Early vasopressin reduces incidence of new onset arrhythmias

Comparison of Early Versus Late Adjunctive Vasopressin and Corticosteroids in Patients With Septic Shock

BACKGROUND

Vasopressin (VP) and hydrocortisone (HC) have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with septic shock. However, there is very little literature addressing the impact of the timing of the combination.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of early versus late initiation of both VP and HC on time to shock reversal in septic shock patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study conducted at a tertiary academic medical center. Data were collected from system-generated reports, which were used to identify patients with septic shock who were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) and received both VP and HC. The primary endpoint was time to shock reversal. Patients were divided into the "early" group if both VP and HC were initiated within 12 hours of vasopressor initiation or into the "late" group if either VP or HC (or both agents) were initiated after 12 hours of vasopressor initiation.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients were included in the analysis. Early initiation was associated with a shorter time to shock reversal (34 hours vs 65 hours; P = 0.012) compared to late initiation. There were no differences in ICU length of stay, mortality, the number patients requiring renal replacement therapy, or the duration of mechanical ventilation in either group.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Our study addressed a major gap in the literature and suggests that adding the combination of VP and HC within 12 hours of septic shock may be associated with improved patient outcomes.

asopressin nitiation as a econd-Line Vasoressor in Early eptic hock (VISPSS)

BACKGROUND

Vasopressin is recommended as a second-line vasoactive agent for the management of septic shock; however, a paucity of data to guide its optimal use remains. The aim was to evaluate the effect of time-to vasopressin initiation and norepinephrine (NE) dose at vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients presenting with septic shock.

METHODS

This was a multi-centered, retrospective, observational study conducted in patients with septic shock. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients initiated on vasopressin when NE-equivalent dose (NEE) < 0.25 mcg/kg/min or ≥ 0.25 mcg/kg/min. The primary outcome was time-to-vasopressor discontinuation (hours). Secondary outcomes included 28-day in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), fluid balance after 72 hours, and the change in NEE at 12 hours.

RESULTS

A total of 302 patients were included in this study. After propensity-score matching, 73 patients in each group were identified for analysis. There was no significant difference in the time-to-vasopressor discontinuation (hours) between the groups (88.8 [55-187.5] vs 86.7 [47-172]); p = 0.7815). Fluid balance (mL) at 72 hours was significantly lower when vasopressin was initiated at NEE < 0.25 mcg/kg/min (1769 [71-7287] vs 5762 [1463-8813]; p = 0.0077). A multivariable linear regression showed shorter time to shock resolution with earlier vasopressin initiation, defined as within 4 hours (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this propensity-score matched cohort, vasopressin initiation at NEE < 0.25 mcg/kg/min was not associated with shorter vasopressor duration. There was a lower fluid balance at 72 hours when vasopressin was initiated at lower NE doses.

Association of systemic inflammatory markers with postoperative arrhythmias in esophageal cancer: a propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

The severity and prognosis of an array of inflammatory diseases have been predicted using systemic inflammatory indices, such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), and systemic immune inflammation index (SII). The purpose of this study was to examine the association between systemic inflammatory markers and postoperative arrhythmias (PA) in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

In the study, laboratory-related parameters were gathered and examined in 278 patients (non-PA = 221, PA = 57). Fit separate propensity score matching (PSM) within subgroup strata (surgery approaches); match within strata, and aggregate for main analysis. Finally, we established a 1:1(57:57) model. The ability of inflammatory makers on the first post-esophagectomy day to distinguish PA from postoperative non-arrhythmia (non-PA) by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

On the first post-esophagectomy day, there was a greater difference between PA and non-PA in terms of white blood cell (WBC) and neutrophil (NE), Neutrophil percentage (NE%), NLR, dNLR, LMR, and SII. After PSM, the following variables were substantially different between non-PA and PA: NE%, NLR, dNLR, and SII. It was found that WBC, NE, NE%, NLR, dNLR, LMR, and SII had the area under the curve (AUC) that was higher than 0.500 in ROC analysis, with NLR and SII having the highest AUC (AUC = 0.661). The indicators were subjected to binary logistic regression analysis, which increased the indicators' predictive ability (AUC = 0.707, sensitivity = 0.877).

CONCLUSION

On the first post-esophagectomy day, systemic inflammatory indicators were significantly correlated with both PA and non-PA, and high SII and NLR are reliable markers of PA.

