Hydrocortisone improved haemodynamics and fluid requirement in surviving but not non-surviving of severely burned patients

Differential benefits of steroid therapies in adults following major burn injury

BACKGROUND

Major thermal injury induces a complex pathophysiological state characterized by burn shock and hypercatabolism. Steroids are used to modulate these post-injury responses. However, the effects of steroids on acute post-burn outcomes remain unclear.

METHODS

In this study of 52 thermally injured adult patients (median total burn surface area 42%, 33 males and 19 females), the effects of corticosteroid and oxandrolone on mortality, multi-organ failure (MOF), and sepsis were assessed individually. Clinical data were collected at days 1, 3, 7, and 14 post-injury.

RESULTS

Twenty-two (42%) and 34 (65%) burns patients received corticosteroids and oxandrolone within the same cohort, respectively. Following separate analysis for each steroid, corticosteroid use was associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 3.25, 95% CI: 1.32-8•00), MOF (OR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.00-1.55), and sepsis (OR 5.95, 95% CI: 2.53-14.00). Days alive (HR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.18-0.60) and sepsis-free days (HR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.37-0.80) were lower among corticosteroid-treated patients. Oxandrolone use was associated with reduced odds of 28-day mortality (OR 0.11, 95% CI: 0.04-0.30), in-hospital mortality (OR 0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.43), and sepsis (OR 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.69). Days alive, at 28 days (HR 6.42, 95% CI: 2.77-14.9) and in-hospital (HR 3.30, 95% CI: 1.93-5.63), were higher among the oxandrolone-treated group. However, oxandrolone was associated with increased MOF odds (OR 7.90, 95% CI: 2.89-21.60) and reduced MOF-free days (HR 0.23, 95% CI: 0.11-0.50).

CONCLUSION

Steroid therapies following major thermal injury may significantly affect patient prognosis. Oxandrolone was associated with better outcomes except for MOF. Adverse effects of corticosteroids and oxandrolone should be considered when managing burn patients.

Corticosteroids for Treating Sepsis in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

Corticosteroids are a common option used in sepsis treatment. However, the efficacy and potential risk of corticosteroids in septic patients have not been well assessed. This review was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of corticosteroids on patients with sepsis were included. The quality of outcomes in the included articles was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. The data were pooled by using risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD). The random-effects model was used to evaluate the pooled MD or RR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Fifty RCTs that included 12,304 patients with sepsis were identified. Corticosteroids were not associated with the mortality in 28-day (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87–1.02; evidence rank, moderate) and long-term mortality (>60 days) (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88–1.05) in patients with sepsis (evidence rank, low). However, corticosteroids may exert a significant effect on the mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.83–0.97), in-hospital (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.82–0.99; evidence rank, moderate) in patients with sepsis or septic shock (evidence rank, low). Furthermore, corticosteroids probably achieved a tiny reduction in the length of hospital stay and ICU. Corticosteroids were associated with a higher risk of hypernatremia and hyperglycemia; furthermore, they appear to have no significant effect on superinfection and gastroduodenal bleeding.

Conclusions

Corticosteroids had no significant effect on the 28-day and long-term mortality; however, they decreased the ICU and hospital mortality. The findings suggest that the clinical corticosteroids may be an effective therapy for patients with sepsis during the short time.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/INPLASY-Protocol-1074-4.pdf

A Novel Human Glucocorticoid Receptor Variant, G459V, is Hyperactive in Response to Steroids

ABSTRACT

A potential cause of the variable response to injury and sepsis is the variability of a patient's human glucocorticoid receptor (hGR) profile. To identify hGR variants, blood samples were collected on admission and biweekly thereafter from hospitalized patients who sustained at least a 20% total body surface area burn injury. A hyperactive G1376T single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) isoform was identified. This SNP led to a single amino acid change of glutamine to valine at site 459, "G459V," in the DNA-binding domain. The isoform's activity was tested in a reporter assay after treatment with steroids, the hGR antagonist RU486 (mifepristone) alone, or RU486 followed by steroids. When treated with hydrocortisone, the hGR G459V isoform had a hyperactive response; its activity was over 30 times greater than the reference hGRα. Unexpectedly, G459V had significantly increased activity when treated with the hGR antagonist RU486. With the combination of both RU486 and hydrocortisone, G459V activity was repressed, but greater than that of RU486 alone. Finally, when hGRα was cotransfected with G459V to simulate isoform interaction, the activity was closer to that of the hGRα profile than the G459V isoform. The unique activity of the G459V isoform shows that some variants of hGR have the potential to alter a person's response to stress and steroid treatment and may be a factor as to why mitigating the clinical response to sepsis and other stressors has been so elusive.

