Current use of vasopressors in septic shock

Emergency medicine updates: Management of sepsis and septic shock

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis is a common condition associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Emergency physicians play a key role in the diagnosis and management of this condition.

OBJECTIVE

This paper evaluates key evidence-based updates concerning the management of sepsis and septic shock for the emergency clinician.

DISCUSSION

Sepsis is a life-threatening syndrome, and rapid diagnosis and management are essential. Antimicrobials should be administered as soon as possible, as delays are associated with increased mortality. Resuscitation targets include mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mmHg, mental status, capillary refill time, lactate, and urine output. Intravenous fluid resuscitation plays an integral role in those who are fluid responsive. Balanced crystalloids and normal saline are both reasonable options for resuscitation. Early vasopressors should be initiated in those who are not fluid-responsive. Norepinephrine is the recommended first-line vasopressor, and if hypotension persists, vasopressin should be considered, followed by epinephrine. Administration of vasopressors through a peripheral 20-gauge or larger intravenous line is safe and effective. Steroids such as hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone should be considered in those with refractory septic shock.

CONCLUSION

An understanding of the recent updates in the literature concerning sepsis and septic shock can assist emergency clinicians and improve the care of these patients.

Oral blood pressure augmenting agents for intravenous vasopressor weaning

Intravenous (IV) vasopressors are essential in the management of hypotension and shock. Initiation of oral vasoactive agents to facilitate weaning of IV vasopressors to liberate patients from the intensive care unit is common despite conflicting evidence regarding the benefits of this practice. While midodrine appears to be the most frequently studied oral vasoactive agent for this purpose, its adverse effect profile may preclude its use in certain populations. In addition, some patients may require persistent use of IV vasopressors for hypotension refractory to midodrine. The use of additional and alternative oral vasoactive agents bearing different mechanisms of action is emerging. This article provides a comprehensive review of the pharmacology, clinical uses, dosing strategies, and safety considerations of oral vasoactive agents and their application in the intensive care setting.

Influence of underlying condition and performance of sepsis bundle in very old patients with sepsis: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition that affects individuals of all ages; however, it presents unique challenges in very old patients due to their complex medical histories and potentially compromised immune systems. This study aimed to investigate the influence of underlying conditions and the performance of sepsis bundle protocols in very old patients with sepsis.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide cohort study of adult patients with sepsis prospectively collected from the Korean Sepsis Alliance Database. Underlying conditions, prognosis, and their association with sepsis bundle compliance in patients with sepsis aged ≥ 80 years were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 11,981 patients with sepsis, 3,733 (31.2%) were very old patients aged ≥ 80 years. In-hospital survivors (69.8%) were younger, less likely male, with higher BMI, lower Charlson Comorbidity Index, lower Clinical Frailty Scale, and lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores. The in-hospital survivor group had lower lactate measurement but higher fluid therapy and vasopressor usage within the 1-h bundle. Similar trends were seen in the 3-h and 6-h bundles. Furthermore, in-hospital survivors were more likely to receive appropriate empiric antibiotics within 24 h. In-hospital mortality was associated with age, Clinical Frailty Scale, SOFA score, comorbidities, Life sustaining treatment issue, interventions in the ICU and vasopressor use in the 1-h sepsis bundle.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing underlying conditions and enhancing sepsis bundle adherence is crucial for better outcomes in very old patients with sepsis. Personalized approaches and increased awareness are essential. Further research should explore interventions to optimize sepsis care in this population.

Timing of adjunctive vasopressin initiation for septic shock patients and hospital mortality: A multicentre observational study

Objective

The optimal timing of vasopressin initiation as an adjunctive vasopressor remains unclear. We aimed to study the association between the timing of vasopressin commencement, pre-specified physiological parameters, and hospital mortality.

Design

We conducted a multicentre, retrospective, observational study.

Setting

Twelve ICUs in Queensland, Australia between January 2015 and December 2021.

Participants

Adult patients with septic shock who received vasopressin as an adjunctive vasopressor within 72 hours of ICU admission.

Main Outcome

Hospital mortality.

Results

Overall, 2747 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 1850 (67%) started vasopressin within six hours of vasopressor therapy start, while 897 (33%) started vasopressin between six hours and 72 hours. APACHE III score, peak lactate, and creatinine were higher in the early start group. Early vasopressin start was independently associated with decreased hospital mortality (aOR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.57-0.83). Vasopressin infusion start was also associated with an immediate decrease in the noradrenaline-equivalent dose regardless of timing. There was a statistically significant favourable breakpoint at vasopressin start for the course of arterial pH, lactate, heart rate and crystalloid infusion rate (p<0.001).

Conclusions

In patients with septic shock, early adjunctive vasopressin initiation was independently associated with lower hospital mortality. Vasopressin starting at any time was also associated with reduced tachycardia, acidosis, and hyperlactatemia.

Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Their Extracellular Vesicles Are a Promising Alternative to Antibiotics for Treating Sepsis

Sepsis is a life-threatening disease caused by the overwhelming response to pathogen infections. Currently, treatment options for sepsis are limited to broad-spectrum antibiotics and supportive care. However, the growing resistance of pathogens to common antibiotics complicates treatment efforts. Excessive immune response (i.e., cytokine storm) can persist even after the infection is cleared. This overactive inflammatory response can severely damage multiple organ systems. Given these challenges, managing the excessive immune response is critical in controlling sepsis progression. Therefore, Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), with their immunomodulatory and antibacterial properties, have emerged as a promising option for adjunctive therapy in treating sepsis. Moreover, MSCs exhibit a favorable safety profile, as they are eventually eliminated by the host's immune system within several months post-administration, resulting in minimal side effects and have not been linked to common antibiotic therapy drawbacks (i.e., antibiotic resistance). This review explores the potential of MSCs as a personalized therapy for sepsis treatment, clarifying their mechanisms of action and providing up-to-date technological advancements to enhance their protective efficacy for patients suffering from sepsis and its consequences.

Moderate IV Fluid Resuscitation Is Associated With Decreased Sepsis Mortality

OBJECTIVES

Significant practice variation exists in the amount of resuscitative IV fluid given to patients with sepsis. Current research suggests equipoise between a tightly restrictive or more liberal strategy but data is lacking on a wider range of resuscitation practices. We sought to examine the relationship between a wide range of fluid resuscitation practices and sepsis mortality and then identify the primary driver of this practice variation.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of the Premier Healthcare Database.