Effect of Early Administration of Vasopressin on New-Onset Arrhythmia Development in Patients With Septic Shock: A Retrospective, Observational Cohort Study

Background: Adjunctive vasopressin use in septic shock reduces catecholamine requirements and is associated with a lower incidence of new-onset arrhythmias (NOAs). The association of vasopressin timing on NOA development is ill-described. Objective: To determine whether early administration of vasopressin was associated with a lower incidence of NOA in septic shock patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis of intensive care unit (ICU) patients at a large, academic medical center. Septic shock patients who required vasopressin and norepinephrine were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded for receipt of other vasoactive agents, history of cardiac arrhythmias, or outside hospital admission. Early vasopressin was defined as receipt within 6 hours of septic shock onset. The primary outcome was incidence of NOA. Results: In total, 436 patients, 220 (50.4%) in the early and 216 (49.6%) in the late vasopressin group, were included. Early vasopressin was not associated with a lower incidence of NOA compared with late vasopressin (9% vs 7%, median absolute difference [95% confidence interval, CI]: -2.1 [-7.2, 3.0], P = 0.41). Early vasopressin patients were observed to have shorter shock duration (2 vs 4 days, median absolute difference [95% CI]: 2 [1, 2], P < 0.001), and ICU length of stay (6 vs 7 days, median absolute difference [95% CI]: 1 [0, 2], P = 0.02). Conclusions and Relevance: Early vasopressin use was not associated with a lower incidence of NOA. Additional studies are needed to elucidate the effect of vasopressin timing on NOA and other clinical outcomes.

Does Early Vasopressin in Septic Shock Improve Outcomes? An Important Piece to This Emerging Puzzle Has Arrived

In this month's Annals of Pharmacotherapy, the largest observational study assessing the early versus later use of vasopressin has been published. When this new study is combined with the other available observational studies, there are 2 important outcomes to focus on. When all the observational studies are pooled together, no reduction in new onset arrhythmias is seen (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41-1.95) with early versus late vasopressin use while the reduction in renal replacement therapy just missed statistical significance (OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.32-1.00). Early vasopressin likely does not reduce new onset arrhythmias versus later use but might reduce the need for renal replacement therapy.

INITIATION TIMING OF VASOPRESSOR IN PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT

Background: Vasopressor plays a crucial role in septic shock. However, the time for vasopressor initiation remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore its initiation timing for septic shock patients. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Sciences were searched from inception to July 12, 2023, for relevant studies. Primary outcome was short-term mortality. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0. Results: Twenty-three studies were assessed, including 2 randomized controlled trials and 21 cohort studies. The early group resulted in lower short-term mortality than the late group (OR [95% CI] = 0.775 [0.673 to 0.893], P = 0.000, I2 = 67.8%). The significance existed in the norepinephrine and vasopressin in subgroup analysis. No significant difference was considered in the association between each hour's vasopressor delay and mortality (OR [95% CI] = 1.02 [0.99 to 1.051], P = 0.195, I2 = 57.5%). The early group had an earlier achievement of target MAP ( P < 0.001), shorter vasopressor use duration ( P < 0.001), lower serum lactate level at 24 h ( P = 0.003), lower incidence of kidney injury ( P = 0.001), renal replacement therapy use ( P = 0.022), and longer ventilation-free days to 28 days ( P < 0.001). Conclusions: Early initiation of vasopressor (1-6 h within septic shock onset) would be more beneficial to septic shock patients. The conclusion needs to be further validated by more well-designed randomized controlled trials.

Optimizing Vasopressin Use and Initiation Timing in Septic Shock: A Narrative Review

TOPIC IMPORTANCE

This review discusses the rationale for vasopressin use, summarizes the results of clinical trials evaluating vasopressin, and focuses on the timing of vasopressin initiation to provide clinicians guidance for optimal adjunctive vasopressin initiation in patients with septic shock.

REVIEW FINDINGS

Patients with septic shock require vasoactive agents to restore adequate tissue perfusion. After norepinephrine, vasopressin is the suggested second-line adjunctive agent in patients with persistent inadequate mean arterial pressure. Vasopressin use in practice is heterogeneous likely because of inconsistent clinical trial findings, the lack of specific recommendations for when it should be used, and the high drug acquisition cost. Despite these limitations, vasopressin has demonstrated price inelastic demand, and its use in the United States has continued to increase. However, questions remain regarding optimal vasopressin use in patients with septic shock, particularly regarding patient selection and the timing of vasopressin initiation.

SUMMARY

Experimental studies evaluating the initiation timing of vasopressin in patients with septic shock are limited, and recent observational studies have revealed an association between vasopressin initiation at lower norepinephrine-equivalent doses or lower lactate concentrations and lower mortality.

