Infusion of methylene blue in human septic shock: a pilot, randomized, controlled study

Protective hemodynamics: a novel strategy to manage blood pressure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This editorial aims to highlight the evolving concept of protective hemodynamics in the management of critically ill patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature underscores the limitations of rigid blood pressure targets, particularly in the context of critical care and perioperative management. High blood pressure targets, especially when coupled with high-dose vasopressors, can lead to poor outcomes. 'Protective hemodynamics' aims to maintain cardiovascular stability while reducing risks associated with interventions.

SUMMARY

The implications of adopting protective hemodynamics are profound for both clinical practice and research. Clinically, this approach can reduce iatrogenic harm and improve long-term outcomes for critically ill patients. For research, it opens new avenues for investigating individualized hemodynamic management strategies that prioritize overall patient stability and long-term health over rigid target attainment.

Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) secondary to disseminated histoplasmosis infection in a patient with HIV

A male in his 30s who was recently diagnosed with HIV arrived at the emergency department exhibiting an altered mental state and acute respiratory distress. Initial laboratory tests revealed a high anion gap metabolic acidosis, elevated liver enzyme levels and bicytopenia. A CT scan identified a miliary pattern. Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage displayed epithelial and inflammatory cells. However, subsequent tests ruled out the presence of fungi, Pneumocystis organisms, malignancies, granulomas and viral inclusions. Broad-spectrum antibiotics with emphasis on Mycobacterium tuberculosis and antifungal treatments were administered. The regimen was adjusted after a positive urine test for the Histoplasma antigen.The patient later manifested signs and symptoms, including increased ferritin level, fever, splenomegaly, diminished natural killer cell function and heightened interleukin-2 receptor levels, confirming haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Given the patient's gravely decompensated state, the treatment incorporated dexamethasone, and the patient's vasopressor-resistant septic shock was addressed with methylene blue.

Methylene Blue in Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Although clinicians may use methylene blue (MB) in refractory septic shock, the effect of MB on patient-important outcomes remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the benefits and harms of MB administration in patients with septic shock.

DATA SOURCES

We searched six databases (including PubMed, Embase, and Medline) from inception to January 10, 2024.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of critically ill adults comparing MB with placebo or usual care without MB administration.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers performed screening, full-text review, and data extraction. We pooled data using a random-effects model, assessed the risk of bias using the modified Cochrane tool, and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to rate certainty of effect estimates.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included six RCTs (302 patients). Compared with placebo or no MB administration, MB may reduce short-term mortality (RR [risk ratio] 0.66 [95% CI, 0.47-0.94], low certainty) and hospital length of stay (mean difference [MD] -2.1 d [95% CI, -1.4 to -2.8], low certainty). MB may also reduce duration of vasopressors (MD -31.1 hr [95% CI, -16.5 to -45.6], low certainty), and increase mean arterial pressure at 6 hours (MD 10.2 mm Hg [95% CI, 6.1-14.2], low certainty) compared with no MB administration. The effect of MB on serum methemoglobin concentration was uncertain (MD 0.9% [95% CI, -0.2% to 2.0%], very low certainty). We did not find any differences in adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Among critically ill adults with septic shock, based on low-certainty evidence, MB may reduce short-term mortality, duration of vasopressors, and hospital length of stay, with no evidence of increased adverse events. Rigorous randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of MB in septic shock are needed.

REGISTRATION

Center for Open Science (https://osf.io/hpy4j).

Methylene blue in sepsis and septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Methylene blue is an interesting approach in reducing fluid overload and vasoactive drug administration in vasodilatory shock. The inhibition of guanylate cyclase induced by methylene blue infusion reduces nitric oxide production and improves vasoconstriction. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of methylene blue administration compared to placebo on the hemodynamic status and clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis and septic shock.

Methods

The authors specifically included randomized controlled trials that compared the use of methylene blue with placebo in adult patients with sepsis and septic shock. The outcomes were length of intensive care unit stay, hemodynamic parameters [vasopressor use], and days on mechanical ventilation. We also evaluated the abnormal levels of methemoglobinemia. This systematic review and meta-analysis were recorded in PROSPERO with the ID CRD42023423470.

Results

During the initial search, a total of 1,014 records were identified, out of which 393 were duplicates. Fourteen citations were selected for detailed reading, and three were selected for inclusion. The studies enrolled 141 patients, with 70 of them in the methylene blue group and 71 of them in the control group. Methylene blue treatment was associated with a lower length of intensive care unit stay (MD -1.58; 95%CI -2.97, -0.20; I2 = 25%; p = 0.03), decreased days on mechanical ventilation (MD -0.72; 95%CI -1.26, -0.17; I2 = 0%; p = 0.010), and a shorter time to vasopressor discontinuation (MD -31.49; 95%CI -46.02, -16.96; I2 = 0%; p < 0.0001). No association was found with methemoglobinemia.

Conclusion

Administering methylene blue to patients with sepsis and septic shock leads to reduced time to vasopressor discontinuation, length of intensive care unit stay, and days on mechanical ventilation.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023423470, CRD42023423470.

Administration of methylene blue in septic shock: pros and cons

Septic shock typically requires the administration of vasopressors. Adrenergic agents remain the first choice, namely norepinephrine. However, their use to counteract life-threatening hypotension comes with potential adverse effects, so that non-adrenergic vasopressors may also be considered. The use of agents that act through different mechanisms may also provide an advantage. Nitric oxide (NO) is the main driver of the vasodilation that leads to hypotension in septic shock, so several agents have been tested to counteract its effects. The use of non-selective NO synthase inhibitors has been of questionable benefit. Methylene blue, an inhibitor of soluble guanylate cyclase, an important enzyme involved in the NO signaling pathway in the vascular smooth muscle cell, has also been proposed. However, more than 25 years since the first clinical evaluation of MB administration in septic shock, the safety and benefits of its use are still not fully established, and it should not be used routinely in clinical practice until further evidence of its efficacy is available.

Effect of methylene blue on outcomes in patients with distributive shock: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to demonstrate the effect of methylene blue (MB) in patients with distributive shock.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

According to the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we searched the relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) via PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from the date of database inception to 19 April 2023. The primary outcome was mortality during follow-up, and secondary outcomes included mean arterial pressure (mm Hg), mechanical ventilation time (hours), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) (days), hospital LOS (days) and heart rate (times/min).

RESULTS

This study included six RCTs with 265 participants. The study showed no significant difference in mortality between the MB and placebo groups (ORs: 0.59; 95% CI 0.32 to -1.06). However, MB reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference (MD): -0.68; 95% CI -1.23 to -0.14), ICU LOS (MD: -1.54; 95% CI -2.61 to -0.48) and hospital LOS (MD: -1.97; 95% CI -3.92 to -0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MB may not reduce mortality in patients with distributive shock, but may shorten the duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU LOS and hospital LOS. More clinical studies are needed to confirm these findings in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023415938.

