Is restrictive fluid resuscitation beneficial not only for hemorrhagic shock but also for septic shock?: A meta-analysis

[Risk factors for acute respiratory distress syndrome in patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk factors of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) after traumatic hemorrhagic shock.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 314 patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock at Trauma Medicine Center, Peking University People's Hospital from December 2012 to August 2021, including 152 male patients and 162 female patients, with a median age of 63.00 (49.75-82.00) years. The demographic data, past medical history, injury assessment, vital signs, laboratory examination and other indicators of these patients during hospitalization were recorded. These patients were divided into two groups, ARDS group (n=89) and non-ARDS group (n=225) according to whether there was ARDS within 7 d of admission. Risk factors for ARDS were identified using Logistic regression. The C-statistic expressed as a percentage [area under curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve] was used to assess the discrimination of the model.

RESULTS

The incidence of ARDS after traumatic hemorrhagic shock was 28.34%. Finally, Logistic regression model showed that the independent risk factors of ARDS after traumatic hemorrhagic shock included male, history of coronary heart disease, high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ) score, road traffic accident and elevated troponin Ⅰ. The OR and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were 4.01 (95%CI: 1.75-9.20), 5.22 (95%CI: 1.29-21.08), 1.07 (95%CI: 1.02-1.57), 2.53 (95%CI: 1.21-5.28), and 1.26 (95%CI: 1.02-1.57), respectively; the P values were 0.001, 0.020, 0.009, 0.014, and 0.034, respectively. The ROC curve was used to analyze the value of each risk factor in predicting ARDS. It was found that the AUC for predicting ARDS after traumatic hemorrhagic shock was 0.59 (95%CI: 0.51-0.68) for male, 0.55 (95%CI: 0.46-0.64) for history of coronary heart disease, 0.65 (95%CI: 0.57-0.73) for APACHE Ⅱ score, 0.58 (95%CI: 0.50-0.67) for road traffic accident, and 0.73 (95%CI: 0.66-0.80) for elevated troponin Ⅰ, with an overall predictive value of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.74-0.88).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of ARDS in patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock is high, and male, history of coronary heart disease, high APACHE Ⅱ score, road traffic accident and elevated troponin Ⅰ are independent risk factors for ARDS after traumatic hemorrhagic shock. Timely monitoring these indicators is conducive to early detection and treatment of ARDS after traumatic hemorrhagic shock.

Effect of restrictive fluid resuscitation on the coagulation function and hemodynamic parameters in patients with hemorrhagic traumatic shock

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the changes in the coagulation function and hemodynamic parameters in patients with Hemorrhagic Traumatic Shock (HTS) after restrictive fluid resuscitation.

METHODS

A total of 139 patients with HTS admitted to our hospital were enrolled, among which 69 HTS patients were divided into the control group and the remaining 70 HTS patients as the observation group. Patients in the control group underwent regular fluid resuscitation, while those in the observation group underwent restrictive fluid resuscitation.

RESULTS

During treatment, 70 patients in the observation group had a lower bleeding amount, infusion amount, and blood transfusion volume than those in the control group (p < 0.05). After treatment, patients in the observation group had better hemodynamic parameters and blood coagulation than those in the control group (p < 0.05), and the incidence rate in the observation group was only 12.9%, which was significantly lower than 60.87% in the control group, while the cure rate in the observation group was 100%, which was significantly higher than that in the control group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Restrictive fluid resuscitation could remarkably increase the cure rate and reduce the bleeding amount during HTS treatment, thereby benefiting the recovery of the patient's blood coagulation.

Effects of Different Crystalloid Fluids on Renal Tissue in an Experimental Model of Hemorrhagic Shock

Objective

The type of fluid that should be used in uncontrollable hemorrhages remains an area of research. This study was designed to compare the effects of resuscitation with Ringer's lactate (RL) solution versus a normal saline (NS) solution on hemodynamics, renal tissue histopathology, coagulation, and apoptosis in a rat model of hemorrhagic shock.

Methods

The study employed groups designated as the control, hemorrhage, NS, and RL groups. Heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and respiratory rate were monitored. Annexin A5 values were assayed, rotational thromboelastometry analysis was performed, and excised kidney tissue samples were histopathologically analyzed.

Results

Blood pressure levels were found to be significantly higher in the control group than those measured in the other groups. While the clotting time (CT) and clot formation time (CFT) in the hemorrhage group were significantly longer than those in the control and RL groups, the CT and CFT measured in the control group were significantly shorter compared to the RL group. The mean Annexin A5 level was in the hemorrhage group, which was significantly higher compared to the other groups. In the renal histopathological evaluation, the scores of proximal tubular injury, distal renal tubular injury, and interstitial renal tubular injury were found to be significantly lower in the control group compared to the other groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that NS or RL can be used safely to improve the hemodynamic symptoms resulting from hemorrhagic shock as a means to reduce apoptosis, and to decrease findings in favor of coagulopathy in bedside coagulation tests during the early stages of hemorrhagic shock until the time of starting a blood transfusion.

