Jean-Marc Malinovsky

Diagnostic value of histamine and tryptase concentrations in severe anaphylaxis with shock or cardiac arrest during anesthesia.

Background:The diagnosis of acute life-threatening allergic reactions during anesthesia relies on clinical signs, histamine and/or tryptase measurements, and allergic testing. In patients who die after the reaction, skin tests cannot be performed, and the effect of resuscitation manoeuvres on mediator concentrations is unknown. The authors compared plasma histamine and tryptase concentrations in patients with severe allergic reactions during anesthesia with those measured in patients with shock due to other causes. Methods:Patients with life-threatening allergic reactions were retrieved from a previous database (Group ALLERGY). All had positive allergy tests to administered agents. Patients with severe septic/cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest (Group CONTROL) had histamine and tryptase measurements during resuscitation manoeuvres. Receiver operating characteristics curves were built to calculate the optimal mediator thresholds differentiating allergic reactions from others. Results:One hundred patients were included, 75 in Group ALLERGY (cardiovascular collapse, 67; cardiac arrest, 8) and 25 in Group CONTROL (shock, 11; cardiac arrest, 14). Mean histamine and tryptase concentrations remained unchanged throughout resuscitation in Group CONTROL and were significantly higher in Group ALLERGY. The optimal thresholds indicating an allergic mechanism were determined as 6.35 nmol/l for histamine (sensitivity: 90.7% [95% CI, 81.7 to 96.1]; specificity: 91.7% [73.0 to 98.9]) and 7.35 &mgr;g/l for tryptase (sensitivity: 92% [83.4 to 97.0]; specificity: 92% [73.9 to 99.0]). Conclusions:Resuscitation manoeuvres by themselves did not modify mediator concentrations. Virtually all life-threatening reactions during anesthesia associated with mediator concentrations exceeding the thresholds were allergic events. These findings have potential forensic interest when a patient dies during anesthesia.

Methylene blue and epinephrine: a synergetic association for anaphylactic shock treatment.

Background:Severe hypotension resulting from anaphylactic shock may be refractory to epinephrine and impair cerebral oxygenation and metabolism contributing to anaphylactic shock morbidity and mortality. Refractoriness to epinephrine could be corrected by nitric oxide pathway inhibitors such as methylene blue. Objectives:To compare the systemic and regional (brain and skeletal muscle) effects of epinephrine and methylene blue given alone or in combination in a rat model of anaphylactic shock. Design:Prospective laboratory study. Setting:University laboratory. Subjects:Male Brown-Norway rats (n = 60). Interventions:After sensitization and induction of anaphylactic shock by ovalbumin, animals received either vehicle (ovalbumin group) or a 3-mg/kg methylene blue bolus (methylene blue group) or epinephrine (epinephrine group) or both (methylene blue–epinephrine group). Sensitized control rats received only vehicle and no ovalbumin (control group). Measurement and Main Results:Mean arterial pressure, cardiac output, cerebral blood flow, skeletal muscular oxygen partial pressure, cerebral oxygen partial pressure, skeletal muscular, and cerebral interstitial lactate/pyruvate ratio were measured. Cleaved caspase 3 and hypoxia-inducible factor-1&agr; expression were analyzed in the cerebral cortex by Western blot. Without treatment, rats died rapidly within 15 mins from a decrease in cardiac output and mean arterial pressure, whereas treated rats survived until the end of the experiment. Methylene blue alone extended survival time but without significant improvement of hemodynamic variables and tissue perfusion and did not prevent neuronal injury. Epinephrine restored partially systemic hemodynamic variables and cerebral perfusion preventing glutamate-induced excitotoxicity. Compared with epinephrine alone, the methylene blue–epinephrine association avoided neuronal excitotoxicity and had an additive effect both on hemodynamic variables and for prevention of brain ischemia. Neither treatment could significantly restore cardiac output or prevent muscular compartment ischemia and microvascular leakage. Conclusions:Anaphylactic shock is associated with severe impairment of cerebral blood flow despite correction of arterial hypotension. Epinephrine must still be considered as the first-line vasoconstrictive agent to treat anaphylactic shock. The epinephrine–methylene blue association was the most effective treatment to prevent cerebral ischemia and could be used in anaphylactic shock refractory to epinephrine.