Methylene Blue Reduces Mortality in Critically Ill and Perioperative Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Vasodilatory hypotension is common in critically ill and perioperative patients, and is associated with adverse outcomes. As a nitric oxide production inhibitor, methylene blue (MB) exerts its vasoconstrictor property and is an adjuvant for catecholamine-refractory vasodilatory shock. However, the effects of MB on clinically relevant outcomes remain unclear. Therefore, the authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials on MB in critically ill and perioperative patients. The authors searched through databases for randomized trials on MB in critically ill and perioperative patients, which yielded 11 studies consisting of 556 patients. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic parameters and organ dysfunction (PROSPERO: CRD42023409243). Nine out of the 11 included randomized trials reported mortality, which was significantly lower in the MB group (risk ratio, 0.60 [95% CI 0.43-0.84] p = 0.003), with findings confirmed in septic shock and cardiac surgery subgroups. The authors found reduced lengths of stay in the intensive care unit (mean difference [MD], -0.9 days [95% CI -1.06 to -0.77] p < 0.001) and in the hospital (MD, -2.2 days [95% CI, -2.68 to -1.70] p < 0.001) in the MB group. MB was associated with increased mean arterial pressure (MD, 8.4 mmHg [95% CI 5.01-11.75] p < 0.001) and systemic vascular resistance (MD, 94.5 dyn/s/cm5 [95% CI 17.73-171.15] p = 0.02), with no difference in cardiac output (standardized MD, 0.16 [95% CI, -0.25 to 0.57] p = 0.45). This meta-analysis showed that MB reverses vasodilation in critically ill and perioperative patients and might improve survival. Further adequately powered randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Can Use of Intravenous Methylene Blue Improve the Hemodynamics and Outcome of the Patients with Refractory Septic Shock? An Observational Study

Introduction

Refractory shock, which fails to respond to conventional vasopressor therapy, is a common complication of sepsis. Methylene blue has emerged as a potential adjunctive treatment option for reversing refractory shock in sepsis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intravenous methylene blue infusion on hemodynamic improvement and mortality in patients with refractory shock.

Methodology

This was an observational prospective study for the duration of six months conducted at intensive care a medical college and teaching hospital including 76 patients with a diagnosis of septic shock requiring vasopressor therapy. Intravenous (IV) methylene blue was infused as a bolus dose with 2 mg/kg dose in 20 minutes and its response to mean arterial blood pressure, decrease in vasopressor therapy, lactate level, and urine output was recorded in next 2 hours. Patients with improvement in mean arterial pressure (MAP) by 10% or decrease in vasopressor therapy in the next 2 hours were leveled as responder. The length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and mortality were compared between responder and non-responder.

Results

A total of 76 patients with refractory shock were included in the study. With the use of IV methylene blue, 41 (53.9%) patients showed significant improvement in MAP within 2 hours (70.17 ± 8.30 vs 64.28 ± 11.84, p = 0.005). Responders were 4.019 times more likely to have vasopressor-free time within 24 hours (18.4% vs 5.3%, p = 0.020, odds ratio 4.019, 95% confidence interval, 1.180-13.682). However, there was no significant difference in terms of mortality, length of ICU stay, ventilator free days, and incidence of AKI. In the responder group, there was a significant increase in the MAP and decrease in vasopressor requirement pre- and post-infusion of methylene blue (p < 0.05). Responder had shorter vasopressor-free days as compared with non-responder (5.34 vs 6.79, p = 0.008) while the mean survival time was longer with responders (21.97 vs 15.93 days, p = 0.024).

Conclusion

The use of IV methylene blue in refractory shock as an adjuvant therapy significantly improved the mean arterial blood pressure and decreased the requirement of vasopressor therapy as well as improvement in the survival time. However, there was no change in the mortality, length of ICU stay, ventilator-free days, or incidence of AKI in the patients.

How to cite this article

Rajbanshi LK, Bajracharya A, Arjyal B, Devkota D. Can Use of Intravenous Methylene Blue Improve the Hemodynamics and Outcome of the Patients with Refractory Septic Shock? An Observational Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(9):669-674.

Successful Use of Methylene Blue in Catecholamine-Resistant Septic Shock: A Case Report and Short Literature Review

Despite efforts to improve treatment outcomes, mortality in septic shock remains high. In some patients, despite the use of several adrenergic drugs, features of refractory vasoplegic shock with progressive multiorgan failure are observed. We present a case report of the successful reversal of vasoplegic shock following the use of methylene blue, a selective inhibitor of the inducible form of nitric oxide synthase, which prevents vasodilation in response to inflammatory cytokines. We also briefly review the literature.

RIGHT VENTRICULAR DYSFUNCTION IN SEPSIS: AN UPDATED NARRATIVE REVIEW

ABSTRACT

Sepsis is a multisystem disease process, which constitutes a significant public health challenge and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Among other systems, sepsis is known to affect the cardiovascular system, which may manifest as myocardial injury, arrhythmias, refractory shock, and/or septic cardiomyopathy. Septic cardiomyopathy is defined as the reversible systolic and/or diastolic dysfunction of one or both ventricles. Left ventricle dysfunction has been extensively studied in the past, and its prognostic role in patients with sepsis is well documented. However, there is relatively scarce literature on right ventricle (RV) dysfunction and its role. Given the importance of timely detection of septic cardiomyopathy and its bearing on prognosis of patients, the role of RV dysfunction has come into renewed focus. Hence, through this review, we sought to describe the pathophysiology of RV dysfunction in sepsis and what have we learnt so far about its multifactorial nature. We also elucidate the roles of different biomarkers for its detection and prognosis, along with appropriate management of such patient population.

Early adjunctive methylene blue in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Methylene blue (MB) has been tested as a rescue therapy for patients with refractory septic shock. However, there is a lack of evidence on MB as an adjuvant therapy, its' optimal timing, dosing and safety profile. We aimed to assess whether early adjunctive MB can reduce time to vasopressor discontinuation in patients with septic shock.

METHODS

In this single-center randomized controlled trial, we assigned patients with septic shock according to Sepsis-3 criteria to MB or placebo. Primary outcome was time to vasopressor discontinuation at 28 days. Secondary outcomes included vasopressor-free days at 28 days, days on mechanical ventilator, length of stay in ICU and hospital, and mortality at 28 days.

RESULTS

Among 91 randomized patients, forty-five were assigned to MB and 46 to placebo. The MB group had a shorter time to vasopressor discontinuation (69 h [IQR 59-83] vs 94 h [IQR 74-141]; p < 0.001), one more day of vasopressor-free days at day 28 (p = 0.008), a shorter ICU length of stay by 1.5 days (p = 0.039) and shorter hospital length of stay by 2.7 days (p = 0.027) compared to patients in the control group. Days on mechanical ventilator and mortality were similar. There were no serious adverse effects related to MB administration.