SETTING

Six hundred twelve U.S. hospitals.

PATIENTS

Patients with sepsis and septic shock admitted from the emergency department to the ICU from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

The volume of resuscitative IV fluid administered before the end of hospital day- 1 and mortality.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In total, 190,682 patients with sepsis and septic shock were included in the analysis. Based upon patient characteristics and illness severity, we predicted that physicians should prescribe patients with sepsis a narrow mean range of IV fluid (95% range, 3.6-4.5 L). Instead, we observed wide variation in the mean IV fluids administered (95% range, 1.7-7.4 L). After splitting the patients into five groups based upon attending physician practice, we observed patients in the moderate group (4.0 L; interquartile range [IQR], 2.4-5.1 L) experienced a 2.5% reduction in risk-adjusted mortality compared with either the very low (1.6 L; IQR, 1.0-2.5 L) or very high (6.1 L; IQR, 4.0-9.0 L) fluid groups p < 0.01). An analysis of within- and between-hospital IV fluid resuscitation practices showed that physician variation within hospitals instead of practice differences between hospitals accounts for the observed variation.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual physician practice drives excess variation in the amount of IV fluid given to patients with sepsis. A moderate approach to IV fluid resuscitation is associated with decreased sepsis mortality and should be tested in future randomized controlled trials.

Noradrenaline dose cutoffs to characterise the severity of cardiovascular failure: Data-based development and external validation

BACKGROUND

The vasopressor dose needed is a common measure to assess the severity of cardiovascular failure, but there is no consensus on the ranges of vasopressor doses determining different levels of cardiovascular support. We aimed to identify cutoffs for determining low, intermediate and high doses of noradrenaline (norepinephrine), the primary vasopressor used in intensive care, based on association with hospital mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a binational registry study to determine cutoffs between low, intermediate and high noradrenaline doses. We required the cutoffs to be statistically rational and practical (rounded to the first decimal and easy to remember), and to result in increasing mortality with increasing doses. The highest noradrenaline dose in the first 24 h after intensive care unit (ICU) admission was used. The cutoffs were developed using data from 8079 ICU patients treated in the ICU at Kuopio University Hospital, Finland, between 2013 and 2019. Subsequently, the cutoffs were validated in the eICU database, including 39,007 ICU admissions to 29 ICUs in the United States of America in 2014-2015. The log-rank statistic, with the Contal and O'Quigley method, was used to determine the cutoffs resulting in the most significant split between the noradrenaline dose groups with regard to hospital mortality.

RESULTS

The two most prominent peaks in the log-rank statistic corresponded to noradrenaline doses 0.20 and 0.44 μg/kg/min. Accordingly, we determined three dose ranges: low (<0.2 μg/kg/min), intermediate (0.2-0.4 μg/kg/min) and high (>0.4 μg/kg/min). Mortality increased, whereas the number of patients decreased consistently with increasing noradrenaline doses in both cohorts. In the development cohort, hospital mortality was 6.5% in the group without noradrenaline administered and 14.0%, 26.4% and 40.2%, respectively, in the low-dose, intermediate-dose and high-dose groups. Compared to patients who received no noradrenaline, the hazard ratio for in-hospital death was 1.4 for the low-dose group, 4.0 for the intermediate-dose group and 7.5 for the high-dose group in the validation cohort (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The highest noradrenaline dose is a useful measure for quantifying circulatory failure. Cutoffs 0.2 and 0.4 μg/kg/min seem to be suitable for defining low, intermediate and high doses.

Association between average mean arterial pressure and 30-day mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis and primary hypertension: a retrospective analysis

Sepsis and hypertension pose significant health risks, yet the optimal mean arterial pressure (MAP) target for resuscitation remains uncertain. This study investigates the association between average MAP (a-MAP) within the initial 24 h of intensive care unit admission and clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis and primary hypertension using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) IV database. Multivariable Cox regression assessed the association between a-MAP and 30-day mortality. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses constructed survival curves, while restricted cubic splines (RCS) illustrated the nonlinear relationship between a-MAP and 30-day mortality. Subgroup analyses ensured robustness. The study involved 8,810 patients. Adjusted hazard ratios for 30-day mortality in the T1 group (< 73 mmHg) and T3 group (≥ 80 mmHg) compared to the T2 group (73-80 mmHg) were 1.25 (95% CI 1.09-1.43, P = 0.001) and 1.44 (95% CI 1.25-1.66, P < 0.001), respectively. RCS revealed a U-shaped relationship (non-linearity: P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significant differences (P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis showed no significant interactions. Maintaining an a-MAP of 73 to 80 mmHg may be associated with a reduction in 30-day mortality. Further validation through prospective randomized controlled trials is warranted.

In a Canine Model of Septic Shock, Cardiomyopathy Occurs Independent of Catecholamine Surges and Cardiac Microvascular Ischemia

BACKGROUND

High levels of catecholamines are cardiotoxic and associated with stress-induced cardiomyopathies. Using a septic shock model that reproduces the reversible cardiomyopathy seen over 10 days associated with human septic shock, we investigated the effects of catecholamines on microcirculatory perfusion and cardiac dysfunction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Purpose-bred beagles received intrabronchial Staphylococcus aureus (n=30) or saline (n=6). The septic animals were than randomized to epinephrine (1 μg/kg per minute, n=15) or saline (n=15) infusions from 4 to 44 hours. Serial cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, catecholamine levels, and troponins were collected over 92 hours. Serial adenosine-stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed on septic animals randomized to receive saline (n=8 out of 15) or epinephrine (n=8 out of 15). High-dose sedation was given to suppress endogenous catecholamine release. Despite catecholamine levels largely remaining within the normal range throughout, by 48 hours, septic animals receiving saline versus nonseptic animals still developed significant worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction, circumferential strain, and ventricular-aortic coupling. In septic animals that received epinephrine versus saline infusions, plasma epinephrine levels increased 800-fold, but epinephrine produced no significant further worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction, circumferential strain, or ventricular-aortic coupling. Septic animals receiving saline had a significant increase in microcirculatory reserve without troponin elevations. Septic animals receiving epinephrine had decreased edema, blunted microcirculatory perfusion, and elevated troponin levels that persisted for hours after the epinephrine infusion stopped.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac dysfunction during sepsis is not primarily due to elevated endogenous or exogenous catecholamines nor due to decreased microvascular perfusion-induced ischemia. However, epinephrine itself has potentially harmful long-lasting ischemic effects during sepsis including impaired cardiac microvascular perfusion that persists after stopping the infusion.

