Objectives: Vasopressin has achieved common usage for the treatment of catecholamine-requiring and catecholamine-resistant shock. Diabetes insipidus is a syndrome characterized by excretion of abnormally large volumes of dilute urine. To date, very few reports of diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion have been published; the majority of previous reports describe neurosurgical patients. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the occurrence rate of diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion among patients treated with vasopressin infusion for shock. Design: Retrospective analysis of electronic health records of patients receiving continuous vasopressin infusion for the treatment of shock within a 5-year period (2012–2016). Setting: Medical, surgical, and cardiothoracic ICUs within one academic medical center. Patients: One-thousand eight-hundred ninety-six patients received vasopressin infusion for the treatment of shock. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The occurrence rate of diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion was 1.53% among all patients. Sixteen of 29 patients with diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion had undergone cardiothoracic intervention, such as coronary artery bypass graft and valve replacement surgery, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and placement of ventricular assist devices. No neurosurgical patients were identified in our cohort. In a control group of patients receiving norepinephrine but not vasopressin infusion for treatment of shock, criteria for diabetes insipidus were observed in two of 1,320 subjects (0.15%). Conclusions: Despite a paucity of published reports, diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion appears not to be a rare phenomenon, and is likely to be encountered by intensivists who regularly employ vasopressin for the treatment of vasoplegic shock. Previous reports consisted predominantly of neurosurgical patients. Our findings demonstrate the occurrence of diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion among patients with septic shock as well as vasoplegic shock after cardiothoracic intervention. The mechanism of diabetes insipidus after discontinuation of vasopressin infusion remains to be elucidated but may involve transient downregulation of V2 receptors induced by exposure to supraphysiological doses of vasopressin.

Septic shock, a form of vasodilatory shock associated with high morbidity and mortality, requires early and effective therapy to improve patient outcomes. Current management of septic shock includes the use of intravenous fluids, catecholamines, and vasopressin for hemodynamic support to ensure adequate perfusion. Despite these interventions, hospital mortality rates are still greater than 40%. Practitioners are continuously faced with cases of refractory shock that are associated with poor clinical outcomes. In December of 2017, the Food and Drug Administration approved the first synthetic human angiotensin II, a potent vasoconstrictor, to increase blood pressure in adults with septic or other distributive shock. This approval was based (ATHOS) on the results from the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High Output Shock study. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients in the angiotensin II group achieved higher rates of target mean arterial pressure and had lower catecholamine requirements in the first 3 hours of therapy compared with patients in the placebo group. There was no significant difference in the 28-day mortality. Safety issues including the risk of thromboembolic events, infection, and delirium have made clinicians cautious in adopting angiotensin II into practice. Ongoing studies are needed to more clearly define the role of this agent and its utility in the management of shock.

Although coronavirus disease 2019 was first identified in December 2019, it rapidly spread and became a global pandemic. The number of patients infected with the novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) rose rapidly in New York State, placing great stress on healthcare systems. The traditional roles and practices of healthcare providers were dramatically redefined to meet the demand to care for the large number of ill patients. While literature reports on the experiences of many frontline staff, there is a scarcity of reports on the role of clinical pharmacists during this crisis. We report the role of critical care clinical pharmacists at a large academic medical center in New York City during this pandemic. Effective crisis management required clinical pharmacists to employ a wide array of skills and knowledge. Areas included clinical expertise, education, data analysis, health informatics infrastructure, and inventory management in times of surging medication use and manufacturer shortages. Clinical pharmacists fulfilled an essential service during the coronavirus pandemic by working to ensure the best possible outcomes for the patients they served on the frontline.

No abstract

Occurrence of DI upon discontinuation of vasopressin infusion appears to be rare, but incidence may be underestimated due to a paucity of published reports. Actual incidence and underlying mechanism of this phenomenon remain to be elucidated.