CONCLUSION

In patients with septic shock, MB initiated within 24 h reduced time to vasopressor discontinuation and increased vasopressor-free days at 28 days. It also reduced length of stay in ICU and hospital without adverse effects. Our study supports further research regarding MB in larger randomized clinical trials. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT04446871 , June 25, 2020, retrospectively registered.

How We Escalate Vasopressor and Corticosteroid Therapy in Patients With Septic Shock

Septic shock is defined by the need for vasopressor agents to correct hypotension and lactic acidosis resulting from infection, with 30%-40% case fatality rates. The care of patients with worsening septic shock involves multiple treatment decisions involving vasopressor choices and adjunctive treatments. In this edition of "How I Do It", we provide a case-based discussion of common clinical decisions regarding choice of first-line vasopressor, BP targets, route of vasopressor delivery, use of secondary vasopressors, and adjunctive medications. We also consider diagnostic approaches, treatment, and monitoring strategies for the patient with worsening shock, as well as approaches to difficult weaning of vasopressors.

Effect of methylene blue on hemodynamic response in the early phase of septic shock: A case series

RATIONALE

Methylene blue (MB) has been used to increase blood pressure in septic shock, acting on the activity of guanylate cyclase and nitric oxide synthase.

PATIENCE CONCERNS

The aim of this study is to demonstrate the benefit of MB in early phase of septic shock.Diagnoses: We report 6 cases of patients with septic shock with up to 72 hours of evolution.

INTERVENTIONS

We used MB after fluid replacement, use of norepinephrine and vasopressin. Patients received a loading dose of MB and maintenance for 48 hours.

OUTCOMES

All patients presented a reduction in the dose of vasopressors and lactate levels soon after the administration of the loading dose of MB, an effect that was maintained with the maintenance dose for 48 hours. Interleukin 6 and interleukin 8 were elevated at the beginning of the septic condition, with a progressive and marked reduction after the beginning of MB infusion, demonstrating a role of MB in reducing the inflammatory activity.

LESSONS

This case series suggests that MB used early in the treatment of septic shock may be useful in reducing vasopressor dose and lactate levels. Further studies are still required to further validate these findings.

An updated "norepinephrine equivalent" score in intensive care as a marker of shock severity

Vasopressors and fluids are the cornerstones for the treatment of shock. The current international guidelines on shock recommend norepinephrine as the first-line vasopressor and vasopressin as the second-line vasopressor. In clinical practice, due to drug availability, local practice variations, special settings, and ongoing research, several alternative vasoconstrictors and adjuncts are used in the absence of precise equivalent doses. Norepinephrine equivalence (NEE) is frequently used in clinical trials to overcome this heterogeneity and describe vasopressor support in a standardized manner. NEE quantifies the total amount of vasopressors, considering the potency of each such agent, which typically includes catecholamines, derivatives, and vasopressin. Intensive care studies use NEE as an eligibility criterion and also an outcome measure. On the other hand, NEE has several pitfalls which clinicians should know, important the lack of conversion of novel vasopressors such as angiotensin II and also adjuncts such as methylene blue, including a lack of high-quality data to support the equation and validate its predictive performance in all types of critical care practice. This review describes the history of NEE and suggests an updated formula incorporating novel vasopressors and adjuncts.

Methylene Blue Use in Pediatrics

Catecholamine-resistant shock, also known as vasoplegia, is a challenging entity with a significant risk of mortality. We seek to provide further data on the safety and effectiveness of methylene blue (MB) for vasoplegic shock in the pediatric population. We conducted a retrospective observational study of pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit or pediatric cardiac intensive care unit at Mount Sinai Kravis Children's Hospital from 2011 to 2021 who received MB for refractory shock. A list of patients was obtained by performing a pharmaceutical query from 2011 to 2021 for “MB.” Chart review was performed to determine indication for use and to collect demographic and clinical data. There were 33 MB administrations: 18 administrations (16 unique patients) for vasoplegic shock, 11 for surgical dye, and 4 for methemoglobinemia. The median age was 5 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.08, 13). Ten patients required MB following congenital cardiac repair (62.5%); one administration for myocarditis, septic shock, postcardiac arrest, high output chylothorax, scoliosis repair, and one multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. No patients experienced hemolytic anemia or serotonin syndrome following administration. The median dose of MB was 1 mg/kg. Vasoactive-inotrope score (VIS) improved in 4 out of 18 administrations at 1 hour. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) improved in 10 out of 18 administrations at 1 hour. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) improved in 8 out of 18 administrations at 1 hour. VIS, MAP, and SBP improved in 8 out of 18 administrations at 6 hours. MB may be safely considered as rescue therapy in catecholamine-resistant shock in pediatrics.

Multimodal strategy to counteract vasodilation in septic shock

Early initiation of a multimodal treatment strategy in the management of vasopressors during septic shock has been advocated to reduce delays in restoring adequate organ perfusion and to mitigate side effects associated with the administration of high-dose catecholamines. We provide a review that summarises the pathophysiology of vasodilation, the physiologic response to the vascular response, and the different drugs used in this situation, focusing on the need to combine early different vasopressors. Fluid loading being insufficient for counteracting vasoplegia, norepinephrine is usually the first-line vasopressor used to restore hemodynamics. Norepinephrine sparing is discussed in further detail through the concomitant use of adrenergic, vasopressinergic, and renin-angiotensin systems and the optimisation of endothelial reactivity with methylene blue. A blueprint for the construction of new studies is outlined to address the question of vasopressor selection and timing in septic shock.

Methylene Blue in Refractory Shock

Many patients suffer shock in intensive care units (ICU). The majority of the patients with shock respond to standard treatment with vasopressors in addition to the treatment of underlying etiology. Some may not respond to vasopressors and have high mortality. To those patients who do not respond, methylene blue has been used in the past with some success. We present a case report on the use of methylene blue along with a brief literature review.

Methylene blue dosing strategies in critically ill adults with shock-A retrospective cohort study

Background

Shock increases mortality in the critically ill and the mainstay of therapy is the administration of vasopressor agents to achieve hemodynamic targets. In the past, studies have found that the NO-pathway antagonist methylene blue improves hemodynamics. However, the optimal dosing strategy remains elusive. Therefore, we investigated the hemodynamic and ICU outcome parameters of three different dosing strategies for methylene blue.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients in shock treated with methylene blue. Shock was defined as norepinephrine dose >0.1 μg/kg/min and serum lactate level >2 mmol/l at the start of methylene blue administration. Different demographic variables, ICU treatment, and outcome parameters were evaluated. To compare the differences in the administration of vasopressors or inotropes, the vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) was calculated at different time points after starting the administration of methylene blue. Response to methylene blue or mortality at 28 days were assessed.