Prognostic evaluation of the norepinephrine equivalent score and the vasoactive-inotropic score in patients with sepsis and septic shock: a retrospective cohort study

Background

This study investigated the association between vasoactive medication exposure and mortality risk in patients with sepsis using the norepinephrine equivalent (NEE) score and vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS).

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included adult patients with sepsis requiring vasoactive agents. The data were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Multivariate Cox regression was used to elucidate the relationship between vasoactive medication exposure and 28-day mortality, as quantified by the VIS and NEE score. Hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for 28-day mortality were generated, and forest plots were constructed to present the results of univariate and multivariate analyses. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the cumulative incidence of 28-day mortality. A nomogram was constructed to predict the prognosis of patients with sepsis.

Results

The present study encompassed 9,032 patients diagnosed with sepsis who received vasoactive therapy, of which 4,229 patients were further analyzed at the second hour after the onset of sepsis. Distinct variations in demographic data were observed between survivors (n = 3,265, 77.21%) and non-survivors (n = 964, 22.79%). Multivariate analysis indicated that several factors, including VIS >15.04 (p = 0.001), NEE >0.10 (p < 0.001), heart rate (p = 0.045), mean arterial pressure (p = 0.009), respiratory rate (p < 0.001), oxygen saturation (p < 0.001), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) (p = 0.001), and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (p < 0.001), were significantly associated with 28-day mortality in the patients with sepsis. The NEE score, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and BUN were incorporated into the nomogram model with a concordance index of 0.779 and an area under the curve of 0.802 (95% CI 0.787-0.818).

Conclusion

We found that the VIS and NEE score had favorable values for predicting mortality risk in patients with sepsis in the intensive care units. The VIS and NEE score in the second hour after sepsis onset were independently associated with 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis.

Recent trends in septic shock management: a narrative review of current evidence and recommendations

Septic shock stands for a group of manifestations that will cause a severe hemodynamic and metabolic dysfunction, which leads to a significant increase in the risk of death by a massive response of the immune system to any sort of infection that ends up with refractory hypotension making it responsible for escalating the numbers of hospitalized patients mortality rate, Organisms that are isolated most of the time are Escherichia coli, Klebsiella, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staph aureus. The WHO considers sepsis to be a worldwide health concern; the incidence of sepsis and septic shock have been increasing over the years while being considered to be under-reported at the same time. This review is a quick informative recap of the recent studies regarding diagnostic approaches using lactic acid (Lac), procalcitonin (PCT), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) score, as well as management recommendations for using vasopressors, fluid resuscitation, corticosteroids and antibiotics that should be considered when dealing with such type of shock.

Clinical effect of perioperative stellate ganglion block on mechanical ventilation and respiratory function of elderly patients with septic shock

BACKGROUND

Here we investigated the effect of a stellate ganglion block on the perioperative mechanical ventilation and postoperative recovery of respiratory function of elderly patients with infectious shock.

METHODS

Thirty-six elderly patients with septic shock who underwent emergency general anesthesia at our hospital were randomly divided into treatment (T) and control (C) groups (n = 18 each). Group T received a preoperative stellate ganglion block, whereas group C received normal saline. Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels were compared preoperatively and at 1 and 7 days postoperative. Mean arterial pressure, oxygen saturation, and mean pulmonary artery pressure were measured preoperative and postoperative as well as at 1 and 7 days later. A blood gas analysis was performed preoperatively, at the end of the operation, during extubation, and at 1 and 7 days postoperative. Intubation under general anesthesia, the completion of anesthesia, and spontaneous respiratory recovery involve pulmonary dynamic compliance, plateau pressure, and mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

General condition did not differ significantly between groups (P > .05). However, mean arterial pressure at the end of surgery and at 1 and 7 days postoperative were significantly higher in group T versus C (P < .05). Furthermore, mean oxygen saturation at the end of surgery and at 1 and 7 days postoperative was significantly lower in group T versus C (P < .05), while procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels were significantly lower at 1 and 7 days postoperative. Group T had significantly better arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide, partial pressure of oxygen, and partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen than group C at the end of surgery, during extubation, and at 1 and 7 days postoperative (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Group T exhibited superior inflammatory responses and respiratory function. Stellate ganglion block in elderly patients with septic shock reduces inflammation, improves mechanical ventilation perioperatively, and promotes postoperative recovery and respiratory function.

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.

The chain of survival and rehabilitation for sepsis: concepts and proposals for healthcare trajectory optimization

This article describes the structures and processes involved in healthcare delivery for sepsis, from the prehospital setting until rehabilitation. Quality improvement initiatives in sepsis may reduce both morbidity and mortality. Positive outcomes are more likely when the following steps are optimized: early recognition, severity assessment, prehospital emergency medical system activation when available, early therapy (antimicrobials and hemodynamic optimization), early orientation to an adequate facility (emergency room, operating theater or intensive care unit), in-hospital organ failure resuscitation associated with source control, and finally a comprehensive rehabilitation program. Such a trajectory of care dedicated to sepsis amounts to a chain of survival and rehabilitation for sepsis. Implementation of this chain of survival and rehabilitation for sepsis requires full interconnection between each link. To date, despite regular international recommendations updates, the adherence to sepsis guidelines remains low leading to a considerable burden of the disease. Developing and optimizing such an integrated network could significantly reduce sepsis related mortality and morbidity.

Understanding How Clinicians Personalize Fluid and Vasopressor Decisions in Early Sepsis Management

Importance

Recent sepsis trials suggest that fluid-liberal vs fluid-restrictive resuscitation has similar outcomes. These trials used generalized approaches to resuscitation, and little is known about how clinicians personalize fluid and vasopressor administration in practice.

