Comparison of dobutamine and levosimendan for treatment of sepsis-induced cardiac dysfunction: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Therapeutic Dilemmas in Mixed Septic-Cardiogenic Shock

Sepsis is an increasing cause of decompensation in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Sepsis and decompensated heart failure results in a mixed septic-cardiogenic shock that poses several therapeutic dilemmas: Rapid fluid resuscitation is the cornerstone of sepsis management, while loop diuretics are the main stay of decompensated heart failure treatment. Whether inotropic therapy with dobutamine or inodilators improves microvascular alterations remains unsettled in sepsis. When to resume loop diuretic therapy in patients with sepsis and decompensated heart failure is unclear. In the absence of relevant guidelines, we review vasopressor therapy, the timing and volume of fluid resuscitation, and the need for inotropic therapy in patients who, with sepsis and decompensated heart failure, present with a mixed septic-cardiogenic shock.

Early administration of dobutamine in the treatment of septic shock patients with tumor-a retrospective comparative cohort study

Background

Studies have found that dobutamine may be beneficial to protect organs function in patients with septic shock, but there is still a lack of relevant research in septic shock patients with tumor. The study sought to explore the role of the early administration of dobutamine in the treatment of septic shock patients with tumors.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the data of tumor patients who developed septic shock at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between June 2008 and November 2021. All the patients were divided into the following 3 groups: (I) the early administration group (<3 days, n=15); (II) the late administration group (≥3 days, n=22); and (III) the non-administration group (n=85). The primary observation indicator was 28-day mortality, and the secondary observation indicators included the shock reversal rate, the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and the duration of mechanical ventilation. There was no statistical difference in the basic data of the three groups.

Results

The early administration group had a significant decrease in 28-day mortality compared to the late and non-administration groups (log-rank P=0.018). The comparison between the groups showed that the 28-day mortality of the early administration group was significantly lower than that of the non-administration group [20.0% vs. 58.8%, P=0.013, hazard ratios (HRs) =0.248, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.077-0.796]. There was no statistically significant difference in 28-day mortality between the late administration group and the non-administration group (63.6% vs. 58.8%, P=0.682, HR =0.983, 95% CI: 0.543-1.778). Additionally, the early administration group had a significantly increased shock reversal rate (P=0.014), shortened length of stay in the ICU (P<0.001), and reduced duration of mechanical ventilation (P=0.049).

Conclusions

Early use of dobutamine may be beneficial to reduce the in-hospital mortality of septic shock patients with tumor, but the sample size of this study was small, which still needs to be confirmed by a multi-center randomized controlled clinical study.