Restrictive fluids versus standard care in adults with sepsis in the emergency department (REFACED): A multicenter, randomized feasibility trial

Managing sepsis and septic shock in an endothelial glycocalyx-friendly way: from the viewpoint of surviving sepsis campaign guidelines

Maintaining tissue perfusion in sepsis depends on vascular integrity provided by the endothelial glycocalyx, the critical layer covering the luminal surface of blood vessels. The glycocalyx is composed of proteoglycans, glycosaminoglycans, and functional plasma proteins that are critical for antithrombogenicity, regulating tone, controlling permeability, and reducing endothelial interactions with leukocytes and platelets. Degradation of the glycocalyx in sepsis is substantial due to thromboinflammation, and treatments for sepsis and septic shock may exacerbate endotheliopathy via additional glycocalyx injury. As a result, therapeutic strategies aimed at preserving glycocalyx integrity should be considered, including modifications in fluid volume resuscitation, minimizing catecholamine use, controlling hyperglycemia, and potential use of corticosteroids and anticoagulants. In this review, we explore treatment strategies aligned with the recommendations outlined in the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2021 with a special emphasis on evidence regarding glycocalyx protection.

Geo-economic Influence on the Effect of Fluid Volume for Sepsis Resuscitation: A Meta-Analysis

Rationale: Sepsis management relies on fluid resuscitation avoiding fluid overload and its related organ congestion. Objectives: To explore the influence of country income group on risk-benefit balance of fluid management strategies in sepsis. Methods: We searched e-databases for all randomized controlled trials on fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis or septic shock up to January 2023, excluding studies on hypertonic fluids, colloids, and depletion-based interventions. The effect of fluid strategies (higher versus lower volumes) on mortality was analyzed per income group (i.e., low- and middle-income countries [LMICs] or high-income countries [HICs]). Measurements and Main Results: Twenty-nine studies (11,798 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. There was a numerically higher mortality in studies of LMICs as compared with those of HICs: median, 37% (interquartile range [IQR]: 26-41) versus 29% (IQR: 17-38; P = 0.06). Income group significantly interacted with the effect of fluid volume on mortality: Higher fluid volume was associated with higher mortality in LMICs but not in HICs: odds ratio (OR), 1.47; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.14-1.90 versus 1.00 (95% CI: 0.87-1.16), P = 0.01 for subgroup differences. Higher fluid volume was associated with increased need for mechanical ventilation in LMICs (OR, 1.24 [95% CI: 1.08-1.43]) but not in HICs (OR, 1.02 [95% CI: 0.80-1.29]). Self-reported access to mechanical ventilation also significantly influenced the effect of fluid volume on mortality, which increased with higher volumes only in settings with limited access to mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.09-1.93] vs. 1.09 [95% CI: 0.93-1.28], P = 0.02 for subgroup differences). Conclusions: In sepsis trials, the effect of fluid resuscitation approach differed by setting, with higher volume of fluid resuscitation associated with increased mortality in LMICs and in settings with restricted access to mechanical ventilation. The precise reason for these differences is unclear and may be attributable in part to resource constraints, participant variation between trials, or other unmeasured factors.

The association between increasing fluid balance, acute kidney injury and mortality in patients with sepsis and septic shock: A retrospective single center audit

PURPOSE

To determine whether a positive fluid balance is associated with AKI and mortality in sepsis and septic shock patients.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 482 patients treated for sepsis or septic shock. Patients were stratified according to quartiles of cumulative fluid balance on days 1 and 3. Logistic models were built to explore the association between fluid balance, AKI, and ICU mortality.

RESULTS

During the first days of ICU admission, fluid input did not differ between survivors and non-survivors, yet a significant difference in output resulted in a more positive fluid balance in non-survivors on day 1 (37.24 ± 31.98 ml/kg vs. 24.97 ± 23.76 ml/kg, p < 0.001) and day 3 (83.33 ± 70.86 ml/kg vs. 62.20 ± 45.90 ml/kg, P = 0.005). Using a logistic regression model, a positive fluid balance on day three was independently associated with higher ICU mortality (odds ratio 1.007 for every one ml/kg, P = 0038) and AKIN stage III (odds ratio 1.006 for every one ml/kg, p = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

In patients with sepsis and septic shock, a more positive fluid balance is associated with an increased incidence of acute kidney injury and death after correction for possible confounders.

Precision fluid and vasoactive drug therapy for critically ill patients

There are several clinical practice guidelines concerning the use of fluid and vasoactive drug therapies in critically ill adult patients, but the recommendations in these guidelines are often based on low-quality evidence. Further, some were compiled prior to the publication of landmark clinical trials, particularly in the comparison of balanced crystalloid and normal saline. An important consideration in the treatment of critically ill patients is the application of precision medicine to provide the most effective care to groups of patients most likely to benefit from the therapy. Although not currently widely integrated into these practice guidelines, the utility of precision medicine in critical illness is a recognized research priority for fluid and vasoactive therapy management. The purpose of this narrative review was to illustrate the evaluation and challenges of providing precision fluid and vasoactive therapies to adult critically ill patients. The review includes a discussion of important investigations published after the release of currently available clinical practice guidelines to provide insight into how recommendations and research priorities may change future guidelines and bedside care for critically ill patients.