Critical Illness-Related Corticosteroid Insufficiency in Patients with Low Cardiac Output Syndrome after Cardiac Surgery

Background

Low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) after cardiac surgery usually requires inotropes. In this setting, critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) may develop. We aimed to investigate the clinical features of CIRCI in the presence of LCOS and to assess the efficacy of steroid treatment.

Methods

We reviewed 28 patients who underwent a rapid adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) test due to the suspicion of CIRCI between February 2010 and September 2014. CIRCI was diagnosed by a change in serum cortisol of <9 μg/dL after the ACTH test or a random cortisol level of <10 μg/dL.

Results

Twenty of the 28 patients met the diagnostic criteria. The patients with CIRCI showed higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores than those without CIRCI (16.1±2.3 vs. 11.4±3.5, p=0.001). Six of the patients with CIRCI (30%) received glucocorticoids. With an average elevation of the mean blood pressure by 22.2±8.7 mm Hg after steroid therapy, the duration of inotropic support was shorter in the steroid group than in the non-steroid group (14.1±2.3 days versus 30±22.8 days, p=0.001). Three infections (15%) developed in the non-steroid group, but this was not a significant between-group difference.

Conclusion

CIRCI should be suspected in patients with LCOS after cardiac surgery, especially in patients with a high SOFA score. Glucocorticoid replacement therapy may be considered to reduce the use of inotropes without posing an additional risk of infection.

Update on low-dose corticosteroids

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Low-dose hydrocortisone is recommended in patients with septic shock unresponsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy. Recent research added new data for patients with septic shock and other target groups such as patients with severe sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), community-acquired pneumonia, and burns. The objective of this review is to summarize and comment recent findings on low-dose corticosteroids (LDC) in critically ill patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last 2 years, a series of clinical trials and retrospective analyses investigated LDC therapy in critically ill patients with severe systemic inflammation of various origins. Improvement in morbidity has been demonstrated in ARDS and community-acquired pneumonia. Retrospective propensity-score analyses also suggest that LDC administered in severe septic shock or in septic shock due to community-acquired pneumonia or intestinal perforation may improve survival.

SUMMARY

Low-dose hydrocortisone or a corresponding low-dose corticosteroid therapy may improve morbidity in specific target groups of critically ill patients. Beneficial effects on mortality remain to be demonstrated in large-scale randomized controlled trials.

Effect and mechanism of hydrocortisone on organ function in patients with severe burns

INTRODUCTION

In patients with severe burns, resuscitation with large volumes of fluid is needed, partly because of an increase in capillary leakage. Corticosteroids might be beneficial by diminishing capillary leakage. This study aimed to assess in severely burned nonseptic patients whether hydrocortisone (HC) improved outcome and diminished capillary leakage.

METHODS

Retrospective analyses of a prospectively collected database were performed, including 39 patients (age 52 [35-62] years, 72% male). Patients were divided based on HC therapy. First, in patients in whom HC was started late, that is when deteriorating (late; 5-12 days postburn) data before and after start of HC were compared. Second, patients in whom HC was started day 0 or 1 postburn (upfront; within 48 hours) were compared with patients who did not receive HC (control). Outcome was assessed as organ dysfunction by Denver Multiple Organ Failure (MOF) score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. As markers for capillary leakage and hydration state, proteinuria, B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), and fluid administration were assessed. Follow-up was 20 days postburn. Possible adverse effects including mortality were recorded. Repeated measurement regression analyses were performed using MLwiN.