Results

262 patients from July 2014 to October 2019 received methylene blue. 209 patients met the inclusion criteria. Three different dosing strategies were identified: bolus injection followed by continuous infusion (n = 111), bolus injection only (no continuous infusion; n = 59) or continuous infusion only (no bolus prior; n = 39). The groups did not differ in demographics, ICU scoring system, or comorbidities. In all groups, VIS decreased over time, indicating improved hemodynamics. Cardiogenic shock and higher doses of norepinephrine increased the chance of responding to methylene blue, while bolus only decreased the chance of responding to methylene blue treatment. 28-day mortality increased with higher SAPSII scores and higher serum lactate levels, while bolus injection followed by continuous infusion decreased 28-day mortality. No severe side effects were noted.

Conclusion

In this cohort, methylene blue as a bolus injection followed by continuous infusion was associated with a reduced 28-day mortality in patients with shock. Prospective studies are needed to systematically evaluate the role of methylene blue in the treatment of shock.

Methylene blue: a controversial diagnostic acid and medication?

A narrative review of the literature was conducted to determine if the administration of methylene blue (MB) in humans has potential risks. Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane. MB is a diagnostic substance used during some diagnostic procedures and also a part of the treatment of several diseases including methemoglobinemia, vasoplegic syndrome, fosfamide-induced encephalopathy, and cyanide intoxication, and the detection of leaks or position of parathyroid corpuscles during surgery. Although the use of MB is historically justified, and it ought to be safe, because it originated as a diagnostic material, the basic toxicological characteristics of this substance are unknown. Despite reports of severe adverse effects of MB, which could significantly exceed any possible benefits evaluated for the given indication. Therefore, the clinical use of MB currently represents a controversial problem given the heterogeneity of available data and the lack of preclinical data. This is in conflict with standards of safe use of such substances in human medicinal practice. The toxic effects of the application of MB are dose-dependent and include serious symptoms such as hemolysis, methemoglobinemia, nausea and vomitus, chest pain, dyspnoea, and hypertension. Some countries regard MB as harmful because of the resulting skin irritation and triggering of an adverse inflammatory response. MB induced serotoninergic toxicity clinically manifests as neuromuscular hyperactivity. This review aims to summarize the current understanding concerning the indications for MB administration and define the potential adverse effects of MB.

Efficacy and safety of methylene blue in patients with vasodilatory shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The role of methylene blue (MB) in patients with vasodilatory shock is unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MB in patients with vasodilatory shock.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE at PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CNKI, CBM and Wanfang Medical databases for all observational and intervention studies comparing the effect of MB vs. control in vasodilatory shock patients. This study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. There were no language restrictions for inclusion.

Results

A total of 15 studies with 832 patients were included. Pooled data demonstrated that administration of MB along with vasopressors significantly reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.85, P = 0.008; I 2 = 7%]. This benefit in mortality rate was also seen in a subgroup analysis including randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials. In addition, the vasopressor requirement was reduced in the MB group [mean difference (MD) -0.77, 95%CI -1.26 to -0.28, P = 0.002; I 2 = 80%]. Regarding hemodynamics, MB increased the mean arterial pressure, heart rate and peripheral vascular resistance. In respect to organ function, MB was associated with a lower incidence of renal failure, while in regards to oxygen metabolism, it was linked to reduced lactate levels. MB had no effect on the other outcomes and no serious side effects.

Conclusions

Concomitant administration of MB and vasopressors improved hemodynamics, decreased vasopressor requirements, reduced lactate levels, and improved survival in patients with vasodilatory shock. However, further studies are required to confirm these findings.

Systematic review registration

Identifier: CRD42021281847.

Septic Cardiomyopathy: From Pathophysiology to the Clinical Setting

The onset of cardiomyopathy is a common feature in sepsis, with relevant effects on its pathophysiology and clinical care. Septic cardiomyopathy is characterized by reduced left ventricular (LV) contractility eventually associated with LV dilatation with or without right ventricle failure. Unfortunately, such a wide range of ultrasonographic findings does not reflect a deep comprehension of sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy, but rather a lack of consensus about its definition. Several echocardiographic parameters intrinsically depend on loading conditions (both preload and afterload) so that it may be challenging to discriminate which is primitive and which is induced by hemodynamic perturbances. Here, we explore the state of the art in sepsis-related cardiomyopathy. We focus on the shortcomings in its definition and point out how cardiac performance dynamically changes in response to different hemodynamic clusters. A special attention is also given to update the knowledge about molecular mechanisms leading to myocardial dysfunction and that recall those of myocardial hibernation. Ultimately, the aim of this review is to highlight the unsolved issue in the field of sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy as their implementation would lead to improve risk stratification and clinical care.

The pharmacotherapeutic options in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock

INTRODUCTION

Septic and vasoplegic shock are common types of vasodilatory shock (VS) with high mortality. After fluid resuscitation and the use of catecholamine-mediated vasopressors (CMV), vasopressin, angiotensin II, methylene blue (MB) and hydroxocobalamin can be added to maintain blood pressure.

AREAS COVERED

VS treatment utilizes a phased approach with secondary vasopressors added to vasopressor agents to maintain an acceptable mean arterial pressure (MAP). This review covers additional vasopressors and adjunctive therapies used when fluid and catecholamine-mediated vasopressors fail to maintain target MAP.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence supporting additional vasopressor agents in catecholamine resistant VS is limited to case reports, series, and a few randomized control trials (RCTs) to guide recommendations. Vasopressin is the most common agent added next when MAPs are not adequately supported with CMV. VS patients failing fluids and vasopressors with cardiomyopathy may have cardiotonic agents such as dobutamine or milrinone added before or after vasopressin. Angiotensin II, another class of vasopressor is used in VS to maintain adequate MAP. MB and/or hydoxocobalamin, vitamin C, thiamine and corticosteroids are adjunctive therapies used in refractory VS. More RCTs are needed to confirm the utility of these drugs, at what doses, which combinations and in what order they should be given.

Methylene blue for vasodilatory shock in the intensive care unit: a retrospective, observational study

Background

Refractory vasodilatory shock is a state of uncontrolled vasodilation associated with underlying inflammation and endothelial dysregulation. Rescue therapy for vasoplegia refractory to catecholamines includes methylene blue (MB) which restores vascular tone. We hypothesized that (1) at least 40% of critically ill patients would respond positively to MB administration and (2) that those who responded to MB would have a survival benefit.

Methods

This study was a retrospective review that included all adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit treated with MB for the indication of refractory vasodilatory shock. Responders to MB were identified as those with a ≥ 10% increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) within the first 1-2 hours after administration. We examined the association of mortality to the groups of responders versus non-responders to MB. A subgroup analysis in patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) was also performed.

Statistical calculations were performed in Microsoft Excel® (Redmond, WA, USA). Where appropriate, the comparison of averages and standard deviations of demographics, dosing, MAP, and reductions in vasopressor dosing were performed via Chi squared, Fisher's exact test, or two-tailed t-test with a p-value < 0.05 being considered as statistically significant. After using the F-test to assess for differences in variance, the proper two tailed t-test was used to compare SOFA scores among responders versus non-responders.