Should we initiate vasopressors earlier in patients with septic shock: A mini systemic review

Septic shock treatment remains a major challenge for intensive care units, despite the recent prominent advances in both management and outcomes. Vasopressors serve as a cornerstone of septic shock therapy, but there is still controversy over the timing of administration. Specifically, it remains unclear whether vasopressors should be used early in the course of treatment. Here, we provide a systematic review of the literature on the timing of vasopressor administration. Research was systematically identified through PubMed, Embase and Cochrane searching according to PRISMA guidelines. Fourteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The pathophysiological basis for early vasopressor use was classified, with the exploration on indications for the early administration of mono-vasopressors or their combination with vasopressin or angiotensinII. We found that mortality was 28.1%-47.7% in the early vasopressors group, and 33.6%-54.5% in the control group. We also investigated the issue of vasopressor responsiveness. Furthermore, we acknowledged the subsequent challenge of administration of high-dose norepinephrine via peripheral veins with early vasopressor use. Based on the literature review, we propose a possible protocol for the early initiation of vasopressors in septic shock resuscitation.

The Heart as a Target of Vasopressin and Other Cardiovascular Peptides in Health and Cardiovascular Diseases

The automatism of cardiac pacemaker cells, which is tuned, is regulated by the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and multiple endocrine and paracrine factors, including cardiovascular peptides. The cardiovascular peptides (CPs) form a group of essential paracrine factors affecting the function of the heart and vessels. They may also be produced in other organs and penetrate to the heart via systemic circulation. The present review draws attention to the role of vasopressin (AVP) and some other cardiovascular peptides (angiotensins, oxytocin, cytokines) in the regulation of the cardiovascular system in health and cardiovascular diseases, especially in post-infarct heart failure, hypertension and cerebrovascular strokes. Vasopressin is synthesized mostly by the neuroendocrine cells of the hypothalamus. There is also evidence that it may be produced in the heart and lungs. The secretion of AVP and other CPs is markedly influenced by changes in blood volume and pressure, as well as by other disturbances, frequently occurring in cardiovascular diseases (hypoxia, pain, stress, inflammation). Myocardial infarction, hypertension and cardiovascular shock are associated with an increased secretion of AVP and altered responsiveness of the cardiovascular system to its action. The majority of experimental studies show that the administration of vasopressin during ventricular fibrillation and cardiac arrest improves resuscitation, however, the clinical studies do not present consisting results. Vasopressin cooperates with the autonomic nervous system (ANS), angiotensins, oxytocin and cytokines in the regulation of the cardiovascular system and its interaction with these regulators is altered during heart failure and hypertension. It is likely that the differences in interactions of AVP with ANS and other CPs have a significant impact on the responsiveness of the cardiovascular system to vasopressin in specific cardiovascular disorders.

Influence of Timing and Catecholamine Requirements on Vasopressin Responsiveness in Critically ill Patients with Septic Shock

Introduction: Despite its widespread use, there is a paucity of data to guide the optimal use of arginine vasopressin (AVP) in critically ill patients with septic shock. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted in critically ill adults sought to evaluate the role of catecholamine requirements and timing on responsiveness to AVP. Responsiveness was defined as both a decrease in ≥ 50% of catecholamine requirements and no decrease in mean arterial pressure (MAP) at 4 hours post-AVP initiation. Primary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients who started AVP within 4 hours after starting catecholamine therapy, as well as baseline norepinephrine (NE) equivalents (< 15, 15-39, or ≥ 40 mcg/min). Multivariate analyses and logistic regression were performed to identify other factors associated with AVP responsiveness. Results: There were 300 patients included in this study, with 74 patients being responders and 226 being non-responders. There was no significant difference in the number of patients who received AVP within 4 hours from catecholamine initiation between responders and non-responders (35% vs. 42%, P = 0.29). There were more patients in the non-responder group requiring ≥ 40 mcg/min of NE equivalents at AVP initiation (30% vs. 16%, P = 0.023). Stress dose steroid use was less common in responders (35% vs. 52%, P = 0.011), which was consistent with logistic regression analysis (OR 0.56, 95% 0.32-0.98, P = 0.044). Clinical outcomes between responders and non-responders were similar, apart from ICU (5.4% vs. 19.5%) and hospital (5.4% vs. 20.4%) mortality being lower in responders (P = 0.0032 and P = 0.0002, respectively). Conclusion: Shorter times to AVP initiation was not associated with responsiveness at 4 hours post-catecholamine initiation, although non-responders tended to require higher doses of NE equivalents at time of AVP initiation. Concomitant corticosteroids were associated with a lower likelihood of AVP responsiveness.