RESULTS

In the late group, Denver MOF and SOFA scores significantly decreased after HC (P<.001). Proteinuria tended to decrease (P=.13), BNP increased on the days HC was used (P<.001), and amounts of fluids diminished (P<.001). In the upfront vs control group, Denver MOF and SOFA scores (P<.001) decreased more quickly. Proteinuria (P=.006) and administered fluids decreased more rapidly (P<.001). Mortality rate, numbers of positive blood cultures, incidence of pneumonia, and graft loss were similar in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrocortisone treatment in severe burned patients without sepsis might improve organ dysfunction possibly because of a reduction in capillary leakage, as reflected by a decrease of proteinuria, an increase of BNP, and diminished fluid resuscitation volumes.

Suspected adrenal insufficiency in critically ill burned patients: etomidate-induced or critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency?-A review of the literature

Adrenal insufficiency (AI), whether etomidate-induced or secondary to critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI), is a common and under appreciated problem in the intensive care unit intensive care unit (ICU). However, AI is often difficult to identify and diagnose in the critically ill. The pathophysiology and ideal management of etomidate-induced AI and CIRCI, especially in burn patients, is unknown. Many studies, however, have examined the prevalence of and risk factors for developing AI in critically ill populations as well as the effect of AI on morbidity and mortality. Observing a seemingly increased number of patients with suspected AI in our burn ICU, we sought to evaluate and summarize the current literature relating to adrenal insufficiency in the critically ill. We performed an electronic literature search on the PubMed and Ovid Medline databases using the key words "etomidate," "adrenal insufficiency," "CIRCI," and "burn injury." Relevant studies from the current burn and ICU era were selected to be included in this review of the literature. Among the critically ill, burn patients are at increased risk for developing adrenal insufficiency and the risk is greatest for elderly patients with large burns and inhalation injury. Both CIRCI and etomidate-induced AI are associated with high morbidity and mortality, therefore avoiding preventable causes of AI, such as choosing alternatives to etomidate for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in the severely burn injured patient should be encouraged. Further research is indicated to investigate the biological relationship between AI and associated morbidity and mortality, whether etomidate-induced or secondary to critical illness; as well as how best to identify and diagnose patients with suspected adrenal insufficiency in the burn intensive care unit.

Glucocorticoid Receptor Expression in Peripheral WBCs of Critically Ill Children

OBJECTIVES

To characterize glucocorticoid receptor expression in peripheral WBCs of critically ill children using flow cytometry.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort.

SETTING

A university-affiliated, tertiary PICU.

PATIENTS

Fifty-two critically ill children.

INTERVENTIONS

Samples collected for measurement of glucocorticoid receptor expression and parallel cortisol levels.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Subjects with cardiovascular failure had significantly lower glucocorticoid receptor expression both in CD4 lymphocytes (mean fluorescence intensity, 522 [354-787] vs 830 [511-1,219]; p = 0.036) and CD8 lymphocytes (mean fluorescence intensity, 686 [350-835] vs 946 [558-1,511]; p = 0.019) compared with subjects without cardiovascular failure. Subjects in the upper 50th percentile of Pediatric Risk of Mortality III scores and organ failure also had significantly lower glucocorticoid receptor expression in CD4 and CD8 lymphocytes. There was no linear correlation between cortisol concentrations and glucocorticoid receptor expression.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that patients with shock and increased severity of illness have lower glucocorticoid receptor expression in CD4 and CD8 lymphocytes. Glucocorticoid receptor expression does not correlate well with cortisol levels. Future studies could focus on studying glucocorticoid receptor expression variability and isoform distribution in the pediatric critically ill population as well as on different strategies to optimize glucocorticoid response.

Low-dose hydrocortisone reduces norepinephrine duration in severe burn patients: a randomized clinical trial

Introduction

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of low-dose corticosteroid therapy in reducing shock duration after severe burn.

Methods

A placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trial (RCT) was performed on two parallel groups in the burn intensive care unit (ICU). Patients were randomized to receive either low-dose corticosteroid therapy or placebo for seven days. A corticotropin test was performed at the time of randomization, before the administration of the treatment dose. Thirty-two severely burned patients with refractory shock (>0.5 μg/kg/min of norepinephrine) were prospectively included in the study.