Anaphylactic shock decreases cerebral blood flow more than what would be expected from severe arterial hypotension.

ABSTRACT The effects of acute reduction in arterial blood pressure in severe anaphylactic shock (AS) on cerebral blood flow are of paramount importance to be investigated. We studied cerebral circulation and oxygenation in a model of severe AS and compared it with a pharmacologically induced arterial hypotension of similar magnitude. Anaphylactic shock was induced by 1 mg intravenous ovalbumin (OVA) in sensitized rats. Rats were randomized to three groups: (i) no resuscitation (OVA; n = 10) (ii) intravenous volume expansion (10 mL in 10 min after OVA injection) (OVA + VE; n = 10); (iii) control hypotension (100 &mgr;g of nicardipine followed by continuous infusion of 1 mg · 100 g−1 · h−1 intravenously; NICAR; n = 10). Mean arterial pressure (MAP), carotid blood flow (CBF), cardiac output, cerebral cortical blood flow (CCBF; estimated by laser Doppler technique), and cerebral tissue oxygen pressure (PtiO2) were recorded over the 15 min following AS induction in all three groups. Results are expressed as mean (SD). One minute after OVA or nicardipine injection, there was a rapid and significant 50% decrease in MAP from basal values. In the OVA group, AS severely altered systemic and cerebral hemodynamics in 5 min: 93% (SD, 4%) decrease in CBF, 66% (SD, 8%) in CCBF, and 44% (SD, 8%) in PtiO2; the decrease in CBF was significantly (P < 0.05) attenuated in the OVA + VE group; however, CCBF and PtiO2 were not statistically different in the OVA versus OVA + VE groups. On the contrary, nicardipine-induced hypotension had only a limited impact on CBF, cardiac output, CCBF, and PtiO2 for a similar MAP decrease. There was a linear relation between CCBF and blood pressure in the OVA (regression slope: 0.87 [SD, 0.06]; median r2 = 0.81) but not in the NICAR group (regression slope: 0.23 [SD, 0.32]; median r2 = 0.33). Anaphylactic shock resulted in severe impairment of cerebral blood flow and oxygenation, beyond what could be expected from the level of arterial hypotension.

Allergy to local anesthetics: Reality or myth?

The incidence of allergic reactions to local anesthetics is low. Most cases involve a psychogenic reaction rather than an allergic reaction. Additives and preservatives added to local anesthetics may cause allergic reactions. Vascular resorption of epinephrine-containing local anesthetics may produce cardiovascular signs similar to an allergic reaction. Diagnosis of allergy to local anesthetics must be established by skin testing and provocative challenge.

Diagnostic procedure after an immediate hypersensitivity reaction in the operating room.

The diagnosis of a perioperative allergic reaction is based on clinical features associated with a suggestive timeline, the exclusion of other diagnoses, elevated concentrations of degranulation markers (histamine, tryptase), and positive allergy assessments (skin tests, specific IgE). After initiating appropriate treatment, the anesthesiologist should take blood samples to measure histamine and tryptase concentrations just after the reaction and repeat them 1-2hours later to validate the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity. A delayed measurement of basal tryptase is useful to rule out mastocytosis and to interpret moderate tryptase levels. The anesthesiologist must inform the patient of the reaction to obtain adhesion and consent to subsequent investigations and must record the timing of the reaction and of the blood sampling, the possible causal agents, and the treatment administered. These data must be shared with the laboratory and the allergist. An adverse drug reaction report must be filed. The gold standard for allergy assessment is skin testing. These tests should be done in an appropriate facility, with experienced staff and in compliance with current guidelines. Specific IgE assays and cellular assays can help when clinical features and skin tests are discordant. Provocation tests are sometimes required. After allergy assessment, the safest protocol for subsequent anesthesia is determined in collaboration with the anesthesiologist. The patient must be informed and carry an allergy alert card.