The effect of early vasopressin use on patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of early vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock is uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of early start of vasopressin support within 6 h after the diagnosis on clinical outcomes in septic shock patients.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies from inception to the 1st of February 2021. We included studies involving adult patients (> 16 years)with septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality and in the experimental group patients in the studies receiving vasopressin infusion within 6 h after diagnosis of septic shock and in the control group patients in the studies receiving no vasopressin infusion or vasopressin infusion 6 h after diagnosis of septic shock, clearly comparing with clinically relevant secondary outcomes(use of renal replacement therapy(RRT),new onset arrhythmias, ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Five studies including 788 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that short-term mortality between the two groups was no difference (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.48; P = 0.6; χ2 = 0.83; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes demonstrated that the use of RRT was less in the experimental group than that of the control group (OR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.88; P = 0.007; χ2 = 3.15; I2 = 36%).The new onset arrhythmias between the two groups was no statistically significant difference (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.1; P = 0.10; χ2 = 4.7; I2 = 36%). There was no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay(mean difference = 0.16; 95% CI, - 0.91 to 1.22; P = 0.77; χ2 = 6.08; I2 = 34%) and length of hospitalization (mean difference = -2.41; 95% CI, -6.61 to 1.78; P = 0.26; χ2 = 8.57; I2 = 53%) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of vasopressin in patients within 6 h of septic shock onset was not associated with decreased short-term mortality, new onset arrhythmias, shorter ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization, but can reduce the use of RRT. Further large-scale RCTs are still needed to evaluate the benefit of starting vasopressin in the early phase of septic shock.

Predictors of dysrhythmias with norepinephrine use in septic shock

PURPOSE

Norepinephrine (NE) is recommended first-line for treatment of septic shock, partly due to its intrinsically low effect on heart rate. While dysrhythmias secondary to NE are still reported, factors associated with development of this adverse effect have not been described. Our study sought to investigate factors associated with dysrhythmias in patients receiving NE for septic shock.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults receiving NE for septic shock if NE was initiated as the first vasopressor and continued for at least 6 h. The primary objective was to determine the rate of dysrhythmias among this patient population. Secondary objectives included determining the effect of dysrhythmia development on patient outcomes and elucidating predictors for dysrhythmia development.

RESULTS

Of the 250 patients included, 34.4% (n = 86) developed a dysrhythmia. These patients had higher mortality (30.5% vs. 63.9%; p < 0.001) with decreased ICU-free days (2 vs. 4; p = 0.04) and ventilator-free days (7 vs. 4; p = 0.048). Duration of NE infusion and maximum NE dose were found to be independently associated with increased rates of dysrhythmia (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Development of dysrhythmia is associated with increased mortality and is independently associated with longer duration of NE infusion and higher NE doses.

Narrative Review of Controversies Involving Vasopressin Use in Septic Shock and Practical Considerations

Objective: To summarize literature evaluating vasopressin use, focusing on clinical controversies regarding initiation, dosing, and discontinuation and interaction of vasopressin with other therapies in septic shock patients. Data Sources: A PubMed English-language literature search (January 2008 to December 2019) was performed using these terms: arginine vasopressin, septic, shock, and sepsis. Citations, including controlled trials, observational studies, review articles, guidelines, and consensus statements, were reviewed. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant clinical data focusing on specific controversial questions regarding the utility of vasopressin in patients with septic shock were narratively summarized. Data Synthesis: Current literature does not strongly support the use of vasopressin as a first-line initial therapy for septic shock. Additionally, there are conflicting data for weight-based dosing of vasopressin in overweight patients. Evidence for vasopressin renal protection and interaction with corticosteroids is minimal. However, vasopressin has the ability to reduce catecholamine requirements in septic shock patients and may provide a mortality benefit in specific subgroups. Discontinuation of vasopressin last, not second to last, in resolving septic shock may reduce hypotension development. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review addresses specific clinical controversies that drive vasopressin use in septic shock patients in real-world practice. Conclusion: Vasopressin should remain second-line adjunct to norepinephrine to augment mean arterial pressures. Dosing should be initiated at 0.03 U/min, and higher doses offer minimal benefit. There are conflicting data on the impact of weight on vasopressin response. Studies have failed to show renal benefit with vasopressin use or an interaction with corticosteroid therapy.

Mortality, Morbidity, and Costs After Implementation of a Vasopressin Guideline in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Septic Shock: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

Background: Vasopressin decreases vasopressor requirements in patients with septic shock. However, the optimal norepinephrine dose for initiation or cessation of vasopressin is unclear. Objective: Analyze monthly intensive care unit (ICU) mortality rates 1 year preimplementation and postimplementation of a guideline suggesting a norepinephrine dose of 50 µg/min or more for initiation of vasopressin and early cessation of vasopressin. Methods: This retrospective quasi-experimental study included adult patients with septic shock admitted to the medical ICU of a tertiary care medical center over 2 years. Time periods were evaluated with interrupted time series analysis. Results: A total of 1148 patients were included: 573 patients preguideline and 575 patients postguideline. Group characteristics were well balanced at baseline, except patients postguideline had higher sequential organ failure assessment scores. Postguideline, fewer patients were initiated on vasopressin (305 [53.2%] vs 217 [37.7%], absolute difference -15.5% [95% CI -21.2% to -9.8%]), and the norepinephrine dose at vasopressin initiation was higher (median 25 [interquartile range 18, 40] µg/min vs 40 [22, 52] µg/min; median difference 15 [95% CI 11 to 19] µg/min; P < 0.01). After guideline implementation, there was no evidence for a difference in ICU mortality rate slope (slope change 0.07% [95% CI -0.8% to 1.0%] per month; P 0.87), but the vasoactive cost level decreased by US$183 (95% CI -US$327 to -US$39) per patient immediately after implementation. Conclusion and Relevance: Implementation of a guideline suggesting a high norepinephrine dose threshold for vasopressin initiation and early vasopressin cessation in patients with septic shock appears to be safe and may decrease vasoactive costs.

