Noradrenaline: friend or foe?

Impact of shock requiring norepinephrine on the accuracy and reliability of subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of circulatory shock requiring norepinephrine therapy on the accuracy and reliability of a subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) in critically ill patients.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A prospective, validation study of a medical intensive care unit at a university hospital was carried out.

METHODS

Continuous glucose monitoring was performed subcutaneously in 50 consecutive patients on intensive insulin therapy (IIT), who were assessed according to the a priori strata of circulatory shock requiring norepinephrine therapy or not.

RESULTS

A total of 736 pairs of sensor glucose (SG)/blood glucose (BG) values were analysed (502 without and 234 with norepinephrine therapy). For all values, repeated measures Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of 0.08 mmol/l (limits of agreement: -1.26 and 1.43 mmol/l). Circulatory shock requiring norepinephrine therapy did not influence the relation of arterial BG with SG in a multivariable random effects linear regression analysis. The covariates norepinephrine dose, body mass index (BMI), glucose level and severity of illness also had no influence. Insulin titration grid analysis showed that 98.6% of the data points were in the acceptable treatment zone. No data were in the life-threatening zone.

CONCLUSIONS

Circulatory shock requiring norepinephrine therapy, as well as other covariates, had no influence on the accuracy and reliability of the CGMS in critically ill patients.

Norepinephrine increases blood pressure but not survival with anthrax lethal toxin in rats

OBJECTIVES

The response of anthrax lethal toxin (LeTx) induced shock and lethality to conventional therapies has received little study. Previously, fluids worsened outcome in LeTx-challenged rats in contrast to its benefit with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or Escherichia coli. The current study investigated norepinephrine treatment.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 232) weighing between 230 and 250 g were challenged with similar lethal (80%) 24-hour infusions of either LPS or LeTx, or with diluent only. Toxin-challenged animals were also randomized to receive 24-hour infusions with one of three doses of norepinephrine (0.03, 0.3, or 3.0 microg/kg/min) or placebo started 1 hour after initiation of challenge. All toxin animals received similar volumes of fluid over the 24 hours (equivalent to 4.0-4.3 mL/kg/hr). Although the intermediate norepinephrine dose (0.3 microg/kg/min for 24 hours) improved survival with LPS (p = 0.04) and increased blood pressure before the onset of lethality with LeTx (p < 0.0001), it did not improve survival with the latter (p = ns). Furthermore, neither increasing nor decreasing norepinephrine doses improved survival with LeTx.

CONCLUSION

Hypotension with LeTx may not be a primary cause of lethality in this model. Rather, LeTx may cause direct cellular injury insensitive to vasopressors. These findings suggest that during anthrax infection and shock, along with hemodynamic support, toxin-directed treatments may be necessary as well.

Phenylephrine versus norepinephrine for initial hemodynamic support of patients with septic shock: a randomized, controlled trial

Introduction

Previous findings suggest that a delayed administration of phenylephrine replacing norepinephrine in septic shock patients causes a more pronounced hepatosplanchnic vasoconstriction as compared with norepinephrine. Nevertheless, a direct comparison between the two study drugs has not yet been performed. The aim of the present study was, therefore, to investigate the effects of a first-line therapy with either phenylephrine or norepinephrine on systemic and regional hemodynamics in patients with septic shock.

Methods

We performed a prospective, randomized, controlled trial in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit in a university hospital. We enrolled septic shock patients (n = 32) with a mean arterial pressure below 65 mmHg despite adequate volume resuscitation. Patients were randomly allocated to treatment with either norepinephrine or phenylephrine infusion (n = 16 each) titrated to achieve a mean arterial pressure between 65 and 75 mmHg. Data from right heart catheterization, a thermodye dilution catheter, gastric tonometry, acid-base homeostasis, as well as creatinine clearance and cardiac troponin were obtained at baseline and after 12 hours. Differences within and between groups were analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance for repeated measurements with group and time as factors. Time-independent variables were compared with one-way analysis of variance.

Results

No differences were found in any of the investigated parameters.

Conclusions

The present study suggests there are no differences in terms of cardiopulmonary performance, global oxygen transport, and regional hemodynamics when phenylephrine was administered instead of norepinephrine in the initial hemodynamic support of septic shock.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov NCT00639015

Modulation of aquaporin-2/vasopressin2 receptor kidney expression and tubular injury after endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide) challenge

OBJECTIVE

Sepsis-induced organ dysfunctions remain prevalent and account for >50% of intensive care unit admissions for acute renal failure with a mortality rate nearing 75%. In addition to the fact that the mechanisms underlying the pathophysiology of sepsis-related acute renal failure are unclear, the impact on septic-induced acute renal failure of either norepinephrine, a gold-standard vasopressor, and arginine vasopressin, a candidate alternative, are not well understood.

DESIGN

Randomized and controlled in vivo study.

SETTING

Research laboratory and animal facilities.

SUBJECTS

Adult rats treated with endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide) and/or vasopressors.

INTERVENTIONS

Rats were intraperitoneally injected with lipopolysaccharide (12 mg/kg) or saline and then infused with either saline, 0.375 microg/microL arginine vasopressin, or 32.5 microg/microL norepinephrine for 18 hrs. These vasopressor rates yielded respective targeted blood levels observed in human septic shock.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Renal function, including glomerular filtration rate and fraction, renal blood flow, aquaporin-2, and arginine vasopressin-2 (V2 receptor) networking, water and salt handling, and urinary protein excretion, were evaluated. After lipopolysaccharide challenge arginine vasopressin infusion: 1) impaired creatinine clearance without affecting renal blood flow, glomerular filtration rate, and fraction but reduced free-water clearance, both of which being partially restored by the V2 receptor antagonist SR-121463B; 2) decreased the recognized ability of arginine vasopressin alone to recruit aquaporin-2 to the apical membrane increase its mRNA expression and urinary release; 3) increased urinary protein content but decreased specific kidney injury molecule-1, and Clara cell protein-16 release (p < 0.05 vs. lipopolysaccharide alone). Conversely, norepinephrine infusion did not add to lipopolysaccharide-induced alteration of urine biochemistry, except for improved creatinine clearance and increased microalbuminuria.

CONCLUSION

In this endotoxic model, dose-targeted arginine vasopressin infusion increased lipopolysaccharide-induced renal dysfunction without affecting renal blood flow and glomerular function, but with particular disruption of aquaporin-2/V2 receptor networking, consecutive decreased salt and water handling ability. This is in clear contrast with norepinephrine infusion and suggests specific arginine vasopressin-induced "tubular epithelial dysfunction."