• Daniel Stuart, Robin Christian, Hartmut Uschmann, and Michelle Palokas.
• School of Nursing, Department of Neurology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA.
• JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2018 Oct 1; 16 (10): 2013-2026.

ObjectiveThe objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness of intrathecal nicardipine compared to usual care on cerebral vasospasm and its impact on the following outcome measures: mean flow velocities, angiographic and/or clinical vasospasm, and infection rates.IntroductionThe results of non-traumatic (aneurysmal) subarachnoid hemorrhage can have devastating effects on patients in terms of functional outcomes. Although other medications have been and continue to be used, Nimodipine is the only Food and Drug Administration-approved medication for treating and improving outcomes following non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, which may be caused by aneurysmal rupture or arteriovenous malformation. Cerebral vasospasm after non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage is a major concern; cerebral vasospasm refers to the narrowing of the cerebral vessels, which can lead to stroke. Delayed ischemic neurological deficit, as a result of cerebral vasospasm, is the number one reason for death and disability following subarachnoid hemorrhage. This review will determine the effects that intrathecal nicardipine has on cerebral vasospam following non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage.Inclusion CriteriaThe participants of this review included adult patients (18 years and over) in intensive care units. The patients must have had a subarachnoid hemorrhage without history of trauma as cause of subarachnoid hemorrhage, along with the presence of an external ventricular drain. The intervention was administration of intrathecal nicardipine in patients with cerebral vasospasm as a result of non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. The comparator was usual care, which does not include use of intrathecal nicardipine as part of the treatment regimen. The current review considered both experimental and quasi-experimental study designs. The primary outcomes measured included presence of cerebral vasospasm (identified by mean flow velocities measured by transcranial Doppler and the presence of angiographic vasospasm identified on angiogram) and clinical/symptomatic vasospasm. Secondarily, infection rates as a result of intrathecal nicardipine administration were evaluated.MethodsThe search strategy aimed to find both published and unpublished studies. Seven databases were searched with no date limitations due to the limited amount of research on this topic.Two independent reviewers assessed the methodological validity of the papers prior to inclusion in the review using the standardized critical appraisal instruments from Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI).Quantitative data was extracted from included studies using the standardized data extraction tool from JBI SUMARI.Statistical pooling was not possible; therefore findings were presented in a narrative form.ResultsTwo studies examined the effect that intrathecal nicardipine has on cerebral vasospasm, clinical/symptomatic vasospasm and safety concerns (i.e. infection). The studies indicate that intrathecal nicardipine has shown potential benefits and safety in the treatment of cerebral vasospasm.ConclusionsAlthough intrathecal nicardipine has shown potential to be effective in treating cerebral vasospasm, variance existed among those who received intrathecal nicardipine. In terms of safety, one study had no occurrences of associated bacterial meningitis and the other study had two reported cases of bacterial meningitis out of 50 among those who received intrathecal nicardipine. Limited studies on the use of intrathecal nicardipine following non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage and lack of pooling of results for this review demonstrate the need for more research in this field.

30 keywords...

hide…