Restrictive resuscitation in patients with sepsis and mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Although fluid resuscitation is recommended by the Society of Critical Care Medicine Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines, risks of volume overload persist.The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effects of a restrictive fluid resuscitation approach in the septic patient both during and after the initial resuscitation period (30  ml/kg).

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomized controlled trials was conducted. Two blinded reviewers independently assessed and included studies that evaluated adult patients with sepsis involving a comparator group with an effective restrictive fluid resuscitation approach. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included rates of acute kidney injury (AKI), renal replacement therapy (RRT), ventilator days, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), duration of vasopressor therapy, and limb (or digital) ischemia.

SETTING

PubMed and Medline databases were queried for the search.

PATIENTS

A total of eight trials in 2375 patients were included.

INTERVENTION

Effective restrictive fluid resuscitation compared with standard of care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The risk of bias was high in six studies and low in two studies, and all studies implemented fluid restriction after a 30-ml/kg infusion of fluids. Fluid restriction did not significantly reduce mortality in all studies compared to usual care (37% vs. 40% with usual care; risk ratio [RR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-1.06, p = 0.23, I2  = 24%) or by TSA findings. There were no significant differences in rates of AKI or RRT (5 studies), LOS in ICU (4 studies) or hospital (3 studies), duration of vasopressor therapy (6 studies), or incidence of limb or digital ischemia (3 studies). However, fluid restriction significantly reduced ventilator days as evaluated in seven studies (mean difference - 1.25 days, 95% CI -1.92 to -0.58  days, p = 0.0003, I2  = 90%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that a restrictive resuscitation strategy in sepsis resulted in no difference in mortality but may reduce ventilator days. Larger randomized trials are required to determine the optimal management of fluids in patients with sepsis.

Effects of Different Types of Early Restrictive Fluid Resuscitation on Immune Function and Multiorgan Damage on Hemorrhagic Shock Rat Model in a Hypothermic Environment

Objective

This study was aimed at investigating the effects of different types of fluid restriction fluid resuscitation on the immune dysfunction and organ injury of hemorrhagic shock rats under a hypothermic environment.

Methods

SD rats were divided into sham operation group (SHAM), hemorrhagic shock model group (HS), crystal liquid limited resuscitation group (CRLLR), colloidal liquid limited resuscitation group (COLLR), and nonlimited resuscitation group (NLR); rats in each group were placed in a low-temperature environment of 0-5°C for 30 min, and then, a hemorrhagic shock rat model was prepared. Sodium lactate Ringer's restricted resuscitation solution, hydroxyethyl starch restricted resuscitation solution, and hydroxyethyl starch were used for resuscitation, and hemodynamic examination was performed. The mortality rate, inflammatory factors, oxidative stress factors, and immune function were detected by ELISA. The dysfunction and injury of the intestinal, lung, liver, and kidney were examined by histological methods.

Results

Hemorrhagic shock resulted in decreased immune function and activation of inflammation. Unrestricted fluid infusion further activated the inflammatory response. The crystalloid-restricted fluid infusion performed effectively to regulate inflammatory response, promote antioxidative activity, and reduce the immunosuppressive reaction. Rehydration could regulate the coagulation. The hydroxyethyl starch reduced the expression of platelet glycoproteins Ib and IIb/IIIa and blocked the binding of fibrinogen to activated platelets, thereby inhibiting intrinsic coagulation and platelet adhesion and aggregation. Rats in the CRLLR group showed to relieve the injury of the lung, liver, kidney, and intestine from hemorrhagic shock in low-temperature environment.

Conclusion

The early application of restrictive crystalloid resuscitation in hemorrhagic shock rats in hypothermic environment showed the best therapy results. Early LR-restrictive fluid replacement promotes the balance of inflammatory response and the recovery of immunosuppressive state, resists oxidative stress, stabilizes the balance of coagulation and fibrinolysis, improves coagulation function, and relieves organ injury.

Non-Invasive Dynamic Reperfusion of Microvessels In Vivo Controlled by Optical Tweezers

Distributive shock is considered to be a condition of microvascular hypoperfusion, which can be fatal in severe cases. However, traditional therapeutic methods to restore the macro blood flow are difficult to accurately control the blood perfusion of microvessels, and the currently developed manipulation techniques are inevitably incompatible with biological systems. In our approach, infrared optical tweezers are used to dynamically control the microvascular reperfusion within subdermal capillaries in the pinna of mice. Furthermore, we estimate the effect of different optical trap positions on reperfusion at branch and investigate the effect of the laser power on reperfusion. The results demonstrate the ability of optical tweezers to control microvascular reperfusion. This strategy allows near-noninvasive reperfusion of the microvascular hypoperfusion in vivo. Hence, our work is expected to provide unprecedented insights into the treatment of distributive shock.

A Multicentric, Randomized, Controlled Phase III Study of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin®) as a Resuscitative Agent in Hypovolemic Shock Patients

Introduction

Centhaquine (Lyfaquin^®) showed significant safety and efficacy in preclinical and clinical phase I and II studies.

