Optimal treatment for women with acute hypertension in pregnancy; a randomized trial comparing intravenous labetalol versus nicardipine.

OBJECTIVES: Blood pressure control in severe hypertension of pregnancy is crucial for mother and neonate. In absence of evidence, guidelines recommend either intravenous labetalol or nicardipine. We compared the effectiveness and safety of these two drugs in women with severe hypertension in pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: We performed an open label randomized controlled trial. Women with a singleton pregnancy complicated by severe hypertension (systolic ≥ 160 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 110 mmHg) requiring intravenous antihypertensive treatment were randomized to intravenous labetalol or intravenous nicardipine. The primary outcome was a composite adverse neonatal outcome defined as severe Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS), Broncho Pulmonary Dysplasia (BPD), Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH) IIB or worse, Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC), or perinatal death defined as fetal death or neonatal death before discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Based on a power analysis, we estimated that 472 women (236 per group) needed to be included to detect a difference of 15% in the primary outcome with 90% power. The study was halted prematurely at 30 inclusions because of slow recruitment and trial fatigue. RESULTS: Between August 2018 and April 2022, we randomized 30 women of which 16 were allocated to intravenous nicardipine and 14 to intravenous labetalol. The composite adverse neonatal outcome was not significantly different between the two groups (25 % versus 43 % OR 0.28 (95 % CI 0.05-1.43), p = 0.12)). Respiratory distress syndrome occurred more often in the labetalol group than in the nicardipine group (42.9 % versus 12.5 %). Neonatal hypoglycemia occurred more often in the nicardipine group than in the labetalol group (31 % versus 7 %). Time until blood pressure control was faster in women treated with nicardipine than in women treated with labetalol (45 (15-150 min vs. 120 (60-127,5) min). CONCLUSION: In our prematurely halted small RCT, we were unable to provide evidence for the optimal choice of treatment for severe hypertension to improve neonatal outcome and/or to obtain faster blood pressure control. Differences in Respiratory distress syndrome and neonatal hypoglycemia between the groups might be the result of coincidental finding due to the small groups included in the study. A larger randomized trial would be needed to determine the safest and most efficacious (intravenous) therapy for severe hypertension in pregnancy. This study emphasizes the challenges of conducting a RCT for the optimal treatment for these women.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of Nicardipine; a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Nicardipine is a type of calcium channel blocker that is commonly used in the treatment of angina pectoris, hypertension, and related cardiovascular disorders. This systematic review assesses the reported pharmacokinetic (PK) and associated pharmacodynamic (PD) parameters of nicardipine in humans. AREAS COVERED: An exhaustive literature search using four internet databases was conducted up to 5 October 2023, which yielded 871 papers, of which 32 fulfilled the eligibility requirements by including human PK and related PD data. The area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of nicardipine rise proportionately with increasing dosage. One study revealed that AUC0-∞ of nicardipine was increased by 5-fold in hepatic cirrhosis patients compared to the control subjects. Moreover, related PD data in renal-impaired hypertensive patients revealed that a notable reduction in blood pressure was associated with nicardipine administration. EXPERT OPINION: This review covers comprehensive data on clinical PK, drug-drug interaction studies, effects of dosage form on ADME, and associated PD parameters of nicardipine using all relevant published studies. The present study will also aid in the development and evaluation of PK models for suggesting model-informed dosing regimens. PROSPERO NUMBER: CRD42024533051.

Impact of Clevidipine Versus Nicardipine on Time in Range when Lowering Blood Pressure.

Background: Two intravenous medications commonly used as first-line therapy for rapid blood pressure control are nicardipine and clevidipine, both of which are available as titratable infusions. Despite pharmacokinetic differences, no data clearly support a preferred agent. Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes associated with current use of these medications across a variety of indications in a hospital system. Methods: This study was a multi-center, retrospective chart review conducted within a hospital system from June 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021. Records of patients were matched in a one-to-one fashion based on indication for blood pressure control and similar pre-intervention blood pressure. The primary outcome was time within target blood pressure range. Results: A total of 569 patients were screened, resulting in 100 matched pairs. The percent of time in blood pressure range was similar between nicardipine and clevidipine when stratified by location of care (51.5% vs 51.7%, P = 0.970 for ED; 68.1% vs 68.8%, P = 0.913 for ICU). Overall, the median (IQR) time to target blood pressure range was significantly faster with clevidipine than nicardipine [20 (7-43) min. vs 34 (14.5-57) min., resp.; P = 0.013). There were numerically higher rates of hypotension with nicardipine than clevidipine, but this finding was not significant (17% vs 10%; P = 0.093). Conclusions: This study shows a statistically significant difference in time to target blood pressure range with clevidipine compared to nicardipine. Although there was no difference in the percentage of time in blood pressure range, nicardipine was associated with a non-significant increase in the incidence of hypotension.

