Retrospective evaluation of inhaled prostaglandins in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome

James M. Camamo, Ruth H. McCoy, Brian L Erstad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study Objectives. To determine whether use of inhaled alprostadil (PGE 1) or epoprostenol (PGI2) significantly improved oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and to determine whether differences between the two drugs exist with regard to oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, adverse effects, and survival. Design. Retrospective chart review. Setting. A 360-bed tertiary care teaching facility with medical and surgical intensive care units. Patients. Twenty-seven patients admitted to the hospital who received either PGI2 or PGE1 for a primary or secondary diagnosis of ARDS. Measurements and Main Results. Seventeen patients received inhaled PGE 1 and 10 received inhaled PGI2. There were no significant changes in the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2):fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and in the PaO 2, from baseline to any time point that was analyzed during treatment, for patients receiving either PGE1 (p=0.2120 and 0.3399, respectively) or PGI2 (p=0.1655 and 0.0784, respectively). Conclusion. No statistically significant improvement in oxygenation was observed in patients receiving either PGE1 or PGI2. In addition, no significant differences were found between the two prostaglandins for the variables studied. Until positive results from large, prospective studies are available, we recommend that these inhaled prostaglandins not be used to treat ARDS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)184-190
Number of pages7
JournalPharmacotherapy
Volume25
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2005

Fingerprint

Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Epoprostenol
Prostaglandins
Alprostadil
Prostaglandins E
Oxygen
Partial Pressure
Tertiary Healthcare
Critical Care
Artificial Respiration
Intensive Care Units
Arterial Pressure
Teaching
Hospitalization
Prospective Studies
Survival
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Acute respiratory distress syndrome
  • ARDS
  • Inhaled prostaglandins
  • Oxygenation
  • PGE
  • PGI

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)

Cite this

Retrospective evaluation of inhaled prostaglandins in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. / Camamo, James M.; McCoy, Ruth H.; Erstad, Brian L.

In: Pharmacotherapy, Vol. 25, No. 2, 02.2005, p. 184-190.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8c36974ca2454453bbc433e64be35fb4,
title = "Retrospective evaluation of inhaled prostaglandins in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome",
abstract = "Study Objectives. To determine whether use of inhaled alprostadil (PGE 1) or epoprostenol (PGI2) significantly improved oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and to determine whether differences between the two drugs exist with regard to oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, adverse effects, and survival. Design. Retrospective chart review. Setting. A 360-bed tertiary care teaching facility with medical and surgical intensive care units. Patients. Twenty-seven patients admitted to the hospital who received either PGI2 or PGE1 for a primary or secondary diagnosis of ARDS. Measurements and Main Results. Seventeen patients received inhaled PGE 1 and 10 received inhaled PGI2. There were no significant changes in the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2):fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and in the PaO 2, from baseline to any time point that was analyzed during treatment, for patients receiving either PGE1 (p=0.2120 and 0.3399, respectively) or PGI2 (p=0.1655 and 0.0784, respectively). Conclusion. No statistically significant improvement in oxygenation was observed in patients receiving either PGE1 or PGI2. In addition, no significant differences were found between the two prostaglandins for the variables studied. Until positive results from large, prospective studies are available, we recommend that these inhaled prostaglandins not be used to treat ARDS.",
keywords = "Acute respiratory distress syndrome, ARDS, Inhaled prostaglandins, Oxygenation, PGE, PGI",
author = "Camamo, {James M.} and McCoy, {Ruth H.} and Erstad, {Brian L}",
year = "2005",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1592/phco.25.2.184.56952",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "184--190",
journal = "Pharmacotherapy",
issn = "0277-0008",
publisher = "Pharmacotherapy Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Retrospective evaluation of inhaled prostaglandins in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome

AU - Camamo, James M.

AU - McCoy, Ruth H.

AU - Erstad, Brian L

PY - 2005/2

Y1 - 2005/2

N2 - Study Objectives. To determine whether use of inhaled alprostadil (PGE 1) or epoprostenol (PGI2) significantly improved oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and to determine whether differences between the two drugs exist with regard to oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, adverse effects, and survival. Design. Retrospective chart review. Setting. A 360-bed tertiary care teaching facility with medical and surgical intensive care units. Patients. Twenty-seven patients admitted to the hospital who received either PGI2 or PGE1 for a primary or secondary diagnosis of ARDS. Measurements and Main Results. Seventeen patients received inhaled PGE 1 and 10 received inhaled PGI2. There were no significant changes in the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2):fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and in the PaO 2, from baseline to any time point that was analyzed during treatment, for patients receiving either PGE1 (p=0.2120 and 0.3399, respectively) or PGI2 (p=0.1655 and 0.0784, respectively). Conclusion. No statistically significant improvement in oxygenation was observed in patients receiving either PGE1 or PGI2. In addition, no significant differences were found between the two prostaglandins for the variables studied. Until positive results from large, prospective studies are available, we recommend that these inhaled prostaglandins not be used to treat ARDS.

AB - Study Objectives. To determine whether use of inhaled alprostadil (PGE 1) or epoprostenol (PGI2) significantly improved oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and to determine whether differences between the two drugs exist with regard to oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, adverse effects, and survival. Design. Retrospective chart review. Setting. A 360-bed tertiary care teaching facility with medical and surgical intensive care units. Patients. Twenty-seven patients admitted to the hospital who received either PGI2 or PGE1 for a primary or secondary diagnosis of ARDS. Measurements and Main Results. Seventeen patients received inhaled PGE 1 and 10 received inhaled PGI2. There were no significant changes in the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2):fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and in the PaO 2, from baseline to any time point that was analyzed during treatment, for patients receiving either PGE1 (p=0.2120 and 0.3399, respectively) or PGI2 (p=0.1655 and 0.0784, respectively). Conclusion. No statistically significant improvement in oxygenation was observed in patients receiving either PGE1 or PGI2. In addition, no significant differences were found between the two prostaglandins for the variables studied. Until positive results from large, prospective studies are available, we recommend that these inhaled prostaglandins not be used to treat ARDS.

KW - Acute respiratory distress syndrome

KW - ARDS

KW - Inhaled prostaglandins

KW - Oxygenation

KW - PGE

KW - PGI

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=13544267517&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=13544267517&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1592/phco.25.2.184.56952

DO - 10.1592/phco.25.2.184.56952

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 184

EP - 190

JO - Pharmacotherapy

JF - Pharmacotherapy

SN - 0277-0008

IS - 2

ER -