Methods

A prospective, multicentric, randomized phase III study was conducted in patients with hypovolemic shock, systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≤ 90 mmHg, and blood lactate levels ≥ 2 mmol/L. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to the centhaquine group (n = 71) or the control (saline) group (n = 34). Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. The study drug (normal saline or centhaquine 0.01 mg/kg) was administered in 100 mL of normal saline infusion over 1 h. The primary objectives were to determine changes (mean through 48 h) in SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), blood lactate levels, and base deficit. The secondary objectives included the amount of fluids, blood products, and vasopressors administered in the first 48 h, duration of hospital stay, time in intensive care units, time on ventilator support, change in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), and the proportion of patients with 28-day all-cause mortality.

Results

The demographics of patients and baseline vitals in both groups were comparable. The cause of hypovolemic shock was trauma in 29.4 and 47.1% of control group and centhaquine group patients, respectively, and gastroenteritis in 44.1 and 29.4%, respectively. Shock index (SI) and quick sequential organ failure assessment at baseline were similar in the two groups. An equal amount of fluids and blood products were administered in both groups during the first 48 h of resuscitation. A lesser amount of vasopressors was needed in the first 48 h of resuscitation in the centhaquine group. An increase in SBP from baseline was consistently higher up to 48 h (12.9% increase in area under the curve from 0 to 48 h [AUC_0–48]) in the centhaquine group than in the control group. A significant increase in pulse pressure (48.1% increase in AUC_0–48) in the centhaquine group compared with the control group suggests improved stroke volume due to centhaquine. The SI was significantly lower in the centhaquine group from 1 h (p = 0.032) to 4 h (p = 0.049) of resuscitation. Resuscitation with centhaquine resulted in a significantly greater number of patients with improved blood lactate (control 46.9%; centhaquine 69.3%; p = 0.03) and the base deficit (control 43.7%; centhaquine 69.8%; p = 0.01) than in the control group. ARDS and MODS improved with centhaquine, and an 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group.

Conclusion

Centhaquine is an efficacious resuscitative agent for treating hypovolemic shock. The efficacy of centhaquine in distributive shock is being explored.

Trial Registration

Clinical Trials Registry, India; ctri.icmr.org.in, CTRI/2019/01/017196; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04045327.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40265-021-01547-5.

A multicentric, randomized, controlled phase III study of centhaquine (Lyfaquin ® ) as a resuscitative agent in hypovolemic shock patients

INTRODUCTION

Centhaquine (Lyfaquin ^® ) showed significant safety and efficacy in preclinical and clinical phase I and II studies.

METHODS

A prospective, multicentric, randomized phase III study was conducted in patients with hypovolemic shock having systolic blood pressure (SBP) of ≤90 mm Hg and blood lactate levels of ≥2 mmol/L. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio, 71 patients to the centhaquine group and 34 patients to the control (saline) group. Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. The study drug (normal saline or centhaquine (0.01 mg/kg)) was administered in 100 mL of normal saline infusion over 1 hour. The primary objectives were to determine changes (mean through 48 hours) in SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), blood lactate levels, and base deficit. The secondary objectives included the amount of fluids, blood products, vasopressors administered in the first 48 hours, duration of hospital stay, time in ICU, time on the ventilator support, change in patient's Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS) scores, and the proportion of patients with 28-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The demographics of patients and baseline vitals in both groups were comparable. Trauma was the cause of hypovolemic shock in 29.41% of control and 47.06% of centhaquine, gastroenteritis in 44.12% of control, and 29.41% of centhaquine patients. An equal amount of fluids and blood products were administered in both groups during the first 48 hours of resuscitation. A lesser amount of vasopressors was needed in the first 48 hours of resuscitation in the centhaquine group. An increase in SBP from the baseline was consistently higher in the centhaquine group than in the control. A significant increase in pulse pressure in the centhaquine group than the control group suggests improved stroke volume due to centhaquine. The shock index was significantly lower in the centhaquine group than control from 1 hour (p=0.0320) till 4 hours (p=0.0494) of resuscitation. Resuscitation with centhaquine had a significantly greater number of patients with improved blood lactate and the base deficit than the control group. ARDS and MODS improved with centhaquine, and an 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group.

CONCLUSION

Centhaquine is a highly efficacious resuscitative agent for treating hypovolemic shock. The efficacy of centhaquine in distributive shock due to sepsis and COVID-19 is being explored.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Registry, India; ctri.icmr.org.in, CTRI/2019/01/017196; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04045327 .

KEY SUMMARY POINTS

A multicentric, randomized, controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of centhaquine in hypovolemic shock patients.One hundred and five patients were randomized 2:1 to receive centhaquine or saline. Centhaquine was administered at a dose of 0.01 mg/kg in 100 mL saline and infused over 1 hour. The control group received 100 mL of saline over a 1-hour infusion.Centhaquine improved blood pressure, shock index, reduced blood lactate levels, and improved base deficit. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS) score improved with centhaquine.An 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group. There were no drug-related adverse events in the study.