Nicardipine-chitosan nanoparticles alleviate thioacetamide-induced acute liver injury by targeting NFκB/NLRP3/IL-1ß signaling in rats: Unraveling new roles beyond calcium channel blocking.

Liver inflammatory diseases are marked by serious complications. Notably, nicardipine (NCD) has demonstrated anti-inflammatory properties, but its benefits in liver inflammation have not been studied yet. However, the therapeutic efficacy of NCD is limited by its short half-life and low bioavailability. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the potential of NCD-loaded chitosan nanoparticles (ChNPs) to improve its pharmacokinetic profile and hepatic accumulation. Four formulations of NCD-ChNPs were synthesized and characterized. The optimal formulation (NP2) exhibited a mean particle diameter of 172.6 ± 1.94 nm, a surface charge of +25.66 ± 0.93 mV, and an encapsulation efficiency of 88.86 ± 1.17 %. NP2 showed good physical stability as a lyophilized powder over three months. It displayed pH-sensitive release characteristics, releasing 77.15 ± 5.09 % of NCD at pH 6 (mimicking the inflammatory microenvironment) and 52.15 ± 3.65 % at pH 7.4, indicating targeted release in inflamed liver tissues. Pharmacokinetic and biodistribution studies revealed that NCD-ChNPs significantly prolonged NCD circulation time and enhanced its concentration in liver tissues compared to plain NCD. Additionally, the study investigated the protective effects of NCD-ChNPs in thioacetamide-induced liver injury in rats by modulating the NFκB/NLRP3/IL-1ß signaling axis. NCD-ChNPs effectively inhibited NFκB activation, reduced NLRP3 inflammasome activation, and subsequent release of IL-1ß, which correlated with improved hepatic function and reduced inflammation and oxidative stress. These findings highlight the potential of NCD-ChNPs as a promising nanomedicine strategy for the treatment of liver inflammatory diseases, warranting further investigation into their clinical applications, particularly in hypertensive patients with liver inflammatory conditions.

Intra-arterial nicardipine versus verapamil during transradial access coronary catheterization.

INTRODUCTION: Intra-arterial (IA) vasodilators are recommended during transradial access (TRA) to prevent radial artery spasm (RAS). The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends either IA verapamil, diltiazem, nicardipine, or nitroglycerin to prevent RAS. To our knowledge, the efficacy of RAS prevention and patient tolerability of verapamil and nicardipine has not been directly compared in a randomized fashion. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-blinded randomized clinical trial comparing the discomfort experienced by patients receiving either 400 µg of IA nicardipine (n = 26) or 5 mg of IA verapamil (n = 29). Patient discomfort and/or pain was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) both before and after IA administration of nicardipine or verapamil. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference in mean change in VAS scores between the 2 groups, with an average increase in VAS score of 0.88 in the nicardipine group and 4.81 in the verapamil group (p < 0.0001). The overall rate of RAS was low in our study (5.5 %) with no significant difference in RAS incidence between the 2 groups (p = 0.465). The nicardipine group had 2 RAS cases (7.7 %), with 1 requiring a change in strategy (3.8 %). The verapamil group had 1 RAS case (3.4 %) that did not require a change in strategy. CONCLUSION: In this trial, we showed that nicardipine causes significantly less discomfort and pain compared to verapamil during IA administration for TRA cardiac catheterization.