Perceptions regarding vasopressin use and practices in septic shock, and cost containment strategies

Background

Clinician preferences and practices regarding appropriate vasopressin use in light of its increased acquisition cost secondary to rebranding has not been evaluated or described since the most recent iteration of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guideline was published.

Objective

To assess vasopressin cost containment initiatives and pharmacists' opinions regarding appropriate vasopressin use.

Methods

A scenario-based survey was distributed to critical care and emergency medicine pharmacists. Responses were characterized using frequency and descriptive statistics. Categorical variables between those who implemented changes (Vasopressin Cost Consideration) and those who did not (Usual Care) were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. McNemar's test was used to compare responses in clinical scenarios between Vasopressin Cost Consideration and Usual Care groups.

Results

Among 1757 pharmacists surveyed, 200 (11.3%) responded. When respondents considered vasopressin cost and evidence (vs evidence alone), fewer respondents would use vasopressin adjunctively with norepinephrine (21% vs 26.6%, P = 0.031), to raise mean arterial pressure compared with epinephrine (65.2% vs 72.3%, P = 0.012), or to reduce norepinephrine infusion rates (71.4% vs 81.4%, P < 0.001), but would use with steroids (62.4% vs 28.3%, P < 0.001). Most (72%) respondents had implemented vasopressin cost containment and/or education initiatives. The Vasopressin Cost Consideration group respondents were more likely to initiate vasopressin at 0.03 units/minute without titrating (47.9% vs 33.9%, P = 0.045).

Conclusion

Since vasopressin was generically rebranded, most institutions have implemented at least one initiative to reduce vasopressin use and/or educate clinicians about its appropriate use. When vasopressin acquisition costs were considered, pharmacists recommended its use less frequently, particularly in clinical scenarios where its use is controversial.

Norepinephrine and Vasopressin Compared With Norepinephrine and Epinephrine in Adults With Septic Shock

Background: The optimal adjuvant vasopressor to norepinephrine in septic shock remains controversial. Objective: To compare durations of shock-free survival between adjuvant vasopressin and epinephrine. Methods: A retrospective, single-center, matched cohort study of adults with septic shock refractory to norepinephrine was conducted. Patients receiving norepinephrine not at target mean arterial pressure (MAP; 65 mm Hg) were initiated on vasopressin or epinephrine to raise MAP to target. Vasopressin-exposed patients were matched to epinephrine-exposed patients using propensity scores. Mortality outcomes were examined using multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance estimation. Results: Of 166 patients, 96 (entire cohort) were included in the propensity score-matched cohort. Shock-free survival durations in the first 7 days were similar between epinephrine- and vasopressin-exposed patients in the matched cohort (median = 13.2 hours, interquartile range [IQR] = 0-121.0, vs median = 41.3 hours, IQR = 0-125.9; P = 0.51). Seven- and 28-day mortality rates were similar in the matched cohort (7-day: 47.9% vs 39.6%, P = 0.35; 28-day: 56.3% vs 58.3%, P = 0.84). Mortality rates were similar between epinephrine- and vasopressin-exposed patients in propensity score-matched regression models with and without adjustments at 7 (relative risk [RR] = 1.28, 95% CI = 0.92-1.79; RR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.81-1.81) and 28 days (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.81-1.34; RR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.69-1.34). Conclusion and Relevance: Shock-free survival durations were similar in matched epinephrine- and vasopressin-exposed groups. Adjuvant epinephrine or vasopressin alongside norepinephrine to raise MAP to target requires further investigation.

The effects and safety of vasopressin receptor agonists in patients with septic shock: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects and safety of vasopressin receptor agonists in patients with septic shock.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of vasopressin receptor agonists in septic shock patients. Two reviewers performed literature selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation independently. The primary outcome was mortality. And secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and incidence of adverse events. In addition, a trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The results showed vasopressin receptor agonists use was associated with reduced mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.99; I2 = 0%). Nevertheless, they had no significant effects on ICU length of stay (mean deviation (MD) - 0.08, 95% CI, - 0.68 to 0.52, I2 = 0%) and duration of mechanical ventilation (MD - 0.58, 95% CI - 1.47 to 0.31, I2 = 57%). Additionally, there was no significant difference in total adverse events between two groups (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.90, I2 = 57%), but vasopressin receptor agonists administration could significantly increase the risk of digital ischemia (RR 4.85, 95% CI 2.81 to 8.39, I2 = 26%). Finally, there was no statistical difference of cardiovascular events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.57, I2 = 1%), arrhythmia (0.77, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.23, I2 = 23%), mesenteric ischemia (0.83, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.55, I2 = 0%), diarrhea (2.47, 95% CI 0.77 to 7.96, I2 = 49%), cerebrovascular events (1.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 10.54, I2 = 0%), and hyponatremia (1.47, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.55, I2 = 0%) between two groups. Egger's test showed there was no significant publication bias among studies (P = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of vasopressin might result in reduced mortality in patients with septic shock. An increased risk of digital ischemia must be taken into account.