Results

A total of 223 patients were included in the responder analysis; 88 (39.5%) had a ≥ 10% increase in MAP post-MB administration that was not associated with a significant change in norepinephrine requirements between responders versus non-responders (p=0.41). There was a non-statistically significant trend (21.6% vs 14.8%, p=0.19) toward improved survival to hospital discharge in the MB responder group compared to the non-responder group. In 70 patients undergoing CRRT, there were 33 responders who were more likely to survive than those who were not (p = 0.0111).

Conclusions

In patients with refractory shock receiving MB, there is a non-statistically significant trend toward improved outcomes in responders based on a MAP increase >10%. Patients supported with CRRT who were identified as responders had decreased ICU mortality compared to non-responders.

Alternatives to norepinephrine in septic shock: Which agents and when?

Vasopressors are the cornerstone of hemodynamic management in patients with septic shock. Norepinephrine is currently recommended as the first-line vasopressor in these patients. In addition to norepinephrine, there are many other potent vasopressors with specific properties and/or advantages that act on vessels through different pathways after activation of specific receptors; these could be of interest in patients with septic shock. Dopamine is no longer recommended in patients with septic shock because its use is associated with a higher rate of cardiac arrhythmias without any benefit in terms of mortality or organ dysfunction. Epinephrine is currently considered as a second-line vasopressor therapy, because of the higher rate of associated metabolic and cardiac adverse effects compared with norepinephrine; however, it may be considered in settings where norepinephrine is unavailable or in patients with refractory septic shock and myocardial dysfunction. Owing to its potential effects on mortality and renal function and its norepinephrine-sparing effect, vasopressin is recommended as second-line vasopressor therapy instead of norepinephrine dose escalation in patients with septic shock and persistent arterial hypotension. However, two synthetic analogs of vasopressin, namely, terlipressin and selepressin, have not yet been employed in the management of patients with septic shock, as their use is associated with a higher rate of digital ischemia. Finally, angiotensin Ⅱ also appears to be a promising vasopressor in patients with septic shock, especially in the most severe cases and/or in patients with acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy. Nevertheless, due to limited evidence and concerns regarding safety (which remains unclear because of potential adverse effects related to its marked vasopressor activity), angiotensin Ⅱ is currently not recommended in patients with septic shock. Further studies are needed to better define the role of these vasopressors in the management of these patients.

Methylene blue for the treatment of refractory septic shock secondary to listeriosis in a paediatric patient

Current therapies frequently used for refractory septic shock include hydrocortisone, vasopressin, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support, inodilators, levosimendan and methylene blue. The evidence for these treatments is very limited. We present a case of a 5-year-old patient with refractory septic shock, secondary to Listeria monocytogenes meningitis. She presented with status epilepticus and developed septic shock. Shock persisted despite multiple high-dose vasoactive medications. ECMO support was not available. The medical team decided to use methylene blue to revert the vasoplegia, with excellent results. Shortly after the administration, vasopressors were weaned off and the high lactate cleared. She developed severe neurological sequelae due to brain haemorrhage secondary to the Listeria meningitis. The evidence supporting methylene blue for refractory septic shock in paediatric patients is limited. This case represents the effectiveness of this therapy without secondary effects.

Current practice and evolving concepts in septic shock resuscitation

Clinical and pathophysiological understanding of septic shock has progressed exponentially in the previous decades, translating into a steady decrease in septic shock-related morbidity and mortality. Even though large randomized, controlled trials have addressed fundamental aspects of septic shock resuscitation, many questions still exist. In this review, we will describe the current standards of septic shock resuscitation, but the emphasis will be placed on evolving concepts in different domains such as clinical resuscitation targets, adequate use of fluids and vasoactive drugs, refractory shock, and the use of extracorporeal therapies. Multiple research opportunities remain open, and collaborative endeavors should be performed to fill in these gaps.

Methylene blue versus vasopressin analog for refractory septic shock in the preterm neonate: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Refractory septic shock in neonates is still associated with high mortality, necessitating an alternative therapy, despite all currently available treatments. This study aims to assess the vasopressor effect of methylene blue (MB) in comparison to terlipressin (TP) as adjuvant therapy for refractory septic shock in the preterm neonate.

METHODS

A double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Neonatal Intensive Care Units at Ain Shams University, Egypt. Thirty preterm neonates with refractory septic shock were randomized to receive either MB or TP as an adjuvant to conventional therapy. Both MB and TP were administered as an intravenous loading dose followed by continuous intravenous infusion. The hemodynamic variables, functional echocardiographic variables, and oxidant stress marker were assessed over a 24 h period together with the side effects of MB.

RESULTS

MB causes significant improvement in mean arterial blood pressure with a significant decrease of the norepinephrine requirements (1.15±0.21μm/kg/min at baseline vs. 0.55±0.15μm/kg/min at 24 h). MB infusion causes an increase of the pulmonary pressure (44.73±8.53 mmHg at baseline vs. 47.27±7.91 mmHg after 24 h) without affecting the cardiac output. Serum malonaldehyde decreased from 5.45±1.30 nmol/mL at baseline to 4.40±0.90 nmol/mL at 24 h in the MB group.

CONCLUSION

Administration of MB to preterm infants with refractory septic shock showed rapid increases in systemic vascular resistance and arterial blood pressure with minimal side effects.

Endothelial dysfunction: a therapeutic target in bacterial sepsis?

INTRODUCTION

Endothelial cells maintain vascular integrity, tone, and patency and have important roles in hemostasis and inflammatory responses. Although some degree of endothelial dysfunction with increased vascular permeability may be necessary to control local infection, excessive dysfunction plays a central role in the pathogenesis of sepsis-related organ dysfunction and failure as it results in dysregulated inflammation, vascular leakage, and abnormal coagulation. The vascular endothelium has thus been proposed as a potential target for therapeutic intervention in patients with sepsis.

AREAS COVERED

Different mechanisms underlying sepsis-related dysfunction of the vascular endothelium are discussed, including glycocalyx shedding, nitrosative stress, and coagulation factors. Potential therapeutic implications of each mechanism are mentioned.

EXPERT OPINION

Multiple targets to protect or restore endothelial function have been suggested, but endothelium-driven treatments remain a future potential at present. As some endothelial dysfunction and permeability may be necessary to remove infection and repair damaged tissue, targeting the endothelium may be a particular challenge. Ideally, therapies should be guided by biomarkers related to that specific pathway to ensure they are given only to patients most likely to respond. This enrichment based on biological plausibility and theragnostics will increase the likelihood of a beneficial response in individual patients and enable more personalized treatment.