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Nicardipine Versus Clevidipine for Blood Pressure Control in Hypertensive Crisis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive crisis is an acute increase in blood pressure >180/120 mm Hg. A titratable antihypertensive agent is preferred to lower blood pressure acutely in a controlled way and prevent an abrupt overcorrection. Nicardipine and clevidipine are both dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers that provide unique benefits for blood pressure control. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of nicardipine or clevidipine for blood pressure control in the setting of hypertensive crisis. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study. Eligible patients received either nicardipine or clevidipine for the treatment of hypertensive crisis. The primary outcome was achievement of 25% reduction in mean arterial pressure at 1 h. The secondary outcome was achievement of a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of <160 mm Hg at 2-6 h from the start of the infusion. RESULTS: This study included a total of 156 patients, 74 in the nicardipine group and 82 in the clevidipine group. The SBP on admission and at the start of the infusion were similar between groups. There was no difference between groups in achieving a 25% reduction in mean arterial pressure at 1 h. Nicardipine achieved an SBP goal of <160 mm Hg at 2-6 h significantly more often than the clevidipine group (89.2% vs. 73.2%; p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference between agents for initial blood pressure control in the treatment of hypertensive crisis. Nicardipine showed more sustained SBP control, with a lower risk of rebound hypertension and a significant cost savings compared with clevidipine.

Use of dual intraventricular vasodilators for refractory cerebral vasospasm in a pediatric patient with traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage: A case report.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: Subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a rare but life-threatening clinical event for pediatric patients. Cerebral vasospasm is a common complication of SAH that often leads to poor outcomes. This case report describes the use of dual intraventricular (IVT) vasodilators in a pediatric patient. SUMMARY: An 11-year-old male presented with traumatic diffuse SAH and cranial vasospasm. Despite treatment with IVT nicardipine, intravenous (IV) milrinone by continuous infusion, enteral nimodipine, and intraarterial verapamil and milrinone given during digital subtraction angiography, transcranial Doppler (TCD) mean velocities continued to rise. IVT milrinone was then added to IVT nicardipine and IV milrinone. The combination of IVT nicardipine, IV milrinone, and rescue therapy with IVT milrinone was continued for a total of 7 days. TCD mean velocities decreased into the mild to moderate range within 2 days of the patient receiving this combined regimen and remained globally low thereafter. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates the potential benefit of using dual IVT vasodilators to improve outcomes for pediatric patients with refractory cerebral vasospasm.

Comparison of clevidipine vs nicardipine in the treatment of hypertensive urgency and emergency in critically ill patients.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: Evidence has suggested that clevidipine may provide faster blood pressure (BP) reduction with less volume than nicardipine in stroke and cardiothoracic surgery patients, but its use in hypertensive crises has not been well established. The primary objective of this study was to compare the treatment success of clevidipine and nicardipine in hypertensive crisis. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including patients who received either clevidipine or nicardipine for treatment of hypertensive crisis. The primary outcome was the time from infusion start to attainment of goal BP, defined as the higher value of the guideline-directed 25% reduction in BP or the physician-ordered goal. Secondary outcomes were the time from infusion start to guideline-directed 25% reduction in BP, drug and total volume intake, the time from order entry to BP goal attainment, the number of BP and heart rate excursions, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and study medication cost. RESULTS: In total, 182 patients were included in the study (103 receiving nicardipine and 79 receiving clevidipine). Time to goal BP was similar between the groups (35 vs 33 minutes for clevidipine vs nicardipine, respectively; P = 0.37). Time to guideline-directed 25% reduction was also similar (P = 0.42). Volume from study drug was significantly less with clevidipine (222 vs 518 mL; P = 0.01); however, the total volume received in the ICU was similar (3,370 vs 3,383 mL; P = 0.43). Percent time in the goal BP range was similar (43.1% vs 42.3%). The cost of clevidipine was $199.37 per vial (based on the average wholesale price as of June 2023). This cost was 682% higher than that for a bag of nicardipine. CONCLUSION: Time to goal BP was similar for clevidipine and nicardipine in this population. Any decreases in medication-associated volume with clevidipine were no longer evident when all volume sources were considered. These results show that clevidipine may not provide meaningful benefit in this heterogenous population. The difference in cost does not seem justified given the lack of improvement in clinically relevant outcomes.

