Assessment of dextrose 50 bolus versus dextrose 10 infusion in the management of hyperkalemia in the ED.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoglycemia is a common adverse effect when intravenous (IV) insulin is administered for hyperkalemia. A prolonged infusion of dextrose 10% (D10) may mitigate hypoglycemia compared to dextrose 50% (D50) bolus. Our objective was to evaluate whether D10 infusion is a safe and effective alternative to D50 bolus for hypoglycemia prevention in hyperkalemic patients receiving IV insulin. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients ≥ 18 years who presented to the emergency department (ED) with hyperkalemia (K+ > 5.5) and received IV insulin and D10 infusion or D50 bolus within 3 h. The primary endpoint was incidence of hypoglycemia, defined as blood glucose (BG) ≤ 70 mg/dL, in the 24 h following IV insulin administration for hyperkalemia. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were included; 72 in the D50 group and 62 in the D10 group. There was no difference in incidence of hypoglycemia between the D50 and D10 groups (16 [22%] vs. 16 [26%], p = 0.77). Symptomatic hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia rates in the D50 and D10 groups were [5 (7%) vs. 2 (3%), p = 0.45], [5 (7%) vs. 1 (2%), p = 0.22], and [34 (47%) vs. 23 (37%), p = 0.31] respectively. Low initial BG was a predictor for developing hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, D10 infusions appeared to be at least as effective as D50 bolus in preventing hypoglycemia in hyperkalemic patients receiving IV insulin. In context of ongoing D50 injection shortages, D10 infusions should be a therapeutic strategy in this patient population.

Dalbavancin Use in the Emergency Department Setting.

Background: Although dalbavancin's (DBV's) long half-life and one-time dosing strategy confer ideal administration in the ambulatory setting, the optimal role of DBV in the management of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) remains to be elucidated. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of ABSSSI between patients who received DBV in the emergency department (ED) as part of standard care versus patients who received DBV as part of a telehealth program. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study evaluating patients who received DBV at 3 urban EDs. The primary end point was the incidence of ABSSSI recurrence. Secondary outcomes included need for hospital admission and ED length of stay (LOS; in hours). Results: A total of 65 ABSSSI treatment courses were included; 42 were included in the telehealth criteria (TC) cohort and 23 in the initial criteria (IC) cohort. There were 14% (6/42) infection recurrences in the TC cohort and 22% (5/23) in the IC cohort, with median time to recurrence being 4 and 14 days, respectively. Median ED LOS was significantly shorter in the TC (5 vs 25 hours, P < 0.05). Numerically fewer individuals in the TC cohort required inpatient admission (0 vs n = 2, 9%). Conclusion and Relevance: Our results suggest that patients may be safely administered DBV in an ED setting, with telehealth follow-up. Providing structured patient selection criteria is an effective method of assisting ED providers in selecting appropriate DBV candidates to limit potential recurrences and readmissions.

Prospective Comparison of Acute Kidney Injury During Treatment With the Combination of Piperacillin-Tazobactam and Vancomycin Versus the Combination of Cefepime or Meropenem and Vancomycin.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the observed incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in adult patients receiving the combination of piperacillin-tazobactam and vancomycin versus the combination of cefepime or meropenem and vancomycin for greater than 72 hours. METHODS: This was a prospective, open-label cohort study at a community academic medical center involving adult patients over a 3-month time period who received either the combination of piperacillin-tazobactam and vancomycin or the combination of cefepime or meropenem and vancomycin for greater than 72 hours. The patients were evaluated for AKI, defined using specific criteria introduced by Kidney Disease: Improving global outcomes (KDIGO) acute kidney injury work group in 2012. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients receiving either antimicrobial combination were evaluated for AKI. The incidence of AKI was significantly higher in the piperacillin-tazobactam and vancomycin group (37.3%) compared with the cefepime or meropenem and vancomycin group (7.7%; χ2 = 7.80, P = .005). CONCLUSION: The result of this study suggests that the risk of developing AKI is increased in patients receiving the combination of piperacillin-tazobactam and vancomycin versus those receiving the combination of cefepime or meropenem and vancomycin.