Scoping Review: Is Push-Dose Norepinephrine a Better Choice?

• Published in: The western journal of emergency medicine Vol. 25; no. 5; pp. 708 - 714
• Main Authors: Berkenbush, Michael, Singh, Lali, Sessa, Kelly, Saadi, Raghad
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States University of California Digital Library - eScholarship 01.09.2024; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine; eScholarship Publishing, University of California
• Subjects: Anesthesia; Clinical trials; Critical Care; Emergency medical care; Emergency Service, Hospital; Epinephrine - administration & dosage; Epinephrine - therapeutic use; Humans; Hypotension - drug therapy; Norepinephrine - administration & dosage; Phenylephrine - administration & dosage; Phenylephrine - therapeutic use; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Review; Vasoconstrictor Agents - administration & dosage; Vasoconstrictor Agents - therapeutic use
• ISSN: 1936-9018; 1936-900X; 1936-9018
• DOI: 10.5811/WESTJEM.18584

Introduction: The use of push-dose vasopressors to treat anesthesia-induced hypotension is a common evidence-based practice among anesthesiologists. In more recent years, the use of push-dose vasopressors has transitioned to the emergency department (ED) and critical care setting. There is debate on the best choice of a push-dose vasopressor, with push-dose epinephrine or phenylephrine being more commonly used. This scoping review evaluated publications regarding the clinical use of push-dose norepinephrine. Methods: We queried research studies in both PubMed and Google Scholar on the use of push-dose norepinephrine in human subjects, with numerous randomized controlled trials that compare norepinephrine to other vasopressors including phenylephrine, ephedrine, and epinephrine. Results: A large majority of the studies were performed in the setting of spinal anesthesia prior to cesarean section, while several involved the administration of general anesthesia, with limited-to-no literature in the emergency and critical care setting. Of the 27 studies that we included in the review, 17 were randomized controlled trials. These studies demonstrated that norepinephrine was safe and effective. Conclusion: Prior research has demonstrated the superiority of norepinephrine as a pressor of choice for various shock states. In this review, the safety and efficacy of push-dose norepinephrine is demonstrated, and favorable hemodynamic markers are shown in comparison to other agents. In addition, there are some safety and efficiency benefits to using push-dose norepinephrine from an administration standpoint, as well as clinically in decreased need for repeat doses. Further high-quality studies in the emergency and critical care realm would be beneficial to confirm these findings.