Is the Sympathetic System Detrimental in the Setting of Septic Shock, with Antihypertensive Agents as a Counterintuitive Approach? A Clinical Proposition

Mortality in the setting of septic shock varies between 20% and 100%. Refractory septic shock leads to early circulatory failure and carries the worst prognosis. The pathophysiology is poorly understood despite studies of the microcirculatory defects and the immuno-paralysis. The acute circulatory distress is treated with volume expansion, administration of vasopressors (usually noradrenaline: NA), and inotropes. Ventilation and anti-infectious strategy shall not be discussed here. When circulation is considered, the literature is segregated between interventions directed to the systemic circulation vs. interventions directed to the micro-circulation. Our thesis is that, after stabilization of the acute cardioventilatory distress, the prolonged sympathetic hyperactivity is detrimental in the setting of septic shock. Our hypothesis is that the sympathetic hyperactivity observed in septic shock being normalized towards baseline activity will improve the microcirculation by recoupling the capillaries and the systemic circulation. Therefore, counterintuitively, antihypertensive agents such as beta-blockers or alpha-2 adrenergic agonists (clonidine, dexmedetomidine) are useful. They would reduce the noradrenaline requirements. Adjuncts (vitamins, steroids, NO donors/inhibitors, etc.) proposed to normalize the sepsis-evoked vasodilation are not reviewed. This itemized approach (systemic vs. microcirculation) requires physiological and epidemiological studies to look for reduced mortality.

Intradermal methylene blue administration on the progression of burn injuries

OBJECTIVE

A burn injury has two defined areas: central necrosis and an adjacent area of ischaemia, which may or may not progress to necrosis. The concentration of nitric oxide (NO) increases after burn injury and may originate from potent oxidising agents. Methylene blue (MB) may act as an antioxidant and is supposed to reduce burn progression. This investigation was carried out to evaluate the effects of intradermal MB on necrosis progression in burns.

METHODS

Full-thickness burn injuries were performed by applying a heated metal comb on the shaved back of male Wistar rats. The animals were divided into three groups: Control (C, n=7); MB (2mg/kg) one hour after burn injury (MB1h, n=11); and MB (2mg/kg) six hours after burn injury (MB6h, n=8). After seven days the lesions were photographed for visual assessment of burn necrosis; full-thickness cuts of lesions were dyed with Masson and Giemsa for microscopic histopathology; and tissue fragments of unburned interspaces were processed for chemiluminescence with nitrite/nitrate (NOX) and malondialdehyde (MDA) as oxidative stress markers.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences between groups were observed during visual analysis and NOX dosage. However, in microscopic analysis, the MB1h and MB6h groups showed smaller areas of necrosis, less inflammatory infiltration, and a more significant extension of interspaces. Furthermore, the dosage of MDA revealed that the MB1h group showed lower values when compared with the control group (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The study provided good evidence that MB intradermal injection can reduce necrosis progression in ischaemic perilesional areas and suggests an alternative to treating burns.

Vasopressor-Sparing Strategies in Patients with Shock: A Scoping-Review and an Evidence-Based Strategy Proposition

Despite the abundant literature on vasopressor therapy, few studies have focused on vasopressor-sparing strategies in patients with shock. We performed a scoping-review of the published studies evaluating vasopressor-sparing strategies by analyzing the results from randomized controlled trials conducted in patients with shock, with a focus on vasopressor doses and/or duration reduction. We analyzed 143 studies, mainly performed in septic shock. Our analysis demonstrated that several pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies are associated with a decrease in the duration of vasopressor therapy. These strategies are as follows: implementing a weaning strategy, vasopressin use, systemic glucocorticoid administration, beta-blockers, and normothermia. On the contrary, early goal directed therapies, including fluid therapy, oral vasopressors, vitamin C, and renal replacement therapy, are not associated with an increase in vasopressor-free days. Based on these results, we proposed an evidence-based vasopressor management strategy.

Hydroxocobalamin in Refractory Septic Shock: A Retrospective Case Series

Objectives:

Refractory septic shock is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Hydroxocobalamin is used to treat postoperative vasoplegia; however, data supporting its use in the setting of refractory septic shock is limited and restricted to case reports. This study evaluates the effect of hydroxocobalamin on mean arterial pressure and vasopressor requirements in a series of patients with refractory septic shock.

Design:

Single-center, retrospective analysis.

Setting:

Urban, tertiary-care ICU.

Patients:

Adult ICU patients with refractory septic shock treated with hydroxocobalamin between August 2018 and January 2020.

Interventions:

Hydroxocobalamin 5 g IV infusion.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

Twenty-six patients were included for the analysis. Administration of hydroxocobalamin was associated with an increase in mean arterial pressure at 1, 6, and 24 hours postdose (+16.3, +14.3, and +16.3 mm Hg, respectively; p < 0.001). Increase in mean arterial pressure from baseline remained statistically significant when controlling for sex, age, and comorbid conditions. There was no change in the norepinephrine equivalents patients required 1 hour following hydroxocobalamin administration, but a statistically significant decrease in norepinephrine equivalent was observed at 6 and 24 hours postdose (p < 0.001).

Conclusions:

Hydroxocobalamin provides sustained hemodynamic benefit at 24 hours in patients with refractory septic shock.

Vasopressor-Sparing Action of Methylene Blue in Severe Sepsis and Shock: A Narrative Review

Shock is a serious acute circulatory failure leading to inadequate oxygen delivery to the cells. Its treatment is mainly based on circulating fluid optimization, and vasopressors to provide an adequate mean arterial pressure and microcirculatory flow. Norepinephrine is the drug of choice, but high dosages may be responsible for several side effects, including increased myocardial oxygen consumption, dysrhythmias, and peripheral and organ ischemia. Moreover, some patients are “non-responders” to first-line norepinephrine treatment. Hence, other drugs have been proposed to reach and maintain the hemodynamic target. In general, they are described as catecholamine-sparing agents. Among others, the most used are vasopressin, corticosteroids, and angiotensin II. Methylene blue (MB) represents a further option, even though its use is still a topic of controversy. This review article tries to summarize what is known and unknown about the actions of MB in patients in shock. It reduces excessive production of nitric oxide via blockade of guanylate cyclase in shock states. At present, it appears the MB provides positive results in septic shock, if administered early. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted regarding its use to provide more precise indications to physicians involved in the treatment of such patients.

