulmonary hypertension specific medication was stopped in 57 (50.0%) cases. The estimated monthly saving of the stopped medication based on wholesale acquisition costs was USD 396,988.05-419,641.05, a monthly saving of USD 6964.70-7362.12 per patient. Evaluation outside of a pulmonary hypertension center may lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate or inadequate treatment. Pulmonary arterial hypertension directed therapy improves median survival, but inappropriate therapy may cause harm; therefore, patients benefit from a specialized center with multiple resources to secure an accurate diagnosis and tailored treatment for their condition.

Comparison of Early Versus Late Initiation of Hydrocortisone in Patients With Septic Shock in the ICU Setting.

BACKGROUND: Multiple publications demonstrate an association between time to initiation of corticosteroids and outcomes such as mortality and reversal of shock. However, the optimal time to initiate hydrocortisone remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of early versus late initiation of hydrocortisone in septic shock patients. METHODS: A retrospective, multicentered, observational study was conducted. Adults admitted from July 1, 2014, to August 31, 2019, diagnosed with septic shock receiving vasopressors and low-dose hydrocortisone were evaluated. Participants were divided into the "early" group if hydrocortisone was initiated within 12 hours or "late" group if initiated after 12 hours of vasopressor initiation. The primary outcome was time to vasopressor discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), vasopressor utilization, fluids administered, and need for renal replacement therapy. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients were identified for inclusion in this propensity score-weighted cohort: 99 in the early group and 99 in the late group. Early initiation was associated with shorter time to vasopressor discontinuation compared with late initiation (40.7 vs 60.6 hours; P = 0.0002). There was also a reduction in ICU LOS (3.6 vs 5.1 days; P = 0.0147) and hospital LOS (8.9 vs 10.9 days; P = 0.0220) seen in the early group. There was no difference in mortality between groups. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this propensity-matched cohort, administration of hydrocortisone within 12 hours from the onset of septic shock was associated with improved time to vasopressor discontinuation and reduced ICU and hospital LOS.