Clinical trials comparing norepinephrine with vasopressin in patients with septic shock: a meta-analysis

Pushing the frontiers of military medical excellence: updates, progress and future needs

Since its establishment in 2014, Military Medical Research has come a long way in becoming a premier journal for scientific articles from various different specialties, with a special emphasis on topics with military relevance. The field of military medicine may be obscure, and may not be readily encountered by the typical clinician on a day-to-day basis. This journal aims not only to pursue excellence in military research, but also keep current with the latest advancements on general medical topics from each and every specialty. This editorial serves to recap and synthesize the existing progress, updates and future needs of military medical excellence, discussing foremostly the unique traits of literature published in this journal, and subsequently presenting the discourse regarding wartime and peacetime medicine, the role of the military in a public health emergency, as well as wound healing and organ regeneration. Special attention have been devoted to military topics to shed light on the effects of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Explosive (CBRE) warfare, environmental medicine and military psychiatry, topics which rarely have a chance to be discussed elsewhere. The interconnectedness between military combat and soldier physical and mental well-being is intricate, and has been distorted by pandemics such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This journal has come a long way since its first article was published, steadily contributing to the existing knowledge pool on general medical topics with a military slant. Only with continuous research and sharing, can we build upon the work of the scientific community, with hopes for the betterment of patient care.

Vasopressin versus norepinephrine as the first-line vasopressor in septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aim

Norepinephrine is currently the first-line vasopressor for septic shock. We conducted this meta-analysis to examine the outcomes of adult patients with septic shock who received vasopressin instead of norepinephrine.

Methods

We selected studies in adults with septic shock that compared the outcomes of patients treated with vasopressin versus norepinephrine. Cochrane ROB 2.0 and the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tools were used to assess the risk of bias in RCTs and observational studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.

Results

Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in 28-day mortality rates (OR, 1.07; CI, 0.80-1.44) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (OR, 0.74; CI, 0.21-2.67) between the two groups. Similarly, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, mean arterial pressure at 24 h, urine output at 24 h, and serious adverse events also did not differ significantly. However, the odds of renal replacement therapy (RRT) requirement in the vasopressin group were substantially lower than in the norepinephrine group (OR, 0.68; CI, 0.47-0.98).

Conclusion

There were no differences in mortality, duration of hospitalization, and adverse effects in adults with septic shock across the two groups. However, the patients treated with vasopressin had lower chances of requiring RRT.

Relevance for Patients

Vasopressin use as the first-line vasopressor in septic shock showed a significant reduction in RRT, though there were no significant differences in terms of mortality and other adverse events. Therefore, vasopressin can be considered as a first-line vasopressor in septic shock patients with other risk factors which may contribute to renal failure requiring RRT.

Non-catecholamine vasopressors in the treatment of adult patients with septic shock-evidence from meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Norepinephrine (NE) has currently been the first-choice vasopressor in treating septic shock despite generally insufficient for patients with refractory septic shock. The aim of this update meta-analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy of a combination of non-catecholamine vasopressors (vasopressin/pituitrin/terlipressin/selepressin/angiotensin II) and NE versus NE in managing adult septic shock patients.

METHODS

We conducted this study of literatures published from the inception to April 30, 2020, using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials comparing NE with non-catecholamine vasopressors among adult septic shock patients were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled effects of relative risk (RR) or standard mean difference (SMD) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies covering 4380 participants were finally enrolled. The combined analysis of non-catecholamine vasopressors resulted in a nonsignificant reduction in 90-day/ICU/hospital mortality except for a decreased in 28-day mortality (n = 4217; RR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.86-0.99; P = 0.02). This favorable result was subsequently verified by the subgroup analyses of low risk of bias studies (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.98; P = 0.02) and catecholamine-resistant refractory shock patients group (RR, 0.84; 95% CI = 0.70-1.00; P = 0.048). The pooled analysis of non-catecholamine vasopressors showed a 14% higher success rate of shock reversal at 6 h, a 29% decreased risk of continuous renal replacement therapy, but a 51% increased risk of hyponatremia and a 2.43 times higher risk of digital ischemia. Besides, the pooled data showed that non-catecholamine vasopressors decreased heart rate (HR) (SMD, - 0.43; 95% CI - 0.66 - - 0.19; P < 0.001), serum creatinine (- 0.15; 95% CI - 0.29 - - 0.01; P = 0.04), and the length of mechanical ventilation (MV) (- 0.19; 95% CI - 0.31 - - 0.07; P < 0.01, but there was no significant difference in other parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Current pooled results suggest that the addition of NE to non-catecholamine vasopressors was associated with a marginally significant reduction in 28-day mortality. Moreover, they were able to shorten the length of MV, improved renal function, decreased HR, and increased the 6-h shock reversal success rate at the expense of increased the risk of hyponatremia and digital ischemia.

Vasoactive agents for the treatment of sepsis

The article describes some commonly used vasoactive agents in patients with septic shock. Depending on their distinct pharmacological properties, their effects on vascular bed and cardiac function are different. For example, dopamine has equivalent effect on heart and vasculature, which can result in increases in cardiac output, mean arterial pressure and heart rate. Dobutamine is considered as inodilator because it has potent effect on cardiac systole and vasculature. Patients with sepsis and septic shock sometimes have coexisting cardiac dysfunction that justifies the use of dobutamine. Levosimendan is a relatively new agent exerting its inodilator effect by increasing sensitivity of myocardium to calcium. Some preliminary studies showed a promising result of levosimendan on reducing mortality.

Clinical efficacy of Xinkeshu Pian on coronary heart disease and mood disorder complications after PCI

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of combining Xinkeshu tablet treatment with routine Western medicine treatment for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and mood disorders after PCI postoperative period.

METHOD

100 patients were randomly divided into treatment group of 50 cases, and control group of 50 cases. The control group was given routine Western medical treatment, whereas the treatment group was given routine Western medical treatment in combination with Xinkeshu tablets. Eight weeks after treatment, the patients underwent SF-36 life quality evaluation, self-rating depression scale (SDS) evaluation, and self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) evaluation.

RESULT

After the eight-week treatment, the SF-36 life quality scores, SAS scores, SDS score, as well as the reduction in heart creatinine levels of the two groups were compared. The results show statistical significance (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Xinkeshu can effectively address the PCI postoperative mood disorders in patients with coronary heart disease and improve the quality of life.