Clevidipine

Evidence has suggested that clevidipine may provide faster blood pressure (BP) reduction with less volume than nicardipine in stroke and cardiothoracic surgery patients, but its use in hypertensive crises has not been well established. The primary objective of this study was to compare the treatment success of clevidipine and nicardipine in hypertensive crisis.

This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including patients who received either clevidipine or nicardipine for treatment of hypertensive crisis. The primary outcome was the time from infusion start to attainment of goal BP, defined as the higher value of the guideline-directed 25% reduction in BP or the physician-ordered goal. Secondary outcomes were the time from infusion start to guideline-directed 25% reduction in BP, drug and total volume intake, the time from order entry to BP goal attainment, the number of BP and heart rate excursions, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and study medication cost.

In total, 182 patients were included in the study (103 receiving nicardipine and 79 receiving clevidipine). Time to goal BP was similar between the groups (35 vs 33 minutes for clevidipine vs nicardipine, respectively; P = 0.37). Time to guideline-directed 25% reduction was also similar (P = 0.42). Volume from study drug was significantly less with clevidipine (222 vs 518 mL; P = 0.01); however, the total volume received in the ICU was similar (3,370 vs 3,383 mL; P = 0.43). Percent time in the goal BP range was similar (43.1% vs 42.3%). The cost of clevidipine was $199.37 per vial (based on the average wholesale price as of June 2023). This cost was 682% higher than that for a bag of nicardipine.

Time to goal BP was similar for clevidipine and nicardipine in this population. Any decreases in medication-associated volume with clevidipine were no longer evident when all volume sources were considered. These results show that clevidipine may not provide meaningful benefit in this heterogenous population. The difference in cost does not seem justified given the lack of improvement in clinically relevant outcomes.

We performed an analysis of a large intensive care unit electronic database to provide preliminary estimates of various blood pressure parameters in patients with acute stroke receiving intravenous (IV) antihypertensive medication and determine the relationship with in-hospital outcomes.

We identified the relationship between pre-treatment and post-treatment systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate (HR)-related variables and in-hospital mortality and acute kidney injury in patients with acute stroke receiving IV clevidipine, nicardipine, or nitroprusside using data provided in the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) IV database.

A total of 1830 patients were treated with IV clevidipine (n = 64), nicardipine (n = 1623), or nitroprusside (n = 143). The standard deviations [SDs] of pre-treatment SBP (16.3 vs. 13.7, p ≤ 0.001) and post-treatment SBP (15.4 vs. 14.4, p = 0.004) were higher in patients who died compared with those who survived, particularly in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). The mean SBP was significantly lower post treatment compared with pre-treatment values for clevidipine (130.7 mm Hg vs. 142.5 mm Hg, p = 0.006), nicardipine (132.8 mm Hg vs. 141.6 mm Hg, p ≤ 0.001), and nitroprusside (126.2 mm Hg vs. 139.6 mm Hg, p ≤ 0.001). There were no differences in mean SDs post treatment compared with pre-treatment values for clevidipine (14.5 vs. 13.5, p = 0.407), nicardipine (14.2 vs. 14.6, p = 0.142), and nitroprusside (14.8 vs. 14.8, p = 0.997). The SDs of pre-treatment and post-treatment SBP were not significantly different in patients with ischemic stroke treated with IV clevidipine, nicardipine, or nitroprusside or for patients with ICH treated with IV clevidipine or nitroprusside. However, patients with ICH treated with IV nicardipine had a significantly higher SD of post-treatment SBP (13.1 vs. 14.2, p = 0.0032).

We found that SBP fluctuations were associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with acute stroke. IV antihypertensive medication reduced SBP but did not reduce SBP fluctuations in this observational study. Our results highlight the need for optimizing therapeutic interventions to reduce SBP fluctuations in patients with acute stroke.