Results

We included 12 patients in the hydrocortisone-treated group and 15 patients in the placebo group in the final analysis. Among these patients, 21 were nonresponders to the corticotropin test. Median norepinephrine treatment duration (primary objective) was significantly lower in the corticosteroid-treated versus the placebo group (57 hours versus 120 hours, P = 0.035). The number of patients without norepinephrine 72 hours after inclusion was significantly lower in the treated group (P = 0.003, log-rank test analysis). The total quantities of norepinephrine administered to patients were lower in the hydrocortisone-treated versus the placebo group (1,205 μg/kg (1,079 to 2,167) versus 1,971 μg/kg (1,535 to 3,893), P = 0.067). There was no difference in terms of ICU or hospital length of stay, sepsis incidence, cicatrization or mortality.

Conclusions

In this placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trial, we show for the first time that the administration of low-dose hydrocortisone in burn patients with severe shock reduces vasopressor administration.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrial.gov NCT00149123. Registered 6 September 2005.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0740-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical review: the critical care management of the burn patient

Between 4 and 22% of burn patients presenting to the emergency department are admitted to critical care. Burn injury is characterised by a hypermetabolic response with physiologic, catabolic and immune effects. Burn care has seen renewed interest in colloid resuscitation, a change in transfusion practice and the development of anti-catabolic therapies. A literature search was conducted with priority given to review articles, meta-analyses and well-designed large trials; paediatric studies were included where adult studies were lacking with the aim to review the advances in adult intensive care burn management and place them in the general context of day-to-day practical burn management.

Sepsis in burns: a review of current practice and future therapies

Sepsis is a major cause of death worldwide and remains the subject of much research and debate within the critical care community. Despite advances in burn prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation, sepsis remains a common cause of death in patients who have sustained a severe burn injury. The unique physical, metabolic, and physiologic changes seen after major thermal injury mean that the management of sepsis in burns poses a particular challenge and differs in many respects to the management of sepsis in the general critical care population. This article describes current issues in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of sepsis in burns with a review of the associated literature. In addition, we discuss possible future therapies for managing this condition.

Should we abandon corticosteroids during septic shock? No

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the publication of the results of the recent CORTICUS trial, stress ('low') doses of corticosteroids for the treatment of vasopressor-dependent septic shock in adults can still be considered controversial. The purpose of this narrative review is to elaborate the pros and cons of this treatment in clinical practice and to formulate clinical and research directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent CORTICUS study only shows a beneficial effect of stress doses of corticosteroids in the time interval to shock reversal and not on mortality, potentially explained by an increased risk for superinfection. The mortality in the placebo arm was relatively low and lower than in earlier randomized studies in which stress doses of corticosteroids had a favorable hemodynamic effect and conferred a survival benefit in septic shock.

SUMMARY

Treatment by stress doses of corticosteroids should not be abandoned during septic shock. Additional studies are needed, however, to better delineate the patient group with the highest likelihood to benefit from this therapy, as a function of severity of illness, response to adrenocorticotrophic hormone testing or both. For now, results of the CORTICUS study should not change current clinical practice of administering 200-300 mg of hydrocortisone daily (in divided doses) in case of fluid and vasopressor-insensitive septic shock and rapid tapering of this treatment on the basis of a hemodynamic response.

Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of corticosteroid insufficiency in critically ill adult patients: consensus statements from an international task force by the American College of Critical Care Medicine

OBJECTIVE

To develop consensus statements for the diagnosis and management of corticosteroid insufficiency in critically ill adult patients.

PARTICIPANTS

A multidisciplinary, multispecialty task force of experts in critical care medicine was convened from the membership of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. In addition, international experts in endocrinology were invited to participate.

DESIGN/METHODS

The task force members reviewed published literature and provided expert opinion from which the consensus was derived. The consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi methodology. The strength of each recommendation was quantified using the Modified GRADE system, which classifies recommendations as strong (grade 1) or weak (grade 2) and the quality of evidence as high (grade A), moderate (grade B), or low (grade C) based on factors that include the study design, the consistency of the results, and the directness of the evidence.