Objective

To understand how clinicians personalize decisions about resuscitation in practice.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This survey study of US clinicians in the Society of Critical Care Medicine membership roster was conducted from November 2022 to January 2023. Surveys contained 10 vignettes of patients with sepsis where pertinent clinical factors (eg, fluid received and volume status) were randomized. Respondents selected the next steps in management. Data analysis was conducted from February to September 2023.

Exposure

Online Qualtrics clinical vignette survey.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Using multivariable logistic regression, the associations of clinical factors with decisions about fluid administration, vasopressor initiation, and vasopressor route were tested. Results are presented as adjusted proportions with 95% CIs.

Results

Among 11 203 invited clinicians, 550 (4.9%; 261 men [47.5%] and 192 women [34.9%]; 173 with >15 years of practice [31.5%]) completed at least 1 vignette and were included. A majority were physicians (337 respondents [61.3%]) and critical care trained (369 respondents [67.1%]). Fluid volume already received by a patient was associated with resuscitation decisions. After 1 L of fluid, an adjusted 82.5% (95% CI, 80.2%-84.8%) of respondents prescribed additional fluid and an adjusted 55.0% (95% CI, 51.9%-58.1%) initiated vasopressors. After 5 L of fluid, an adjusted 17.5% (95% CI, 15.1%-19.9%) of respondents prescribed more fluid while an adjusted 92.7% (95% CI, 91.1%-94.3%) initiated vasopressors. More respondents prescribed fluid when the patient examination found dry vs wet (ie, overloaded) volume status (adjusted proportion, 66.9% [95% CI, 62.5%-71.2%] vs adjusted proportion, 26.5% [95% CI, 22.3%-30.6%]). Medical history, respiratory status, lactate trend, and acute kidney injury had small associations with fluid and vasopressor decisions. In 1023 of 1127 vignettes (90.8%) where the patient did not have central access, respondents were willing to start vasopressors through a peripheral intravenous catheter. In cases where patients were already receiving peripheral norepinephrine, respondents were more likely to place a central line at higher norepinephrine doses of 0.5 µg/kg/min (adjusted proportion, 78.0%; 95% CI, 74.7%-81.2%) vs 0.08 µg/kg/min (adjusted proportion, 25.2%; 95% CI, 21.8%-28.5%) and after 24 hours (adjusted proportion, 59.5%; 95% CI, 56.6%-62.5%) vs 8 hours (adjusted proportion, 47.1%; 95% CI, 44.0%-50.1%).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that fluid volume received is the predominant factor associated with ongoing fluid and vasopressor decisions, outweighing many other clinical factors. Peripheral vasopressor use is common. Future studies aimed at personalizing resuscitation must account for fluid volumes and should incorporate specific tools to help clinicians personalize resuscitation.

Position Paper on the Reporting of Norepinephrine Formulations in Critical Care from the Society of Critical Care Medicine and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Joint Task Force

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance on the reporting of norepinephrine formulation labeling, reporting in publications, and use in clinical practice.

DESIGN

Review and task force position statements with necessary guidance.

SETTING

A series of group conference calls were conducted from August 2023 to October 2023, along with a review of the available evidence and scope of the problem.

SUBJECTS

A task force of multinational and multidisciplinary critical care experts assembled by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

INTERVENTIONS

The implications of a variation in norepinephrine labeled as conjugated salt (i.e., bitartrate or tartrate) or base drug in terms of effective concentration of norepinephrine were examined, and guidance was provided.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

There were significant implications for clinical care, dose calculations for enrollment in clinical trials, and results of datasets reporting maximal norepinephrine equivalents. These differences were especially important in the setting of collaborative efforts across countries with reported differences.

CONCLUSIONS

A joint task force position statement was created outlining the scope of norepinephrine-dose formulation variations, and implications for research, patient safety, and clinical care. The task force advocated for a uniform norepinephrine-base formulation for global use, and offered advice aimed at appropriate stakeholders.

The Impact of Midodrine Tapering Versus Nontapering Regimens on the Clinical Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Midodrine has been used in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting to reduce the time to vasopressor discontinuation. The limited data supporting midodrine use have led to variability in the pattern of initiation and discontinuation of midodrine.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of 2 midodrine discontinuation regimens during weaning vasopressors in critically ill patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City. Included patients were adults admitted to ICU who received midodrine after being unable to be weaned from intravenous vasopressors for more than 24 hours. Patients were categorized into two subgroups depending on the pattern of midodrine discontinuation (tapered dosing regimen vs. nontapered regimen). The primary endpoint was the incidence of inotropes and vasopressors re-initiation after midodrine discontinuation.

RESULTS

The incidence of inotropes or vasopressors' re-initiation after discontinuation of midodrine was lower in the tapering group (15.4%) compared with the non-tapering group (40.7%) in the crude analysis as well as regression analysis (odd ratio [OR] = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.73, P = 0.02). The time required for the antihypertensive medication(s) initiation after midodrine discontinuation was longer in patients who had dose tapering (beta coefficient (95% CI): 3.11 (0.95, 5.28), P = 0.005). Moreover, inotrope or vasopressor requirement was lower 24 hours post midodrine initiation. In contrast, the two groups had no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, or ICU length of stay.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

These real-life data showed that tapering midodrine dosage before discontinuation in critically ill patients during weaning from vasopressor aids in reducing the frequency of inotrope or vasopressor re-initiation. Application of such a strategy might be a reasonable approach among ICU patients unless contraindicated.

Influence of antibiotic therapy with hemodynamic optimization on 30-day mortality among septic shock patients cared for in the prehospital setting

BACKGROUND

In order to reduce septic shock mortality, international guidelines recommend early treatment implementation, antibiotic therapy (ABT) and hemodynamic optimisation, within 1-h. This retrospective multicentric study aims to investigate the relationship between prehospital ABT delivered within 1st hour and mean blood pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mmHg at the end of the prehospital stage, and 30-day mortality among patients with septic shock.

METHODS

From May 2016 to December 2021, patients with septic shock requiring pre-hospital Mobile Intensive Care Unit intervention (MICU) were retrospectively analysed. To assess the relationship between 30-day mortality and prehospital ABT delivered within 1st hour and/or MAP ≥ 65 mmHg at the end of the prehospital stage, Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting (IPTW) propensity score method was performed.