Neuroendocrine Derangements in Early Septic Shock: Pharmacotherapy for Relative Adrenal and Vasopressin Insufficiency

Septic shock is a leading cause of mortality in intensive care units throughout the world. While this disease state represents a highly complex pathophysiology involving numerous organ systems, the early approach to care includes adequate hemodynamic support traditionally achieved via infusions of vasoactive medications after adequate fluid resuscitation. Relative adrenal and vasopressin deficiencies are a common feature of septic shock that contribute to impaired hemodynamics. Hydrocortisone and vasopressin are endocrine system hormone analogues that target the acute neuroendocrine imbalance associated with septic shock. This clinically focused annotated review describes the pathophysiological mechanisms behind their use and explores the potential clinical roles of early administration and synergy when combined.

Prospective Open-label Trial of Early Concomitant Vasopressin and Norepinephrine Therapy versus Initial Norepinephrine Monotherapy in Septic Shock

PURPOSE

Delays in achieving target mean arterial pressure (MAP) are associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients with septic shock. This trial was conducted to test the hypothesis that early concomitant treatment with vasopressin and norepinephrine reduces the time to achieve and maintain target MAP compared with initial norepinephrine monotherapy.

METHODS

A single-center prospective open-label trial was conducted in patients with septic shock between November 2015 and June 2016 at a medical intensive care unit in an academic medical center. Initial norepinephrine monotherapy was initiated between November 2015 and February 2016. Between March and June 2016, vasopressin was initiated within 4 hours of norepinephrine. The primary outcome was time to achieving and maintaining MAP of 65 mm Hg for at least 4 hours that was compared between groups using the Student t test and examined using the Kaplan-Meier curve (Clinical Trials registration: NCT02454348).

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were included (41 in each group). Patients treated with early concomitant vasopressin and norepinephrine more frequently had a positive culture (59% vs 37%, p=0.05) and grew nonlactose fermenting gram-negative bacilli (34% vs 10%, p=0.01) compared with patients treated with norepinephrine monotherapy, respectively. The median time to achieve and maintain MAP occurred faster in the early concomitant vasopressin and norepinephrine group, at 5.7 hours (interquartile range [IQR] 1.7-10.3 hrs), compared with 7.6 hours (IQR 3.6-16.7 hrs, p=0.058) in the norepinephrine group. Durations of therapy for norepinephrine or vasopressin, amount of norepinephrine received in the first 24 hours, norepinephrine dosage when MAP was achieved and maintained, maximum norepinephrine dosage, and mortality were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with early concomitant vasopressin and norepinephrine achieved and maintained MAP of 65 mm Hg faster than those receiving initial norepinephrine monotherapy, suggesting that overcoming vasopressin deficiency sooner may reduce the time patients spend in the early phase of septic shock.

Combined use of high doses of vasopressin and corticosteroids in a patient with Crohn's disease with refractory septic shock after intestinal perforation: a case report

BACKGROUND

In this article, we present a clinical case of refractory septic shock resulting from intestinal perforation treated with high doses of vasopressin and hydrocortisone during emergency surgery. The use of such high doses of vasopressin for this type of shock is not described in the literature.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 49-year-old white woman with grade III obesity, Crohn's disease, and an intestinal perforation presented with refractory septic shock. Initially, a low dose of vasopressin was used. Then, the dosage was increased to 0.4 U/minute; in the literature, this is defined as "salvage therapy." This therapy consists of an initial load followed by a continuous infusion of hydrocortisone.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant increase in her cardiac index and stroke volume index resulted in an improvement in peripheral resistance, gas exchange, and urine output and a decrease in her heart rate, interleukin-6 level, and tumor necrosis factor-α level. The administration of high doses of vasopressin and corticosteroids was demonstrated to be safe for the immune system, to reduce the systemic inflammatory response, and to have direct cardiovascular effects. Further studies are required to examine the use of vasopressin as an initial vasopressor as well as its use in high dosages and in combination with corticosteroids.

