Skip Navigation LinksHome > June 2008 - Volume 108 - Issue 6 > Dobutamine: Too Dangerous for “Routine” Administration?
Anesthesiology:
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318172fb98
Editorial Views

Dobutamine: Too Dangerous for “Routine” Administration?

Butterworth, John M.D.

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

RISK factors associated with the administration of positive inotropic drugs (PIDs) have often been studied; the indications for which dobutamine and other PIDs are administered to patients undergoing cardiac surgery are less well defined.1–4 Depending on the center in which the surgery takes place, PIDs may be administered to as few as 5% or to as many as 100% of patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery. Prescribing habits vary markedly by physician and by center. Some initiate therapy with dobutamine, others with epinephrine, dopamine, dopexamine, milrinone, enoximone, olprinone, norepinephrine, or levosimendan.4,5 Even when practicing with the same set of surgeons within the same center, individual anesthesiologists may demonstrate a widely varying threshold for initiating therapy with PIDs.2 These seemingly haphazard prescribing habits seem consistent with a belief that patients who are given PIDs have no worse outcome than patients who do not receive them. In this issue of Anesthesiology, Fellahi et al.6 attempt to test this assumption.
Most PIDs (including dobutamine, inamrinone, and milrinone) were licensed by drug regulatory agencies for treatment of acute heart failure or acute exacerbations of chronic heart failure. If we assume that clinicians prescribe PIDs appropriately, the patients receiving them should be “sicker” and have a worse outcome than those who do not receive them. Nevertheless, in a small sample of patients that provided inadequate statistical power, a negative outcome from the decision to administer PIDs was not detected.1
In any case, the critical hypothesis must be properly stated. For patients with low cardiac output syndrome after heart surgery, the alternatives to PIDs include intraaortic balloon counterpulsation, ventricular assist devices, or death. None of these are attractive alternatives. Unlike the case for patients with severe chronic heart failure who are not transplant candidates, there is no consensus that assist devices are safer than PIDs for patients with acute heart failure after cardiac surgery.7 Therefore, a critical and testable hypothesis must be that patients who can be appropriately managed without PIDs will have a worse outcome if they receive PIDs. Fellahi et al.6 used a propensity scoring technique to approach this hypothesis. They attempted to compare the outcome after coronary artery surgery in otherwise similar patients who either did or did not receive a PID (nearly always dobutamine). Their conclusion was that, all other things being the same, patients had worse outcome when they received PIDs. But what do these results mean for the practicing clinician?
First, these results relate almost exclusively to the use of dobutamine and may not apply to other PIDs. Although often used, dobutamine may not be the best agent. We know that dobutamine has different hemodynamic actions from other β-adrenergic agonists. For example, dobutamine has a marked tendency to produce tachycardia, much more so than epinephrine, inamrinone, or milrinone, and elevated heart rate has long been associated with worsened outcome in patients with coronary artery disease.8–12 Dobutamine differs from phosphodiesterase inhibitors in how it interacts with the calcium salts that some clinicians administer at the time of separation from cardiopulmonary bypass.13 Dobutamine is also a partial agonist with the potential for inhibiting the response to other β-adrenergic agonists.14
Second, these authors have not excluded from their analysis those patients to whom nearly every clinician would administer a PID. That is, there are patients who require PIDs, and there really is not a suitable alternative (other than an alternative PID). Until suitable options are available, we will continue to administer PIDs to these patients.
Third, there may come a time when we can identify which patients may derive benefit and which patients may derive harm from dobutamine and other PIDs. Genetic studies have already identified a particular β-adrenergic receptor polymorphism in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery that associates with the use of larger doses of β-adrenergic agonists.15
I think the most important lesson to be gleaned from this report is that no patient should receive dobutamine after heart surgery unless there is a medical indication. There are centers where it is routine practice to initiate an infusion of 5 μg · kg−1 · min−1 dobutamine at the time of separation from cardiopulmonary bypass in all patients, not just those with depressed cardiac function. The data of Fellahi et al., consistent with previous work in chronic heart failure patients, provide a very strong argument against administering dobutamine to any patient who does not require the agent to improve the odds of survival.6,7 The authors argue that there should be guidelines and protocols by which dobutamine should be administered. I would have the more mundane hope that patients will receive this agent only for an indication, rather than based on a whim or a routine practice.
John Butterworth, M.D.
Department of Anesthesia, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. jfbutter@iupui.edu
Back to Top | Article Outline