RESULTS

Among the 530 patients included, 341 were male gender (64%) with a mean age of 69 ± 15 years. One-hundred and thirty-two patients (25%) patients received prehospital ABT, among which 98 patients (74%) were treated with 3rd generation cephalosporin. Suspected pulmonary, urinary and digestive infections were the cause of sepsis in respectively 43%, 25% and 17%. The 30-day overall mortality was 31%. A significant association was observed between 30-day mortality rate and (i) ABT administration within the first hour: RRa = 0.14 [0.04-0.55], (ii) ABT administration within the first hour associated with a MAP ≥ 65 mmHg: RRa = 0.08 [0.02-0.37] and (iii) ABT administration within the first hour in the prehospital setting associated with a MAP < 65 mmHg at the end of the prehospital stage: RRa = 0.75 [0.45-0.85]. Patients who received prehospital ABT after the first hour have also a 30-day mortality rate decrease: RRa = 0.87 [0.57-0.99], whereas patients who did not received ABT had an increased 30-day mortality rate: RRa = 2.36 [1.89-2.95].

CONCLUSION

In this study, we showed that pre-hospital ABT within the first hour and MAP≥65 mmHg at the end of prehospital stage are both associated with 30-day mortality decrease among patients suffering from septic shock cared for by a MICU. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Predictors of Treatment Failure and Mortality among Patients with Septic Shock Treated with Meropenem in the Intensive Care Unit

Background

The aim of the study was to determine the predictors of meropenem treatment failure and mortality in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

Methods

This was a retrospective study, involving sepsis and septic shock patients who were admitted to the ICU and received intravenous meropenem. Treatment failure is defined as evidence of non-resolved fever, non-reduced total white cell (TWC), non-reduced C-reactive protein (CRP), subsequent culture negative and death in ICU.

Results

An Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and duration of antibiotic treatment less than 5 days were associated with treatment failure with adjusted OR = 1.24 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.33; P < 0.001), OR = 65.43 (95% CI: 21.70, 197.23; P < 0.001). A higher risk of mortality was observed with higher APACHE and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, initiating antibiotics > 72 h of sepsis, duration of antibiotic treatment less than 5 days and meropenem with renal adjustment dose with an adjusted OR = 1.21 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.30; P < 0.001), adjusted OR = 1.23 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.41; P < 0.001), adjusted OR = 6.38 (95% CI: 1.67, 24.50; P = 0.007), adjusted OR = 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01, 0.14; P < 0.001), adjusted OR = 0.30 (95% CI: 0.14, 0.64; P = 0.002).

Conclusion

A total of 50 (14.12%) patients had a treatment failure with meropenem with 120 (48.02%) ICU mortality. The predictors of meropenem failure are higher APACHE score and shorter duration of meropenem treatment. The high APACHE, high SOFA score, initiating antibiotics more than 72 h of sepsis, shorter duration of treatment and meropenem with renal adjustment dose were predictors of mortality.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Priorities 2023

OBJECTIVES

To identify research priorities in the management, epidemiology, outcome, and pathophysiology of sepsis and septic shock.

DESIGN

Shortly after publication of the most recent Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines, the Surviving Sepsis Research Committee, a multiprofessional group of 16 international experts representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, convened virtually and iteratively developed the article and recommendations, which represents an update from the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Priorities.

METHODS

Each task force member submitted five research questions on any sepsis-related subject. Committee members then independently ranked their top three priorities from the list generated. The highest rated clinical and basic science questions were developed into the current article.

RESULTS

A total of 81 questions were submitted. After merging similar questions, there were 34 clinical and ten basic science research questions submitted for voting. The five top clinical priorities were as follows: 1) what is the best strategy for screening and identification of patients with sepsis, and can predictive modeling assist in real-time recognition of sepsis? 2) what causes organ injury and dysfunction in sepsis, how should it be defined, and how can it be detected? 3) how should fluid resuscitation be individualized initially and beyond? 4) what is the best vasopressor approach for treating the different phases of septic shock? and 5) can a personalized/precision medicine approach identify optimal therapies to improve patient outcomes? The five top basic science priorities were as follows: 1) How can we improve animal models so that they more closely resemble sepsis in humans? 2) What outcome variables maximize correlations between human sepsis and animal models and are therefore most appropriate to use in both? 3) How does sepsis affect the brain, and how do sepsis-induced brain alterations contribute to organ dysfunction? How does sepsis affect interactions between neural, endocrine, and immune systems? 4) How does the microbiome affect sepsis pathobiology? 5) How do genetics and epigenetics influence the development of sepsis, the course of sepsis and the response to treatments for sepsis?

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge advances in multiple clinical domains have been incorporated in progressive iterations of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines, allowing for evidence-based recommendations for short- and long-term management of sepsis. However, the strength of existing evidence is modest with significant knowledge gaps and mortality from sepsis remains high. The priorities identified represent a roadmap for research in sepsis and septic shock.

Effect of Norepinephrine on Peripheral Perfusion Index and Its Association With the Prognosis of Patients With Sepsis

Background: To evaluate whether the use of norepinephrine during the management of patients with sepsis affects the perfusion index (PI) and patient outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively studied patients with septic shock between January 2014 and December 2018 who had undergone Pulse index Continuous Cardiac Output-Plus cardiac output monitoring and received norepinephrine during the management. We collected data regarding basic clinical characteristics. Hemodynamic parameters, including lactate, PI, and norepinephrine dose at T0 and 24 h after Pulse index Continuous Cardiac Output catheterization (T24) were obtained. Results: The PI of the nonsurvivor group (n  =  44) was significantly lower than that of the survivor group (n  =  144) at T24, and the lactate level of the nonsurvivor group was significantly higher than that of the survivor group. The multiple logistic regression analysis suggested that the norepinephrine dose and PI were the most independent risk and protective factors, respectively, for intensive care unit mortality. The area under the curve for a poor prognosis was 0.847 (95% confidence interval, 0.782-0.912). The optimal cutoff value of the PI at T24 to predict intensive care unit mortality was 0.6, with a sensitivity of 77.1% and a specificity of 80%. Based on this optimal cutoff value, we divided patients into groups with PI ≥ 0.6 (n  =  125) and PI < 0.6 (n  =  59). The lactate level of the PI < 0.6 group was higher than that of the PI ≥ 0.6 group at T24. The PI < 0.6 group showed a significantly higher sublingual dose of norepinephrine indicators than the PI ≥ 0.6 group. The PI showed a strong negative correlation with norepinephrine dose (r  =  -0.344, P < .001) and lactate (r  =  -0.291, P < .001). Conclusions: A higher PI is a protective factor, and a higher dose of norepinephrine is a risk factor for the prognosis of critically ill patients with septic shock. A lower PI was associated with a higher dose of norepinephrine.