Vasopressor Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit

After fluid administration for vasodilatory shock, vasopressors are commonly infused. Causes of vasodilatory shock include septic shock, post-cardiovascular surgery, post-acute myocardial infarction, postsurgery, other causes of an intense systemic inflammatory response, and drug -associated anaphylaxis. Therapeutic vasopressors are hormones that activate receptors-adrenergic: α1, α2, β1, β2; angiotensin II: AG1, AG2; vasopressin: AVPR1a, AVPR1B, AVPR2; dopamine: DA1, DA2. Vasopressor choice and dose vary widely because of patient and physician practice heterogeneity. Vasopressor adverse effects are excessive vasoconstriction causing organ ischemia/infarction, hyperglycemia, hyperlactatemia, tachycardia, and tachyarrhythmias. To date, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) of vasopressors has shown a decreased 28-day mortality rate. There is a need for evidence regarding alternative vasopressors as first-line vasopressors. We emphasize that vasopressors should be administered simultaneously with fluid replacement to prevent and decrease duration of hypotension in shock with vasodilation. Norepinephrine is the first-choice vasopressor in septic and vasodilatory shock. Interventions that decrease norepinephrine dose (vasopressin, angiotensin II) have not decreased 28-day mortality significantly. In patients not responsive to norepinephrine, vasopressin or epinephrine may be added. Angiotensin II may be useful for rapid resuscitation of profoundly hypotensive patients. Inotropic agent(s) (e.g., dobutamine) may be needed if vasopressors decrease ventricular contractility. Dopamine has fallen to almost no-use recommendation because of adverse effects; angiotensin II is available clinically; there are potent vasopressors with scant literature (e.g., methylene blue); and the novel V1a agonist selepressin missed on its pivotal RCT primary outcome. In pediatric septic shock, vasopressors, epinephrine, and norepinephrine are recommended equally because there is no clear evidence that supports the use of one vasoactive agent. Dopamine is recommended when epinephrine or norepinephrine is not available. New strategies include perhaps patients will be started on several vasopressors with complementary mechanisms of action, patients may be selected for particular vasopressors according to predictive biomarkers, and novel vasopressors may emerge with fewer adverse effects.

The Story of Nitric Oxide, Sepsis and Methylene Blue: A Comprehensive Pathophysiologic Review

Methylene blue (MB) is considered to be the first synthetic medication ever used in humans. There are many indications for MB, including vasoplegic shock. Nitric oxide (NO), the central mediator of sepsis, promotes vasoplegia by enhancing the guanylate cyclase cyclic guanosine monophosphate second messenger system, the effect of which is attenuated by MB. Therefore, the use of MB represents a unique pharmacologic approach towards treating the underlying pathophysiology of vasoplegia in sepsis. There are numerous reports of the successful use of MB in refractory shock in the literature. This manuscript describes the historical aspects of the identification of NO as the endothelial derived relaxation factor and its role in the pathogenesis of vasoplegia in septic shock. An analysis of the existing evidence for the use of MB as an inhibitor of NO in vasodilatory shock is provided. The adverse effects associated with the use of MB and an approach to optimal dosing in septic shock are also addressed.

Effect of Methylene Blue on a Porcine Model of Amlodipine Toxicity

INTRODUCTION

Calcium channel blocker (CCB) overdoses cause significant morbidity and mortality. Dihydropyridine CCBs cause peripheral vascular dilation and at high doses cardiac dysfunction. Amlodipine, a dihydropyridine, causes peripheral vasodilation from release of nitric oxide (NO) in addition to calcium channel blockade; NO scavenging is a potential treatment. Methylene blue (MB) inhibits NO directly and inhibits NO production. We compared the effects of MB versus norepinephrine (NE), with time to death as the primary outcome, in a porcine amlodipine toxicity model.

METHODS

Animals were anesthetized and instrumented, and an amlodipine infusion was administered to mimic oral overdose. After 70 minutes, each group was resuscitated with normal saline. Animals in each group were then randomized to receive either MB or NE. Hemodynamic parameters, including mean arterial pressure and cardiac output, were recorded every 10 minutes. The primary outcome was survival time (Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test).

RESULTS

Interim analysis after 15 animals (7 MB, 8 NE) revealed that MB was clearly not superior to NE. Overall, 1 of 7 animals in the MB group survived to 300 minutes compared with 2 of 8 animals in the NE group. The median survival time was 100 minutes for the MB group and 177 minutes for the NE group. Survival time did not differ by group (log-rank test p = 0.29).

CONCLUSION

In this porcine model of amlodipine toxicity, methylene blue did not improve survival time compared with norepinephrine. Whether methylene blue is beneficial in combatting distributive shock in amlodipine toxicity remains unclear and requires further study.

Sepsis-Induced Cardiomyopathy: a Comprehensive Review

Purpose of Review

To briefly review epidemiology and pathophysiology of SICM and provide a more extensive review of the data on diagnostic and management strategies.

Recent Findings

SICM is likely underdiagnosed and that has mortality implications. Current evidence supports speckle tracking echocardiography to identify decreased contractility irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction for the diagnosis of SICM. There continues to be a dearth of large clinical trials evaluating the treatment of SICM and current consensus focuses on supportive measures such as vasopressors and inotropes.

Summary

Sepsis is a significant cause of mortality, and sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy has both prognostic and management implications for these patients. Individualized work-up and management of these patients is crucial to improving outcomes.

Pharmacologic Agents for the Treatment of Vasodilatory Shock

Vasodilatory shock is a life-threatening syndrome in critically ill patients and is characterized by severe hypotension and resultant tissue hypoperfusion. This shock state requires the use of vasopressor agents to restore adequate vascular tone. Norepinephrine is still recommended as first-line vasopressor in the management of critically ill patients suffering from severe vasodilation. In the recent time, catecholaminergic vasopressor drugs have been associated with possible side effects at higher dosages. This so-called catecholamine toxicity has focused on alternative noncatecholaminergic vasopressors or the use of moderate doses of multiple vasopressors with complementary mechanisms of action. Besides vasopressin and terlipressin, angiotensin II may be a promising drug for the management of vasodilatory shock. In addition, adjunctive drugs, such as hydrocortisone, methylene blue or ascorbic acid can be added to conventional vasopressor therapy. The objective of this review is to give an overview of the current available vasopressor agents used in vasodilatory shock. A thorough search of PubMed was conducted in order to identify the majority of studies related to the subject. Data on the outcome of several drugs and future perspective of possible management strategies for the therapy of vasodilatory shock are discussed.

Clinical utility of midodrine and methylene blue as catecholamine-sparing agents in intensive care unit patients with shock

Shock is common in the intensive care unit, affecting up to one third of patients. Treatment of shock is centered upon managing hypotension and ensuring adequate perfusion via administration of fluids and catecholamine vasopressors. Due to the risks associated with catecholamine vasopressors, interest has grown in using catecholamine-sparing agents such as midodrine and methylene blue. Midodrine is an orally administered alpha-1 adrenergic agonist while methylene blue is an intravenously administered blue dye used to restore vascular tone and increase blood pressure. Separate MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase database searches were conducted to assess literature revolving around these agents. Examples of search terms included "midodrine", "methylene blue", "critically ill", "shock", and "catecholamine-sparing." Several studies have evaluated their use in patients with shock and found potential benefits in terms of causing significant elevations in blood pressure and hastening catecholamine vasopressor discontinuation with few adverse effects; however, robust evidence is lacking for these off-label indications. Because of the variety of dosing strategies used and the incongruences between patient populations, it is also challenging to define finite recommendations. This review aims to summarize current evidence for the use of midodrine and methylene blue as catecholamine-sparing agents in critically ill patients with resolving or refractory shock.

