Safety and efficacy of methylprednisolone versus dexamethasone in critically ill patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective study.

Background: Corticosteroids (CSs), specifically dexamethasone (DEX), are the treatment of choice for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 pneumonia (CARDS). However, data from both ARDS and relatively small CARDS clinical trials have suggested improved outcomes with methylprednisolone (MP) versus DEX. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of MP and DEX in critically ill CARDS patients. Methods: The study cohort included CARDS patients admitted to a tertiary referral intensive care unit (ICU) between April and September 2020 who received at least 5 days of CSs for CARDS. Results: The cohort was notable for a high severity of illness (overall, 88.5% of patients required mechanical ventilation and 16% required vasopressors on admission). The DEX group (n = 62) was significantly older with a higher illness severity [Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) 6 (4.75-8) versus 4.5 (3-7), p = 0.008], while the MP group (n = 51) received significantly more loading doses [19 (37.3%) versus 4 (6.5%), p < 0.0001]. MP was associated with a shorter time to intubation and more rapid progression to mortality [days to death: 18 (15-23) versus 27 (15-34), p = 0.026]. After correction for baseline imbalances in age and SOFA score, DEX was associated with improved mortality at 90 days compared with MP [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.23-0.80, p = 0.008]. However, there were no differences between rates of secondary infections during hospitalization or insulin requirements at 7 and 14 days. Conclusion: In this cohort of critically ill CARDS, choice of CS was associated with mortality but not adverse event profile, and thus warrants further investigation.

Comparison of Amantadine, Modafinil, and Standard of Care in the Acute Treatment of Disorders of Consciousness After Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Many patients who experience severe TBI have persistent disorders of consciousness. Amantadine and modafinil are used for some neurological disorders; however, a comparison of the 2 medications in TBI has not been reported. This study compared the effectiveness of amantadine, modafinil, and standard of care (SOC) on disorders of consciousness after TBI. METHODS: All adult TBI patients admitted between January 1, 2017, and September 31, 2020 who received amantadine, modafinil, or SOC treatments were screened. Data collection included: demographics, change in Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), location of hemorrhage, medication duration, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, adverse drug reactions, and concomitant sedative medications. Patients in the amantadine and modafinil groups were matched 1:2 with patients who received SOC therapies. The primary outcome was change in GCS ≥ 3 from baseline to discharge. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients met inclusion criteria. Medications were initiated a median of 8 days from admission. Patients in the SOC group experienced a greater improvement in GCS and shorter hospital length of stay compared with amantadine. A change in GCS ≥ 3 from medication initiation to hospital discharge occurred in 46.5% of amantadine patients and 53.8% of modafinil patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, TBI patients did not benefit from amantadine or modafinil compared with SOC therapies, and no differences were found between medication groups. Further studies are warranted to determine whether the addition of amantadine or modafinil in the weeks after TBI provides benefit.

Use of Intraventricular Medications in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review.

New evidence and increased use of intracranial devices have increased the frequency of intraventricular (IVT) medication administration in the neurologic intensive care unit. Significant benefits and risks are associated with administration of medications directly into the central nervous system. This review summarizes important literature, along with key information for clinicians regarding the administration, dosing, monitoring, and adverse effects related to IVT medication usage. Multiple medications have supporting literature for their use in critically ill patients including amphotericin B, aminoglycosides, colistimethate, daptomycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, vancomycin, alteplase, and nicardipine. Sterile preparation and delivery, along with different types of devices that support medication administration, are also reviewed. One randomized, placebo-controlled trial of alteplase demonstrated decreased mortality but no change in good functional outcome. Other reports of IVT medication use are mainly limited to case reports and retrospective case series. There is a need for increased research on the topic; however, several practical barriers decrease the likelihood of a large, placebo-controlled, prospective study for most indications. Providers should consider implementing protocols to maximize safety of IVT medication delivery to ensure optimal patient outcomes.