Optimizing nicardipine dosage for effective control of pituitrin-induced hypertension in laparoscopic myomectomy undergoing total intravenous anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the median effective dose (ED50) and 95% effective dose (ED95) of nicardipine for treating pituitrin-induced hypertension during laparoscopic myomectomy, providing guidance for the management of intraoperative blood pressure in such patients. METHODS: Among the initial 40 participants assessed, 24 underwent elective laparoscopic myomectomy. A sequential up-and-down method was employed to ascertain the ED50 of nicardipine based on its antihypertensive efficacy. Nicardipine was initially administered at 6 µg/kg following the diagnosis of pituitrin-induced hypertension in the first patient. Dosing adjustments were made to achieve the desired antihypertensive effect, restoring systolic blood pressure and heart rate to within ± 20% of baseline within 120 s. The dosing increment or reduction was set at 0.5 µg/kg for effective or ineffective responses, respectively. The ED50 and ED95 of nicardipine were calculated using Probit regression by Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) to establish dose-response curves and confidence intervals. RESULTS: 24 patients were included for analysis finally. The ED50 and ED95 of nicardipine for blood pressure control after pituitrin injection were determined. The study found that the ED50 of nicardipine for treating pituitrin-induced hypertension was 4.839 µg/kg (95% CI: 4.569-5.099 µg/kg), and the ED95 was estimated at 5.308 µg/kg (95% CI: 5.065-6.496 µg/kg). Nicardipine effectively mitigated the hypertensive response caused by pituitrin without inducing significant tachycardia or hypotension. CONCLUSIONS: Nicardipine effectively controlled blood pressure after pituitrin injection during laparoscopic myomectomy, with ED50 and ED95 values established. This research highlights the potential utility of nicardipine in addressing hypertensive responses induced by pituitrin, particularly in clinical settings where pituitrin is routinely administered.

First use of intraventricular nicardipine in a pediatric patient with vasospasm secondary to meningitis: illustrative case.

BACKGROUND: Cerebral vasospasm is commonly associated with adult aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage but can develop in children. The standard vasospasm treatment includes induced hypertension, avoidance of hypovolemia, systemic use of the calcium channel blocker (CCB) nimodipine, and cerebral angiography for intraarterial therapy. Emerging treatments in adults, such as intraventricular CCB administration, have not been investigated in children. This study demonstrates the successful use of an intraventricular CCB in a pediatric patient with refractory vasospasm secondary to meningitis. OBSERVATIONS: A 12-year-old female presented with Streptococcus pneumoniae meningitis and ventriculitis with refractory symptomatic cerebral vasospasm. She received a 5-day course of intrathecal nicardipine through an existing external ventricular drain. Her clinical status, transcranial Doppler studies, and radiography improved. Treatment was well tolerated. LESSONS: Pediatric vasospasm is uncommon and potentially devastating. The management of vasospasm in adults occurs frequently. Principles of this management are adapted to pediatric care given the rarity of vasospasm in children. The use of intraventricular nicardipine has been reported in the care of adults with level 3 evidence. It has not been adequately reported in children with refractory vasospasm. Here, the first use of intraventricular nicardipine in treating pediatric cerebral vasospasm in the setting of meningitis is described and highlighted.

Nicardipine constant rate infusion alleviates the cardiovascular effects of dexmedetomidine infusions without affecting the minimal alveolar concentration in sevoflurane-anesthetized dogs.

Two randomized crossover trials evaluated the effects of nicardipine constant rate infusion (CRI) on 1) the anesthetic potency of sevoflurane and 2) the ability to attenuate dexmedetomidine-induced cardiovascular depression in anesthetized dogs. First, six healthy Beagle dogs weighing 11.7 ± 0.9 kg were allocated to one of three treatments that administered a CRI of carrier (saline) or dexmedetomidine 0.5 or 3.0 µg/kg/h following a loading dose. The minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane was determined utilizing electric stimuli before and after the loading dose of nicardipine (20 µg/kg intravenously for 10 min), followed by CRI at 40 µg/kg/h with 60 min of equilibration. Subsequently, cardiovascular and blood gas variables were evaluated in another trial under sevoflurane anesthesia at the individual 1.5 MAC. After baseline measurements, the dogs were assigned to two treatments (dexmedetomidine CRI at 0.5 or 3.0 µg/kg/h following a loading dose) with sevoflurane doses adjusted to 1.5 times of MAC equivalent, and the measurements were repeated every 15 min for 120 min. After 60 min, nicardipine CRI at 40 µg/kg/h with a loading dose was added to the dexmedetomidine CRI. Dexmedetomidine infusions significantly decreased the sevoflurane MAC but nicardipine did not significantly alter the MAC either with or without dexmedetomidine CRI in dogs. Dexmedetomidine dose-dependently decreased the cardiac index and increased the systemic vascular resistance index; these effects were fully counteracted by concomitant nicardipine CRI. Nicardipine CRI can be useful for controlling the cardiovascular depression elicited by dexmedetomidine in anesthetized dogs without affecting the anesthetic potency of sevoflurane.