Efficacy and Safety of the Early Addition of Vasopressin to Norepinephrine in Septic Shock

BACKGROUND

Delays in achievement of target mean arterial pressure (MAP) have been associated with increased mortality in patients with septic shock. Vasopressin may be added to norepinephrine to raise MAP or decrease norepinephrine dosage. The purpose of this study was to determine whether early initiation of vasopressin to norepinephrine resulted in a reduced time to target MAP compared to norepinephrine monotherapy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study compared early addition of vasopressin within 4 hours of septic shock onset to norepinephrine versus initial norepinephrine monotherapy in medically, critically ill patients with septic shock admitted from May 2014 to October 2015. Time to goal MAP was compared using Student t test and examined with Kaplan-Meier curves. Changes in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were evaluated with Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

Each group contained 48 patients. Mean arterial pressure (61.5 vs 58.6 mm Hg) and intravenous fluid volume received at vasopressor initiation (14.3 vs 25.2 hours, P = .014) were similar. Patients started on early vasopressin achieved and maintained goal MAP sooner (6.2 vs 9.9 hours, P = .023), experienced greater reductions in SOFA scores at 72 hours (-4 vs -1, P = .012), and had shorter hospital durations (343 vs 604 hours, P = .014). Not initiating early vasopressin trended toward an association with increased time to goal MAP (P = .067).

CONCLUSION

Early initiation of vasopressin in patients with septic shock may achieve and maintain goal MAP sooner and resolve organ dysfunction at 72 hours more effectively than later or no initiation.

Arginine-vasopressin therapy in hypotensive neonates and infants after cardiac surgery: response is unrelated to baseline ventricular function

We hypothesised that infants with ventricular dysfunction after cardiac surgery have impaired haemodynamic response to arginine-vasopressin therapy. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of neonates and infants treated with arginine-vasopressin within 48 hours of corrective or palliative cardiac surgery who underwent echocardiographic assessment of ventricular function before initiation of therapy. Patients were classified as "responders" if their systolic blood pressure increased by ⩾10% without increase in catecholamine score or if it was maintained with decreased catecholamine score. Response was assessed 1 hour after maximum upward titration of arginine-vasopressin. A total of 36 children (15 neonates) were reviewed (17 male). The median (interquartile) age was 10.4 weeks (1.1-26.9), and the median weight was 4.3 kg (3.2-5.8). Diagnoses included single ventricle (eight), arch abnormalities (five), atrioventricular septal defect (four), double-outlet right ventricle (three), tetralogy of Fallot (three), and others (13). In all, 12 patients (33%) had ventricular dysfunction. Only 15 (42%) responded favourably according to our definition 1 hour after the "target" arginine-vasopressin dose was achieved. Ventricular dysfunction was not associated with poor response. The overall mortality was 25%, but mortality in patients with ventricular dysfunction was 42%. Favourable response was associated with shorter ICU stay (9.5 days versus 19.5 days, p=0.01). We conclude that arginine-vasopressin fails to increase blood pressure in ~50% of hypotensive children after cardiac surgery. The response rate does not increase with duration of therapy. Ventricular function does not predict haemodynamic response. The mortality in this group is very high. Prospective comparison of vasopressin with other vasoactive agents and/or inotropes is warranted.

Hemodynamic Instability Secondary to Vasopressin Withdrawal in Septic Shock

RATIONALE

Vasopressors such as norepinephrine are first line for support of mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the management of septic shock. Their use, however, is commonly associated with many adverse events. These detriments frequently trigger the use of alternative, noncatecholamine therapies, including vasopressin. Vasopressin deficiency is a known physiologic consequence of septic shock, and while guidelines recommend vasopressin in addition to norepinephrine, no consensus exists on the duration of deficiency or ideal time of cessation. Studies have suggested that vasopressin discontinuation prior to other vasopressors may lead to hypotension; however, data are limited. This study evaluates the optimal sequence for the discontinuation of vasopressin therapy in septic shock.

METHODS

This was a 1-year retrospective study of 152 patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) with septic shock who received concurrent norepinephrine and vasopressin for vasoactive support. Patients were excluded if death occurred on vasopressors, within 24 hours after discontinuation of vasopressors, or within 48 hours of ICU admission. The primary outcome of hemodynamic instability included incidence of hypotension after vasopressor discontinuation (2 consecutive MAPs < 60 mm Hg), fluid bolus administration, greater than 0.05 μg/kg/min increase in norepinephrine requirements, or addition of an alternative vasopressor. Secondary outcomes included time to hypotension, total vasopressor duration, arrhythmias, mortality, and length of stay.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients met exclusion criteria, resulting in 61 patients for evaluation. Vasopressin was the first vasoactive therapy to be discontinued in 19 patients and last in 42 patients. Baseline characteristics and the use of potentially confounding treatments known to effect MAP were similar between groups. Discontinuation of vasopressin first was associated with a significant increase in hemodynamic instability (74% vs 16.7%, P < .01), with a shorter time to hemodynamic instability (5 vs 15 hours, P < .01). Secondary outcomes were similar.

