ArticleCureus2022
A Case Report of Lifesaving Intravenous Bolus Epinephrine Administration in a Case of Severe Refractory Anaphylactic Shock.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Exploring the anti-anaphylaxis potential of natural products: A Review.Inflammopharmacology · 2025Review
- NButGT Reinforces the Beneficial Effects of Epinephrine on Cardiac Mitochondrial Respiration, Lactatemia and Cardiac Output in Experimental Anaphylactic Shock.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening response to various types of allergens. Early recognition and management are crucial for reducing mortality. This case report highlights a 31-year-old male with a background of hypertension who presented to the emergency department with nausea, vomiting, right flank pain, headache, and elevated blood pressure (BP) of 212/134 mmHg. The patient was started on stat captopril 12.5 mg tablet and stat amlodipine 5 mg tablet for his high BP and stat diclofenac 75 mg (1 mg/kg) intramuscular (IM) for his flank pain. Two minutes later the patient started developing swelling of his mucosal membranes with no urticaria or rashes and his BP suddenly dropped and was unrecordable. First-line management was immediately initiated including the administration of two standard adult doses of IM epinephrine of 500 mcg each with a 5-minute interval. The BP remained undetectable; accordingly, a third IM epinephrine dose of 500 mcg was administered along with an intravenous (IV) epinephrine drip initiated at a rate of 4 mcg/min. The BP became 60/40 mmHg but kept dropping, thus an IV epinephrine bolus of 300 mcg (4 mcg/kg) was given along with the ongoing IV epinephrine drip. BP increased to 126/75 mmHg. While on the IV epinephrine drip the BP dropped again to 88/59 mmHg, a second IV epinephrine bolus of 200 mcg (2.6 mcg/kg) was given and the BP became 140/90 mmHg and recovery was achieved. Emergency cases require immediate recognition and intervention. Currently, IM epinephrine is the primary treatment for anaphylaxis. We hope our case report contributes to the database on severe refractory anaphylaxis by discussing a successful case where IV bolus epinephrine was used to prevent imminent cardiovascular collapse. Highlighting the need for appropriate escalation of management given the availability of physicians with expertise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.