Trends in perioperative practices of high-risk surgical patients over a 10-year interval

INTRODUCTION

In Brazil, data show an important decrease in morbi-mortality of high-risk surgical patients over a 10-year high. The objective of this post-hoc study was to evaluate the mechanism explaining this trend in high-risk surgical patients admitted to Brazilian ICUs in two large Brazilian multicenter cohort studies performed 10 years apart.

METHODS

The patients included in the 2 cohorts studies published in 2008 and 2018 were compared after a (1:1) propensity score matching. Patients included were adults who underwent surgeries and admitted to the ICU afterwards.

RESULTS

After matching, 704 patients were analyzed. Compared to the 2018 cohort, 2008 cohort had more postoperative infections (OR 13.4; 95%CI 6.1-29.3) and cardiovascular complications (OR 1.5; 95%CI 1.0-2.2), as well as a lower survival ICU stay (HR = 2.39, 95% CI: 1.36-4.20) and hospital stay (HR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.03-2.62). In addition, by verifying factors strongly associated with hospital mortality, it was found that the risk of death correlated with higher intraoperative fluid balance (OR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), higher creatinine (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.1-1.56), and intraoperative blood transfusion (OR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.35-4.0). By increasing the mean arterial pressure, according to the limits of sample values from 43 mmHg to 118 mmHg, the risk of death decreased (OR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.98). The 2008 cohort had higher fluid balance, postoperative creatinine, and volume of intraoperative blood transfused and lower mean blood pressure at ICU admission and temperature at the end of surgery.

CONCLUSION

In this sample of ICUs in Brazil, high-risk surgical patients still have a high rate of complications, but with improvement over a period of 10 years. There were changes in the management of these patients over time.

Association between diastolic blood pressure during the first 24 h and 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Although the mean arterial pressure (MAP) target of 65 mmHg was achieved, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was still low in some septic shock patients. The effects of DBP on the prognosis and optimal target for patients with septic shock are unclear. We sought to investigate the relationship between DBP and 28-day mortality in septic shock patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, we obtained data from the Chinese Database in Intensive Care (CDIC). We included patients with an admission diagnosis of septic shock and shock was controlled. DBP was measured every 1 h, and the mean DBP during the first 24 h (mDBP24h) was recorded. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression determined the relationship between mDBP24h and 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 1251 patients were finally included. The 28-day mortality of included septic shock patients was 28.3%. The mDBP24h, not mSBP24h, was higher among 28-day survivors compared with non-survivors. 28-day mortality was inversely associated with mDBP24h (unadjusted OR 0.814 per 10 mmHg higher mDBP24h, P = 0.003), with a stepwise increase in 28-day mortality at lower mDBP24h. The 28-day mortality of patients with mDBP24h < 59 mmHg had an absolute risk reduction of 9.4% (P = 0.001). And mDBP24h < 59 mmHg was the remaining high risk factor inversely associated with 28-day mortality after multivariable adjustment (adjusted OR 1.915, 95% CI 1.037-3.536, P = 0.038), while mMAP24h and mSBP24h were not.

CONCLUSION

In patients with septic shock after initial resuscitation, we observed an inverse association between mDBP24h and 28-day mortality. The poor outcomes in patients with mDBP24h < 59 mmHg provide indirect evidence supporting a further DBP goal of 59 mmHg for patients with septic shock after MAP of 65 mmHg was achieved.

Sepsis among Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit of a Tertiary Care Centre

Introduction

Sepsis is a life-threatening dysfunction and is one of the common causes of admission in intensive care units. Early diagnosis and management improves the outcome of patients. The aim of this study was to find out the prevalence of sepsis among patients admitted to the intensive care unit of a tertiary care centre.

Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among patients admitted to the intensive care unit of a tertiary care centre after obtaining ethical approval from the Institutional Review Committee. Data of patients admitted from 1 February 2022 to 31 January 2023 was collected between 6 April 2023 to 27 April 2023. Convenience sampling method was used. The point estimate was calculated at a 95% Confidence Interval.

Results

Among 1001 patients, the prevalence of sepsis was 278 (27.77%) (25-30.54, 95% Confidence Interval). Among them, 209 (75.17%) developed septic shock. The mean age was 56.6±19.34 years. Pneumonia 43 (15.46%) and genitourinary infection 43 (15.46%) were the most common sources of infection and the source was unknown in 124 (44.60%) of patients. Hypertension 75 (26.97%) was the most common comorbidity. Acute kidney injury 166 (59.71%) was the most common complication followed by thrombocytopenia 165 (59.35%) and transaminitis 79 (28.41%).

Conclusions

The prevalence of sepsis among patients admitted to the intensive care unit was higher than other studies done in similar settings.

Keywords

infection; intensive care unit; sepsis; tertiary care centre.

Prehospital pulse pressure and mortality of septic shock patients cared for by a mobile intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Septic shock medical treatment relies on a bundle of care including antibiotic therapy and hemodynamic optimisation. Hemodynamic optimisation consists of fluid expansion and norepinephrine administration aiming to optimise cardiac output to reach a mean arterial pressure of 65mmHg. In the prehospital setting, direct cardiac output assessment is difficult because of the lack of invasive and non-invasive devices. This study aims to assess the relationship between 30-day mortality and (i) initial pulse pressure (iPP) as (ii) pulse pressure variation (dPP) during the prehospital stage among patients cared for SS by a prehospital mobile intensive care unit (MICU).