Assessment of effects of methylene blue on intestinal ischemia and reperfusion in a rabbit model: hemodynamic, histological and immunohistochemical study

BACKGROUND

Intestinal ischemia-reperfusion (IR) is an important clinical occurrence seen in common diseases, such as gastric dilatation-volvulus in dogs or colic in horses. Limited data is available on the use of methylene blue in veterinary medicine for intestinal ischemia-reperfusion. The present study aimed to compare the hemodynamic, histopathological, and immunohistochemical effects of two doses of methylene blue in two rabbit model groups In one group, 5 mg/kg IV was administered, and in another, 20 mg/kg IV was administered following a constant rate infusion (CRI) of 2 mg/kg/h that lasted 6 h. All the groups, including a control group had intestinal ischemia-reperfusion. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed using caspase-3.

RESULTS

During ischemia, hemodynamic depression with reduced perfusion and elevated lactate were observed. During reperfusion, methylene blue (MB) infusion generated an increase in cardiac output due to a positive chronotropic effect, an elevation of preload, and an intense positive inotropic effect. The changes in heart rate and blood pressure were significantly greater in the group in which methylene blue 5 mg/kg IV was administered (MB5) than in the group in which methylene blue 20 mg/kg IV dose was administered (MB20). In addition, lactate and stroke volume variations were significantly reduced, and vascular resistance was significantly elevated in the MB5 group compared with the control group and MB20 group. The MB5 group showed a significant decrease in the intensity of histopathological lesion scores in the intestines and a decrease in caspase-3 areas, in comparison with other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MB infusion produced improvements in hemodynamic parameters in rabbits subjected to intestinal IR, with increased cardiac output and blood pressure. An MB dosage of 5 mg/kg IV administered at a CRI of 2 mg/kg/h exhibited the most protective effect against histopathological damage caused by intestinal ischemia-reperfusion. Further studies with MB in clinical veterinary pathologies are recommended to fully evaluate these findings.

Bench to bedside review: therapeutic modulation of nitric oxide in sepsis-an update

Nitric oxide is a signalling molecule with an extensive range of functions in both health and disease. Discovered in the 1980s through work that earned the Nobel prize, nitric oxide is an essential factor in regulating cardiovascular, immune, neurological and haematological function in normal homeostasis and in response to infection. Early work implicated exaggerated nitric oxide synthesis as a potentially important driver of septic shock; however, attempts to modulate production through global inhibition of nitric oxide synthase were associated with increased mortality. Subsequent work has shown that regulation of nitric oxide production is determined by numerous factors including substrate and co-factor availability and expression of endogenous regulators. In sepsis, nitric oxide synthesis is dysregulated with exaggerated production leading to cardiovascular dysfunction, bioenergetic failure and cellular toxicity whilst at the same time impaired microvascular function may be driven in part by reduced nitric oxide synthesis by the endothelium. This bench to bedside review summarises our current understanding of the ways in which nitric oxide production is regulated on a tissue and cellular level before discussing progress in translating these observations into novel therapeutic strategies for patients with sepsis.

Vasopressor therapy in critically ill patients with shock

BACKGROUND

Vasopressors are administered to critically ill patients with vasodilatory shock not responsive to volume resuscitation, and less often in cardiogenic shock, and hypovolemic shock.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives are to review safety and efficacy of vasopressors, pathophysiology, agents that decrease vasopressor dose, predictive biomarkers, β1-blockers, and directions for research.

METHODS

The quality of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

Vasopressors bind adrenergic: α1, α2, β1, β2; vasopressin: AVPR1a, AVPR1B, AVPR2; angiotensin II: AG1, AG2; and dopamine: DA1, DA2 receptors inducing vasoconstriction. Vasopressor choice and dose vary because of patients and physician practice. Adverse effects include excessive vasoconstriction, organ ischemia, hyperglycemia, hyperlactatemia, tachycardia, and tachyarrhythmias. No randomized controlled trials of vasopressors showed a significant difference in 28-day mortality rate. Norepinephrine is the first-choice vasopressor in vasodilatory shock after adequate volume resuscitation. Some strategies that decrease norepinephrine dose (vasopressin, angiotensin II) have not decreased 28-day mortality while corticosteroids have decreased 28-day mortality significantly in some (two large trials) but not all trials. In norepinephrine-refractory patients, vasopressin or epinephrine may be added. A new vasopressor, angiotensin II, may be useful in profoundly hypotensive patients. Dobutamine may be added because vasopressors may decrease ventricular contractility. Dopamine is recommended only in bradycardic patients. There are potent vasopressors with limited evidence (e.g. methylene blue, metaraminol) and novel vasopressors in development (selepressin).

CONCLUSIONS

Norepinephrine is first choice followed by vasopressin or epinephrine. Angiotensin II and dopamine have limited indications. In future, predictive biomarkers may guide vasopressor selection and novel vasopressors may emerge.

Vasopressor therapy in critically ill patients with shock

BACKGROUND

Vasopressors are administered to critically ill patients with vasodilatory shock not responsive to volume resuscitation, and less often in cardiogenic shock, and hypovolemic shock.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives are to review safety and efficacy of vasopressors, pathophysiology, agents that decrease vasopressor dose, predictive biomarkers, β1-blockers, and directions for research.

METHODS

The quality of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

Vasopressors bind adrenergic: α1, α2, β1, β2; vasopressin: AVPR1a, AVPR1B, AVPR2; angiotensin II: AG1, AG2; and dopamine: DA1, DA2 receptors inducing vasoconstriction. Vasopressor choice and dose vary because of patients and physician practice. Adverse effects include excessive vasoconstriction, organ ischemia, hyperglycemia, hyperlactatemia, tachycardia, and tachyarrhythmias. No randomized controlled trials of vasopressors showed a significant difference in 28-day mortality rate. Norepinephrine is the first-choice vasopressor in vasodilatory shock after adequate volume resuscitation. Some strategies that decrease norepinephrine dose (vasopressin, angiotensin II) have not decreased 28-day mortality while corticosteroids have decreased 28-day mortality significantly in some (two large trials) but not all trials. In norepinephrine-refractory patients, vasopressin or epinephrine may be added. A new vasopressor, angiotensin II, may be useful in profoundly hypotensive patients. Dobutamine may be added because vasopressors may decrease ventricular contractility. Dopamine is recommended only in bradycardic patients. There are potent vasopressors with limited evidence (e.g. methylene blue, metaraminol) and novel vasopressors in development (selepressin).

CONCLUSIONS

Norepinephrine is first choice followed by vasopressin or epinephrine. Angiotensin II and dopamine have limited indications. In future, predictive biomarkers may guide vasopressor selection and novel vasopressors may emerge.

Use of High-Dose Hydroxocobalamin for Septic Shock: A Case Report

In this case report, we describe 2 patients with septic shock requiring high-dose vasopressors for hemodynamic support despite aggressive fluid resuscitation. After the administration of high-dose hydroxocobalamin for presumed septic vasoplegic syndrome, both patients had an immediate response to hydroxocobalamin with a rapid and lasting improvement of blood pressure that significantly reduced the need for vasopressor support.