CONCLUSION

Vasopressin discontinuation prior to cessation of norepinephrine infusion was associated with an increased risk of hemodynamic instability.

Factors Associated with the Incidence and Severity of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Adult Critically Ill Patients

Background

Acute Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is common in critically ill patients, with significant morbidity and mortality; however, its incidence and severity in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) from low-income countries are poorly studied. Additionally, impact of vasoactive drugs on its incidence and severity is still not understood. This study aimed to assess epidemiology and risk factors for acute new-onset AF in critically ill adult patients and the role of vasoactive drugs.

Method

Cohort performed in seven general ICUs (including cardiac surgery) in three cities in Paraná State (southern Brazil) for 45 days. Patients were followed until hospital discharge.

Results

Among 430 patients evaluated, the incidence of acute new-onset AF was 11.2%. Patients with AF had higher ICU and hospital mortality. Vasoactive drugs use (norepinephrine and dobutamine) was correlated with higher incidence of AF and higher mortality in patients with AF; vasopressin (though used in few patients) had no effect on development of AF.

Conclusions

In general ICU patients, incidence of new-onset AF was 11.2% with a high impact on morbidity and mortality, particularly associated with the presence of Acute Renal Failure. The use of vasoactive drugs (norepinephrine and dobutamine) could lead to a higher incidence of new-onset AF-associated morbidity and mortality.

Anesthesia for Patients with Concomitant Sepsis and Cardiac Dysfunction

Anesthesiologists faced with a patient with sepsis and concurrent cardiac dysfunction must be cognizant of the patient's cardiac status and cause of the cardiac problem to appropriately adapt physiologic and metabolic monitoring and anesthetic management. Anesthesia in such patients is challenging because the interaction of sepsis and cardiac dysfunction greatly complicates management. Intraoperative anesthesia management requires careful induction and maintenance of anesthesia; optimizing intravascular volume status; avoiding lung injury during mechanical ventilation; and close monitoring of arterial blood gases, serum lactate concentrations, and hematology renal and electrolyte parameters. Such patients have increased mortality because of their inability to adequately compensate for the cardiovascular changes caused by sepsis.

Vasopressin in Septic Shock; Assessment of Sepsis Biomarkers: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Background and Aims:

Vasopressin (VP) in sepsis apart from vasoconstrictive effect may have some immunomodulatory effects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of VP on different aspect of sepsis by measuring of sepsis biomarkers.

Materials and Methods:

In this trial, a total number of 42 septic shock patients were included. The first group received norepinephrine (NE) infusion to reach the target mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥ 65 mm Hg and the second group received arginine vasopressin (AVP) infusion in addition to NE. Serum lactate, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, pentraxin 3 (PTX3), angiopoietin 1 and 2 (Ang 1 and 2) levels were assessed.

Results:

Level of IL-6 and IL-10 decreased, but there was no significant difference between the two groups after 48 h. CRP and PTX3 levels were not also significantly different between groups. Although Angs were not statistically different, there was a trend toward higher Ang-1 in and lower Ang 2 in AVP group after 24 and 48 h. In addition, lactate level did not differ between NE and AVP groups. There was no interaction between VP and hydrocortisone use on IL-6, IL-10, and PTX3, but a significant statistical interaction on Ang 1 and Ang 2 were observed.

Conclusions:

Although analysis of sepsis biomarkers showed no significant difference between two groups, no immunomodulatory effect for VP alone, subgroup analysis of hydrocortisone used in this study showed that the combination of glucocorticoids and AVP had a significant effect on Angs level which eventually causes less endothelial permeability and higher MAP in this group of patients.

The impact of endocrine supplementation on adverse events in septic shock

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of severe adverse events of vasopressin vs hydrocortisone for endocrine support therapy in patients with septic shock.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, propensity-matched cohort of patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit with septic shock between February 2012 and February 2015. Patients were included if vasopressin or hydrocortisone was administered for hemodynamic support secondary to norepinephrine.

RESULTS

In the unmatched cohort of 124 patients, vasopressin was associated with a significant decrease in the number of severe adverse events (P=.03). In the matched cohort, severe adverse events occurred 3 times as often in patients receiving hydrocortisone; however, this difference was not statistically significant. (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-12.11; P=.06). In the matched cohort, vasopressin was associated with a faster time to hemodynamic stability (P<.05) and discontinuation of hemodynamic support (P<.01) with an increased requirement for third-line therapy (P<.01). No statistical differences were seen in length of stay (intensive care unit and hospital), length of mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Given the lower incidence of adverse events and faster time to hemodynamic stability, vasopressin appears to be the most advantageous endocrine agent for hemodynamic support in septic shock.