Lower vs Higher Fluid Volumes in Adult Patients With Sepsis: An Updated Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

IV fluids are recommended for adults with sepsis. However, the optimal strategy for IV fluid management in sepsis is unknown, and clinical equipoise exists.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do lower vs higher fluid volumes improve patient-important outcomes in adult patients with sepsis?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We updated a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials assessing lower vs higher IV fluid volumes in adult patients with sepsis. The coprimary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. We followed the recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Primary conclusions were based on trials with low risk of bias if available.

RESULTS

We included 13 trials (N = 4,006) with four trials (n = 3,385) added to this update. The meta-analysis of all-cause mortality in eight trials with low risk of bias showed a relative risk of 0.99 (97% CI, 0.89-1.10; moderate certainty evidence). Six trials with predefined definitions of serious adverse events showed a relative risk of 0.95 (97% CI, 0.83-1.07; low certainty evidence). Health-related quality of life was not reported.

INTERPRETATION

Among adult patients with sepsis, lower IV fluid volumes probably result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality compared with higher IV fluid volumes, but the interpretation is limited by imprecision in the estimate, which does not exclude potential benefit or harm. Similarly, the evidence suggests lower IV fluid volumes result in little to no difference in serious adverse events. No trials reported on health-related quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO; No.: CRD42022312572; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

The Effects of Restrictive Fluid Resuscitation on the Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Sepsis or Septic Shock: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized-Controlled Trials

This study aims to assess the impact of a restrictive resuscitation strategy on the outcomes of patients with sepsis and septic shock. This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the recommendations from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A systematic search was performed in databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, covering the period from the inception of the database to August 2023, with no limitations on the language of publication. Outcomes assessed in the meta-analysis included mortality, duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay in days, duration of mechanical ventilation in days, acute kidney injury (AKI) or the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), and length of hospital stay in days. Overall, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the present meta-analysis. The findings of this study indicate that although the risk of mortality was lower in fluid restriction compared to the control group, the difference was statistically insignificant (risk ratio (RR): 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.9-1.05; P value: 0.61). Additionally, the duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly shorter in the restrictive fluid group compared to its counterparts (mean difference (MD): -1.02; 95% CI: -1.65 to -0.38; P value: 0.003). There were no significant differences found in relation to the duration of ICU stays, the incidence of AKI, the requirement for RRT, or the length of hospital stays measured in days.

Fluid Resuscitation in Septic Patients

Sepsis is a life-threatening organ failure caused by a dysregulated response to infection. Fluid resuscitation and vasopressors are used to maintain systolic blood pressure and organ perfusion. Fluid resuscitation can be done with liberal or restricted fluids as well as colloids or crystalloid fluids. This review analyses the evidence for the use of liberal or restrictive fluids and colloids or crystalloids for the management of sepsis. A methodical search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines were followed for this study. Randomized controlled trials and retrospective observational studies were included in this study. Liberal and restrictive fluid strategies were found to be comparable in efficacy, but restrictive fluid regimens had the added benefit of a lower incidence of fluid overload. Balanced crystalloids were safer and more effective when compared to normal saline. Albumin replacement was found to be safe and showed efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with sepsis and septic shock.

Evolving Management Practices for Early Sepsis-induced Hypoperfusion: A Narrative Review

Sepsis causes significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Resuscitation is a cornerstone of management. This review covers five areas of evolving practice in the management of early sepsis-induced hypoperfusion: fluid resuscitation volume, timing of vasopressor initiation, resuscitation targets, route of vasopressor administration, and use of invasive blood pressure monitoring. For each topic, we review the seminal evidence, discuss the evolution of practice over time, and highlight questions for additional research. Intravenous fluids are a core component of early sepsis resuscitation. However, with growing concerns about the harms of fluid, practice is evolving toward smaller-volume resuscitation, which is often paired with earlier vasopressor initiation. Large trials of fluid-restrictive, vasopressor-early strategies are providing more information about the safety and potential benefit of these approaches. Lowering blood pressure targets is a means to prevent fluid overload and reduce exposure to vasopressors; mean arterial pressure targets of 60-65 mm Hg appear to be safe, at least in older patients. With the trend toward earlier vasopressor initiation, the need for central administration of vasopressors has been questioned, and peripheral vasopressor use is increasing, although it is not universally accepted. Similarly, although guidelines suggest the use of invasive blood pressure monitoring with arterial catheters in patients receiving vasopressors, blood pressure cuffs are less invasive and often sufficient. Overall, the management of early sepsis-induced hypoperfusion is evolving toward fluid-sparing and less-invasive strategies. However, many questions remain, and additional data are needed to further optimize our approach to resuscitation.

Challenges With Using a Weight-Based Approach to Bolus Fluid Dosing in Obese Critically Ill Patients

At least 30 mL/kg of crystalloid fluid administration within the first 3 hours of resuscitation is suggested by the current Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock. This commentary discusses the challenges with using a weight-based approach to bolus fluid dosing during the early phase of resuscitation of adult, obese patients. Based on the available literature, arguments can be made for the use of either ideal or adjusted body weight for weight-based fluid dosing, but there are concerns with fluid overload if using actual body weight to dose patients with more severe forms of obesity.