METHODS

From May 09th, 2016 to December 02nd, 2021, septic shock patients requiring MICU intervention were retrospectively analysed. iPP was calculated as the difference between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at the first contact between the patient and the MICU team prior to any treatment and, dPP as the difference between the final PP (the difference between SBP and DBP at the end of the prehospital stage) and iPP divided by prehospital duration. To consider cofounders, the propensity score method was used to assess the relationship between (i) iPP < 40mmHg, (ii) positive dPP and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Among the 530 patients analysed, pulmonary, digestive, and urinary infections were suspected among 43%, 25% and 17% patients, respectively. The 30-day overall mortality rate reached 31%. Cox regression analysis showed an association between 30-day mortality and (i) iPP < 40mmHg; aHR of 1.61 [1.03-2.51], and (ii) a positive dPP; aHR of 0.56 [0.36-0.88].

CONCLUSION

The current study reports an association between 30-day mortality rate and iPP < 40mmHg and a positive dPP among septic shock patients cared for by a prehospital MICU. A negative dPP could be helpful to identify septic shock with higher risk of poor outcome despite prehospital hemodynamic optimization.

Early administration of multiple vasopressors is associated with better survival in patients with sepsis: a propensity score-weighted study

BACKGROUND

The association between the timing of administration of multiple vasopressors and patient outcomes has not been investigated.

METHODS

This study used data from the MIMIC-IV database. Patients with sepsis who were administered two or more vasopressors were included. The principal exposure was the last norepinephrine dose when adding a second vasopressor. The cohort was divided into early (last norepinephrine dose < 0.25 μg/kg/min) and normal (last norepinephrine dose ≥ 0.25 μg/kg/min) groups. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Multivariable Cox analyses, propensity score matching, stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW), and restricted cubic spline (RCS) curves were used.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,437 patients who received multiple vasopressors were included. Patients in the early group had lower 28-day mortality (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.65-0.89; p < 0.001) than those in the single group, with similar results in the propensity score-matched (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.68-0.94; p = 0.006) and sIPTW (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.63-0.88; p < 0.001) cohorts. RCS curves showed that the risk of 28-day mortality increased as the last norepinephrine dose increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The timing of secondary vasopressor administration is strongly associated with the outcomes of patients with sepsis.

The Eight Unanswered and Answered Questions about the Use of Vasopressors in Septic Shock

Septic shock is mainly characterized-in addition to hypovolemia-by vasoplegia as a consequence of a release of inflammatory mediators. Systemic vasodilatation due to depressed vascular tone results in arterial hypotension, which induces or worsens organ hypoperfusion. Accordingly, vasopressor therapy is mandatory to correct hypotension and to reverse organ perfusion due to hypotension. Currently, two vasopressors are recommended to be used, norepinephrine and vasopressin. Norepinephrine, an α₁-agonist agent, is the first-line vasopressor. Vasopressin is suggested to be added to norepinephrine in cases of inadequate mean arterial pressure instead of escalating the doses of norepinephrine. However, some questions about the bedside use of these vasopressors remain. Some of these questions have been well answered, some of them not clearly addressed, and some others not yet answered. Regarding norepinephrine, we firstly reviewed the arguments in favor of the choice of norepinephrine as a first-line vasopressor. Secondly, we detailed the arguments found in the recent literature in favor of an early introduction of norepinephrine. Thirdly, we reviewed the literature referring to the issue of titrating the doses of norepinephrine using an individualized resuscitation target, and finally, we addressed the issue of escalation of doses in case of refractory shock, a remaining unanswered question. For vasopressin, we reviewed the rationale for adding vasopressin to norepinephrine. Then, we discussed the optimal time for vasopressin administration. Subsequently, we addressed the issue of the optimal vasopressin dose, and finally we discussed the best strategy to wean these two vasopressors when combined.

Fluids and Early Vasopressors in the Management of Septic Shock: Do We Have the Right Answers Yet?

Septic shock is a common condition associated with hypotension and organ dysfunction. It is associated with high mortality rates of up to 60% despite the best recommended resuscitation strategies in international guidelines. Patients with septic shock generally have a Mean Arterial Pressure below 65 mmHg and hypotension is the most important determinant of mortality among this group of patients. The extent and duration of hypotension are important. The two initial options that we have are 1) administration of intravenous (IV) fluids and 2) vasopressors, The current recommendation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines to administer 30 ml/kg fluid cannot be applied to all patients. Complications of fluid over-resuscitation further delay organ recovery, prolong ICU and hospital length of stay, and increase mortality. The only reason for administering intravenous fluids in a patient with circulatory shock is to increase the mean systemic filling pressure in a patient who is volume-responsive, such that cardiac output also increases. The use of vasopressors seems to be a more appropriate strategy, the very early administration of vasopressors, preferably during the first hour after diagnosis of septic shock, may have a multimodal action and potential advantages, leading to lower morbidity and mortality in the management of septic patients. Vasopressor therapy should be initiated as soon as possible in patients with septic shock.

DEVELOPMENT OF SCORE SYSTEM BASED ON POINT-OF-CARE ULTRASOUND TO PREDICT VASOPRESSOR REQUIREMENT FOR EMERGENCY PATIENTS WITH CARDIOPULMONARY SYMPTOMS

ABSTRACT

Objectives : Patients with cardiopulmonary symptoms admitted to the emergency department (ED) have high mortality and intensive care unit admission rates. We developed a new scoring system comprising concise triage information, point-of-care ultrasound, and lactate levels to predict vasopressor requirements. Methods : This retrospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary academic hospital. Patients with cardiopulmonary symptoms who visited the ED and underwent point-of-care ultrasound between January 2018 and December 2021 were enrolled. The influence of demographic and clinical findings on the requirement for vasopressor support within 24 h of ED admission was investigated. A new scoring system was developed using key components after stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis. Prediction performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results : A total of 2,057 patients were analyzed. A stepwise multivariable logistic regression model showed high predictive performance in the validation cohort (AUC, 0.87). Eight key components were selected: hypotension, chief complaint, and fever at ED admission, and way of ED visit, systolic dysfunction, regional wall motion abnormalities, inferior vena cava status, and serum lactate level. The scoring system was developed based on the β coefficients of each component: accuracy, 0.8079; sensitivity, 0.8057; specificity, 0.8214; PPV, 0.9658; and NPV, 0.4035, with a cutoff value according to the Youden index. Conclusions : A new scoring system was developed to predict vasopressor requirements in adult ED patients with cardiopulmonary symptoms. This system can serve as a decision-support tool to guide efficient assignment of emergency medical resources.