Cisternal nicardipine for prevention of delayed cerebral ischemia in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a comparative retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Intrathecal vasoactive drugs have been proposed in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) to manage cerebral vasospasm (CV). We analyzed the efficacy of intracisternal nicardipine compared to intraventricular administration to a control group (CG) to determine its impact on delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) and functional outcomes. Secondary outcomes included the need for intra-arterial angioplasties and the safety profile. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of all adult patients admitted for a high modified Fisher grade aSAH between January 2015 and April 2022. All patients with significant radiological CV were included. Three groups of patients were defined based on the CV management: cisternal nicardipine (CN), ventricular nicardipine (VN), and no intrathecal nicardipine (control group). RESULTS: Seventy patients met the inclusion criteria. Eleven patients received intracisternal nicardipine, 18 intraventricular nicardipine, and 41 belonged to the control group. No cases of DCI were observed in the CN group (p = 0.02). Patients with intracisternal nicardipine had a reduced number of intra-arterial angioplasties when compared to the control group (p = 0.03). The safety profile analysis showed no difference in complications across the three groups. Intrathecal (ventricular or cisternal) nicardipine therapy improved functional outcomes at 6 months (p = 0.04) when compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Administration of intrathecal nicardipine for moderate to severe CV reduces the rate of DCI and improved long-term functional outcomes in patients with high modified Fisher grade aSAH. This study also showed a relative benefit of cisternal over intraventricular nicardipine, thereby reducing the number of angioplasties performed in the post-treatment phase. However, these preliminary results should be confirmed with future prospective studies.

Direct investigations of the effects of nicardipine on calcium channels of astrocytes by Atomic Force Microscopy.

Calcium channel blockers (CCB) of astrocytes can blockade the calcium ions entry through the voltage gated calcium channels (VGCC), and is widely used in the diseases related with VGCC of astrocytes. But many aspects of the interaction mechanisms between the CCB and VGCC of astrocytes still remain unclear due to the limited resolution of the approaches. Herein the effects of the nicardipine (a type of CCB) on VGCC of astrocytes were investigated at very high spatial, force and electrical resolution by multiple modes of Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) directly. The results reveal that after the addition of nicardipine, the recognition signals of VGCC disappeared; the specific unbinding forces vanished; the conductivity of the astrocytes decreased (the current decreased about 2.9 pA and the capacitance was doubled); the surface potential of the astrocytes reduced about 14.2 mV. The results of electrical properties investigations are consistent with the simulation experiments. The relations between these biophysical and biochemical properties of VGCC have been discussed. All these demonstrate that the interactions between nicardipine and VGCC have been studied at nanometer spatial resolution, at picoNewton force resolution and very high electrical signal resolution (pA in current, pF in capacitance and 0.1 mV in surface potential) level. The approaches are considered to be high resolution and high sensitivity, and will be helpful and useful in the further investigations of the effects of other types of CCB on ion channels, and will also be helpful in the investigations of mechanisms and therapy of ion channelopathies.

Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Modeling to Predict CYP3A-Mediated Drug Interaction between Saxagliptin and Nicardipine: Bridging Rat-to-Human Extrapolation.

The aim of this study was to predict the cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A)-mediated drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between saxagliptin and nicardipine using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model. Initially, in silico and in vitro parameters were gathered from experiments or the literature to construct PBPK models for each drug in rats. These models were integrated to predict the DDIs between saxagliptin, metabolized via CYP3A2, and nicardipine, exhibiting CYP3A inhibitory activity. The rat DDI PBPK model was completed by optimizing parameters using experimental rat plasma concentrations after co-administration of both drugs. Following co-administration in Sprague-Dawley rats, saxagliptin plasma concentration significantly increased, resulting in a 2.60-fold rise in AUC, accurately predicted by the rat PBPK model. Subsequently, the workflow of the rat PBPK model was applied to humans, creating a model capable of predicting DDIs between the two drugs in humans. Simulation from the human PBPK model indicated that nicardipine co-administration in humans resulted in a nearly unchanged AUC of saxagliptin, with an approximate 1.05-fold change, indicating no clinically significant changes and revealing a lack of direct translation of animal interaction results to humans. The animal-to-human PBPK model extrapolation used in this study could enhance the reliability of predicting drug interactions in clinical settings where DDI studies are challenging.