RESULTS

The task force coined the term critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency to describe the dysfunction of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis that occurs during critical illness. Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency is caused by adrenal insufficiency together with tissue corticosteroid resistance and is characterized by an exaggerated and protracted proinflammatory response. Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency should be suspected in hypotensive patients who have responded poorly to fluids and vasopressor agents, particularly in the setting of sepsis. At this time, the diagnosis of tissue corticosteroid resistance remains problematic. Adrenal insufficiency in critically ill patients is best made by a delta total serum cortisol of < 9 microg/dL after adrenocorticotrophic hormone (250 microg) administration or a random total cortisol of < 10 microg/dL. The benefit of treatment with glucocorticoids at this time seems to be limited to patients with vasopressor-dependent septic shock and patients with early severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (PaO2/FiO2 of < 200 and within 14 days of onset). The adrenocorticotrophic hormone stimulation test should not be used to identify those patients with septic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome who should receive glucocorticoids. Hydrocortisone in a dose of 200 mg/day in four divided doses or as a continuous infusion in a dose of 240 mg/day (10 mg/hr) for > or = 7 days is recommended for septic shock. Methylprednisolone in a dose of 1 mg x kg(-1) x day(-1) for > or = 14 days is recommended in patients with severe early acute respiratory distress syndrome. Glucocorticoids should be weaned and not stopped abruptly. Reinstitution of treatment should be considered with recurrence of signs of sepsis, hypotension, or worsening oxygenation. Dexamethasone is not recommended to treat critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency. The role of glucocorticoids in the management of patients with community-acquired pneumonia, liver failure, pancreatitis, those undergoing cardiac surgery, and other groups of critically ill patients requires further investigation.

CONCLUSION

Evidence-linked consensus statements with regard to the diagnosis and management of corticosteroid deficiency in critically ill patients have been developed by a multidisciplinary, multispecialty task force.

Indications and practical use of replacement dose of corticosteroids in critical illness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ongoing and severe systemic inflammation affecting critically ill patients may cause adrenal insufficiency and steroid resistance in target cells. As the appropriate diagnosis of this clinical entity remains a challenge, indication and practical use of corticosteroid replacement therapy in the critically ill is generally directed by clinical symptoms and features.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last 2 years, a series of clinical trials have been undertaken to investigate corticosteroid replacement therapy in critically ill patients with severe systemic inflammation of various origin. Improvements of morbidity have been demonstrated in some studies. The data of recent studies should lead to a restriction of corticosteroid replacement therapy in critically ill patients. The purpose of this review is to investigate indications and the best current practical use of corticosteroid replacement therapy in critically ill patients in the absence of accurate laboratory assessment of adrenal insufficiency.

SUMMARY

Corticosteroid replacement therapy may improve morbidity and mortality in specific target groups of critically ill patients. The appropriate target groups remain to be refined. To demonstrate this, additional studies are required on endocrine disorder in critical illness and corticosteroid replacement therapy.

Beneficial effect of corticosteroids in catecholamine-dependent septic burn patients

Recent studies indicated the benefit of hydrocortisone in septic patients based on the significant reduction of catecholamines and improved outcome in common intensive care patients. The treatment of intensive care burn patients with corticosteroids was discussed with great caution due to the especially compromised immune status of severely burned patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of corticosteroids in burn patients during septic shock. In our burn unit, we started with the administration of cortisol in 2001. In this retrospective study, 10 severely burned patients received, > or = 24h after norepinephrine dependency, hydrocortisone infusions of 200 mg/24 h. The course of norepinephrine dose, hemodynamic measurements (Swan-Ganz-Catheter) and daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA-Score) were analyzed and compared to nine (catecholamine-dependent) burn patients without cortisol therapy. Statistical analysis by means of Fisher's Exact Test revealed beneficial effects (morbidity and mortality) of low dose cortisol therapy compared to control patients. However, the results of this study must be interpreted with caution because of its limited number of patients and its retrospective character. Further randomized prospective controlled studies are necessary to determine the efficacy and safety of cortisol therapy in burn patients.