Background: Early vasopressor utilization has been associated with improved outcomes of patients with spinal shock; however, there are difficulties in weaning off vasopressors, in which patients after recovery from spinal shock develop a state of persistent vasodilation, which may take a few days to resolve and delays the discharge in the intensive care unit (ICU). Therefore, we tested the hypothesis using two oral vasopressors (midodrine and minirin) to facilitate weaning off intravenous vasopressors, reducing the ICU length of stay, and compare them for more efficacy.
Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in the trauma ICU at the Assiut University Hospital in Egypt in patients with spinal shock who required intravenous vasopressor for ≥24 h. A convenience sample was classified into three groups, in which 30 patients were included for each group. The midodrine group received midodrine 10 mg per oral every 8 h with gradual weaning off intravenous (IV) vasopressor (noradrenaline) after receiving 4 doses, the minirin group received minirin 60 μg per oral every 8 h with gradual weaning off IV vasopressor after receiving 4 doses, whereas the control group received IV vasopressor (noradrenaline) with gradual weaning according to the routine hospital care without adding oral vasopressors. The primary outcome was shortening the duration of IV vasopressor requirements. The secondary outcome was reducing the ICU length of stay.
Results: Our results showed that the duration of IV vasopressor requirements in the midodrine (3.3 ± 1.32) and minirin groups (4.8 ± 1.83) was significantly lower than in the control group (6.93 ± 2.32). Additionally, the ICU length of stay (days) in the midodrine (5.13 ± 1.83) and minirin groups (5.5 ± 1.91) was significantly lower than in the control group (9.03 ± 3.74).
Conclusion: Midodrine and minirin accelerated liberation from intravenous noradrenaline and effective in reducing the ICU length of stay in patients with spinal shock.
Background: Major bleeding has been a common and serious complication with poor outcomes in ECMO patients. With a novel, less-invasive cannulation approach and closer coagulation monitoring regime, the incidence of major bleeding is currently not determined yet. Our study aims to examine the incidence of major bleeding, its determinants, and association with mortality in peripheral-ECMO patients.
Method: We conducted a single-center retrospective study on adult patients undergoing peripheral-ECMO between January 2019 and January 2020 at a tertiary referral hospital. Determinants of major bleeding were defined by logistic regression analysis. Risk factors of in-hospital mortality were determined by Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.
Results: Major bleeding was reported in 33/105 patients (31.4%) and was associated with higher in-hospital mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63-7.80, p < 0.001). There were no significant difference in age, sex, ECMO indications, ECMO modality, pre-ECMO APACHE-II and SOFA scores between two groups with and without major bleeding. Only APTT >72 seconds [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 7.10, 95% CI 2.60-19.50, p < 0.001], fibrinogen <2 g/L [aOR = 7.10, 95% CI 2.60-19.50, p < 0.001], and ACT >220 seconds [aOR = 3.9, 95% CI 1.20-11.80, p=0.017] on days with major bleeding were independent predictors.
Conclusions: In summary, major bleeding still had a fairly high incidence and poor outcome in peripheral-ECMO patients. APTT > 72 seconds, fibrinogen < 2 g/L were the strongest predicting factors for major bleeding events.