In vitro models for neuropathic pain phenotypic screening in brain therapeutics.

The discovery of brain therapeutics faces a significant challenge due to the low translatability of preclinical results into clinical success. To address this gap, several efforts have been made to obtain more translatable neuronal models for phenotypic screening. These models allow the selection of active compounds without predetermined knowledge of drug targets. In this review, we present an overview of various existing models within the field, examining their strengths and limitations, particularly in the context of neuropathic pain research. We illustrate the usefulness of these models through a comparative review in three crucial areas: i) the development of novel phenotypic screening strategies specifically for neuropathic pain, ii) the validation of the models for both primary and secondary screening assays, and iii) the use of the models in target deconvolution processes.

Effects of intravenous nicardipine followed by oral labetalol in combination with nifedipine controlled-release tablet on severe peripartum hypertension.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of intravenous nicardipine as initial therapy and oral labetalol combined with nifedipine controlled-release tablet as subsequent treatment of severe peripartum hypertension. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Intravenous nicardipine was delivered as the initial treatment, after the target blood pressure (BP) had been achieved, oral labetalol was used to maintain the target BP. If oral labetalol failed to maintain the target BP, oral labetalol combined with nifedipine controlled-release tablet was used. RESULTS: A total number of 131 patients were enrolled. The target BP (BP < 140/90 mmHg) was achieved in all patients within 60 minutes by intravenous nicardipine. After receiving labetalol orally, the target BP was maintained in nine patients. However, in 104 patients, we had to combine oral labetalol and nifedipine controlled-release tablet due to re-elevation of their systolic BP to 140-159 mmHg. In 18 patients, we restarted intravenous nicardipine because their systolic BP re-elevated above 160 mm Hg. Among the 104 patients who received oral labetalol and nifedipine controlled-release tablet, the target BP was achieved and maintained in 96 patients, and eight patients had to restart nicardipine. Of the total number of 26 patients in whom intravenous nicardipine was resumed, the target BP was successfully maintained in 22 patients with oral labetalol combined with nifedipine controlled-release tablet. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous nicardipine rapidly and safely lowered severe peripartum hypertension. As subsequent therapy, oral labetalol combined with nifedipine controlled-release tablet protocol may be applied to effectively maintain a target BP.

Utility of nicardipine in the management of hypertensive crises in adults with reduced ejection fractions.

BACKGROUND: Nicardipine is commonly used in the management of hypertensive crises, except those involving cardiac contractility defects despite its ability to reduce afterload and pulmonary congestion. Consequently, there is limited literature evaluating nicardipine's role for this indication. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nicardipine in adults with reduced ejection fractions presenting with acute heart failure with hypertension (AHF-H). METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted at an academic Level 1 trauma center with an annual Emergency Department (ED) volume surpassing 100,000. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of nicardipine in adults with reduced ejection fractions presenting to the ED with AHF-H. Efficacy was determined by achievement of the physician prescribed blood pressure target range. The primary safety endpoints included the number of individuals who experienced bradycardia (< 60 beats per minute, bpm) or hypotension (systolic blood pressure, SBP, < 90 mmHg) while receiving nicardipine and for up to 15 min after its discontinuation. Patients were included if they were ≥ 18 years of age, received a continuous intravenous nicardipine infusion within six hours of presenting to the ED, and had an ejection fraction ≤ 40% per an echocardiogram obtained within three months of the study visit. Pregnant and incarcerated patients were excluded. RESULTS: Of the 500 patient charts reviewed, 38 met inclusion criteria. The median (interquartile, IQR) ejection fraction and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) were 35% (25-40) and 731 pg/nL (418-3277), respectively. The median baseline heart rate and SBP were 90 bpm and 193 mmHg, respectively. The median physician specified SBP goal was 160 mmHg and all patients met this endpoint in a median time of 18 min. One (2.6%) patient in the total population developed both hypotension and bradycardia. This patient had an ejection fraction of 20%, was intubated, and received nicardipine in addition to esmolol for an aortic dissection without experiencing an adverse event until 30 min after dexmedetomidine was initiated. CONCLUSION: In this non-interventional study evaluating the use of nicardipine in patients with reduced ejection fractions presenting to the ED with AHF-H, nicardipine was found to be safe and effective. To our knowledge this is the largest study to date evaluating nicardipine in this patient population and positively contributes to the existing literature.