References

1. Royster RL, Butterworth JF IV, Prough DS, Johnston WE, Thomas JL, Hogan PE, Case LD, Gravlee GP: Preoperative and intraoperative predictors of inotropic support and long-term outcome in patients having coronary artery bypass grafting. Anesth Analg 1991; 72:729–36

2. Butterworth JF IV, Legault C, Royster RL, Hammon JW Jr: Factors that predict the use of positive inotropic drug support after cardiac valve surgery. Anesth Analg 1998; 86:461–7

3. Müller M, Junger A, Bräu M, Kwapisz MM, Schindler E, Akintürk H, Benson M, Hempelmann G: Incidence and risk calculation of inotropic support in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass using an automated anaesthesia record-keeping system. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89:398–404

4. Kastrup M, Markewitz A, Spies C, Carl M, Erb J, Grobe J, Schirmer U: Current practice of hemodynamic monitoring and vasopressor and inotropic therapy in post-operative cardiac surgery patients in Germany: Results from a postal survey. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2007; 51:347–58

5. De Hert SG, Lorsomradee S, Cromheecke S, Van der Linden PJ: The effects of levosimendan in cardiac surgery patients with poor left ventricular function. Anesth Analg 2007; 104:766–73

6. Fellahi J-L, Parienti J-J, Hanouz J-L, Plaud B, Riou B, Ouattara A: Perioperative use of dobutamine in cardiac surgery and adverse cardiac outcome: Propensity-adjusted analyses. Anesthesiology 2008; 108:979–87

7. Rogers JG, Butler J, Lansman SL, Gass A, Portner PM, Pasque MK, Pierson RN III, INTrEPID Investigators: Chronic mechanical circulatory support for inotrope-dependent heart failure patients who are not transplant candidates: Results of the INTrEPID trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:741–7

8. Feneck RO, Sherry KM, Withington PS, Oduro-Dominah A, European Milrinone Multicenter Trial Group: Comparison of the hemodynamic effects of milrinone with dobutamine in patients after cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2001; 15:306–15

9. MacGregor DA, Butterworth JF IV, Zaloga GP, Prielipp RC, James R, Royster RL: Hemodynamic and renal effects of dopexamine and dobutamine in patients with reduced cardiac output following coronary artery bypass grafting. Chest 1994; 106:835–41

10. Butterworth JF IV, Prielipp RC, Royster RL, Spray BJ, Kon ND, Wallenhaupt SL, Zaloga GP: Dobutamine increases heart rate more than epinephrine in patients recovering from aortocoronary bypass surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 1992; 6:535–41

11. Rich MW, Woods WL, Davila-Roman VG, Morello PJ, Kurz H, Barbarash R, Spinner L, Sperry J, Beckham V, Coulter L, Brown P: A randomized comparison of intravenous amrinone versus dobutamine in older patients with decompensated congestive heart failure. J Am Geriatr Soc 1995; 43:271–4

12. Hjalmarson A, Gilpin EA, Kjekshus J, Schieman G, Nicod P, Henning H, Ross J Jr: Influence of heart rate on mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1990; 65:547–53

13. Butterworth JF IV, Zaloga GP, Prielipp RC, Tucker WY Jr, Royster RL: Calcium inhibits the cardiac stimulating properties of dobutamine but not of amrinone. Chest 1992; 101:174–80

14. Prielipp RC, MacGregor DA, Royster RL, Kon ND, Hines MH, Butterworth JF: Dobutamine antagonizes epinephrine’s biochemical and cardiotonic effects: Results of an in vitro model using human lymphocytes and a clinical study in patients recovering from cardiac surgery. Anesthesiology 1998; 89:49–57

15. Leineweber K, Bogedain P, Wolf C, Wagner S, Weber M, Jakob HG, Heusch G, Philipp T, Brodde OE: In patients chronically treated with metoprolol, the demand of inotropic catecholamine support after coronary artery bypass grafting is determined by the Arg389Gly-beta 1-adrenoceptor polymorphism. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 2007; 375:303–9

Cited By:

This article has been cited 1 time(s).

Anesthesiology
Residual Confounding in Observational Studies
Fellahi, J; Parienti, J
Anesthesiology, 110(2): 430.
10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181944aa3
PDF (230) | CrossRef
Back to Top | Article Outline

© 2008 American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc.

Publication of an advertisement in Anesthesiology Online does not constitute endorsement by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. or Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. of the product or service being advertised.
Login

Article Tools

Share