Epinephrine, compared with arginine vasopressin, is associated with similar haemodynamic effects but significantly improved brain oxygenation in the early phase of anaphylactic shock in rats: An experimental study.

BACKGROUND In contrast to other types of shock, anaphylactic shock decreases cerebral blood flow more than would be expected from severe arterial hypotension, thus potentially affecting survival through brain ischaemia/hypoxia. We hypothesised that epinephrine (EPI) used as a first-line treatment of anaphylactic shock and arginine vasopressin (AVP) proposed in case of EPI refractoriness may have different effects on brain oxygenation. OBJECTIVES To compare the effect of EPI and AVP on brain oxygenation under similar macro-haemodynamic target values in an anaphylactic shock model. DESIGN Prospective laboratory study. SETTING University laboratory. ANIMALS Male brown Norway rats (n = 27). INTERVENTIONS Twenty-seven rats were sensitised with ovalbumin (OVA). Twenty rats had anaphylactic shock induced with OVA and were resuscitated with either 0.9% saline (OVA group), EPI (EPI group) or AVP (AVP group). Sensitised control rats received only 0.9% saline and no OVA (CON group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Mean arterial pressure (MAP), carotid artery blood flow (CaBF), cerebral cortical blood flow (CBF) and hippocampal oxygen partial pressure (PtiO2) were recorded. RESULTS All rats in the OVA group died within 15 min. EPI and AVP restored comparable levels of MAP, carotid artery blood flow and CBF, and extended survival time. EPI was associated with biologically relevant and significantly (P < 0.05) higher PtiO2 values (nadir values at 20 min: 25.0 ± 2.2 mmHg) compared with the AVP group (14.9 ± 2.0 mmHg). The slopes of the correlations of MAP vs. PtiO2 and CBF were significantly steeper with AVP (more pressure dependence) compared with EPI. By the end of the experiment, hippocampal PtiO2 values between the EPI (24.1 ± 2.1 mmHg) and the AVP (20.8 ± 2.0 mmHg) groups were similar. CONCLUSION At early, but not at late time points, resuscitation of anaphylactic shock with EPI or AVP to similar MAP and CBF endpoints resulted in hippocampal PtiO2 being significantly higher after EPI. In addition, the PtiO2 after EPI always remained above the threshold for brain hypoxia, whereas PtiO2 after AVP was below the hypoxic threshold most of the time. Because of this early brain hypoxia, AVP may not be the drug of first choice for resuscitation of anaphylactic shock.

Methylene blue and epinephrine, a synergistic association for anaphylactic shock treatment in anesthetized brown Norway rats: 13AP2-6

Af ter engine shut-down, subsequent “POST”-data were collected. Results and Discussion: Inter-individual dif ferences in “BASELINE” (rSO2range ~75%-85%) were noted based on sensor location, however intra-individual NIRS-measurements by Nonin/Equanox-7600 were not systematically af fected by helicopter artifacts, e.g., cabin vibrations (“ENGINES”). In addition, no helicopter-instruments were apparently disturbed by the Nonin/ Equanox-7600-monitor. Conclusion(s): Our findings suggest that NIRS-measurements by Nonin/ Equanox-7600 are not disturbed by HEMS-typical confounders, e.g., engines start-up/shut-down and helicopter vibrations. Therefore, the Equanox-technology based NIRS-system could become a valuable addition in HEMS-settings. Further studies will have to define how NIRS-monitoring may support (HEMS-) therapy and ultimately (HEMS-) outcome. References: (1) Schwarte, et al.; Br. J. Anaesth. 2010 (2) Burillo-Putze, et al.; Air. Med. J. 2002 (3) Schwarte, et al.; Eur. J. Anaesth. 2008