New Insights into the Fluid Management in Patients with Septic Shock

The importance of fluid resuscitation therapy during the early stages of sepsis management is a well-established principle. Current Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines recommend the early administration of intravenous crystalloid fluids for sepsis-related hypotension or hyperlactatemia due to tissue hypoperfusion, within the first 3 h of resuscitation and suggest using balanced solutions (BSs) instead of normal saline (NS) for the management of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Studies comparing BS versus NS administration in septic patients have demonstrated that BSs are associated with better outcomes including decreased mortality. After initial resuscitation, fluid administration has to be judicious in order to avoid fluid overload, which has been associated with increased mortality, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and worsening of acute kidney injury. The "one size fits all" approach may be "convenient" but it should be avoided. Personalized fluid management, based on patient-specific hemodynamic indices, provides the foundations for better patient outcomes in the future. Although there is a consensus on the need for adequate fluid therapy in sepsis, the type, the amount of administered fluids, and the ideal fluid resuscitation strategy remain elusive. Well-designed large randomized controlled trials are certainly needed to compare fluid choices specifically in the septic patient, as there is currently limited evidence of low quality. This review aims to summarize the physiologic principles and current scientific evidence regarding fluid management in patients with sepsis, as well as to provide a comprehensive overview of the latest data on the optimal fluid administration strategy in sepsis.

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.

Prediction prolonged mechanical ventilation in trauma patients of the intensive care unit according to initial medical factors: a machine learning approach

The goal of this study was to develop a predictive machine learning model to predict the risk of prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), with a focus on laboratory and Arterial Blood Gas (ABG) data. This retrospective cohort study included ICU patients admitted to Rajaei Hospital in Shiraz between 2016 and March 20, 2022. All adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation and seeking ICU admission had their data analyzed. Six models were created in this study using five machine learning models (PMV more than 3, 5, 7, 10, 14, and 23 days). Patients' demographic characteristics, Apache II, laboratory information, ABG, and comorbidity were predictors. This study used Logistic regression (LR), artificial neural networks (ANN), support vector machines (SVM), random forest (RF), and C.5 decision tree (C.5 DT) to predict PMV. The study enrolled 1138 eligible patients, excluding brain-dead patients and those without mechanical ventilation or a tracheostomy. The model PMV > 14 days showed the best performance (Accuracy: 83.63-98.54). The essential ABG variables in our two optimal models (artificial neural network and decision tree) in the PMV > 14 models include FiO2, paCO2, and paO2. This study provides evidence that machine learning methods outperform traditional methods and offer a perspective for achieving a consensus definition of PMV. It also introduces ABG and laboratory information as the two most important variables for predicting PMV. Therefore, there is significant value in deploying such models in clinical practice and making them accessible to clinicians to support their decision-making.

The Use of Midodrine as an Adjunctive Therapy to Liberate Patients from Intravenous Vasopressors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating the role of midodrine as an adjunctive therapy to liberate patients with shock from intravenous (IV) vasopressors have yielded mixed results. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of midodrine as an adjunctive therapy to liberate patients with shock from IV vasopressors.

METHODS

Electronic searches of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through April 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of midodrine versus control in patients with shock and a low dose of IV vasopressors. The primary outcome was total IV vasopressor time, while the secondary outcomes included time-to-IV vasopressor discontinuation, IV vasopressor restart, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and incidence of bradycardia.

RESULTS

The final analysis included four RCTs with a total of 314 patients: 158 in the midodrine group and 156 in the control group, with a weighted mean age of 64 years (54.2% men). There was no significant difference in the total IV vasopressor time between the midodrine and control groups (standardized mean difference [SMD] - 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.38 to 0.32, p = 0.22; I² = 92%). Also, there were no significant differences between the two groups in the time-to-IV vasopressor discontinuation (SMD - 0.05; 95% CI - 0.57 to 0.47, p = 0.09), IV vasopressor restart (19.3 vs. 28.3%; risk ratio [RR] 0.74; 95% 0.25-2.20, p = 0.59), ICU LOS (SMD - 0.49; 95% CI - 1.30 to 0.33, p = 0.24), and hospital LOS (SMD 0.01; 95% CI - 0.27 to 0.29, p = 0.92). However, compared with the control group, the midodrine group had a higher risk of bradycardia (15.3 vs. 2.1% RR 5.56; 95% CI 1.54-20.05, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with vasopressor-dependent shock, midodrine was not associated with early liberation of vasopressor support or shorter ICU or hospital length of stay. Adding midodrine increased the risk of bradycardia. Further large RCTs are needed to better evaluate the efficacy and safety of midodrine in liberating patients from IV vasopressors.

Renal medicine in the intensive care unit: a narrative review

Kidney disease, both acute and chronic, is commonly encountered on the intensive care unit. Due to the role the kidneys play in whole body homeostasis, it follows that their dysfunction has wide-ranging implications and can affect prescribing and therapeutic management. This narrative review discusses the pathophysiology of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease, and how this relates to critically unwell patients. We cover several aspects of the management of renal dysfunction on the critical care unit, exploring some of the recurrent themes within the literature, including type and timing of kidney replacement therapy, management of acute kidney injury, as well as discussing how novel biomarkers for acute kidney injury may help to identify patients suffering from acute kidney injury as well as risk stratifying these patients. We discuss how early involvement of specialist nephrology services can improve outcomes in patients with kidney disease as well as offer valuable diagnostic and specialist management advice, particularly for patients with established end stage kidney disease and patients who are already known to nephrology services. We also explore some of the ongoing research questions that need to be answered within this arena.

Early versus delayed vasopressor administration in patients with septic shock

Aim

This study aimed to investigate the association of early vasopressor initiation with improved septic shock outcomes.

Methods

This multicenter observational study was conducted in 17 intensive care units in Japan and included adult patients with sepsis admitted to the intensive care unit from July 2019 to August 2020 and treated with vasopressor therapy. Patients were divided into the early vasopressor group (≤1 h from sepsis recognition) and the delayed vasopressor group (>1 h). The impact of early vasopressor administration on risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality was estimated using logistic regression analyses adjusted by an inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis with propensity scoring.

Results

Among the 97 patients, 67 received vasopressor therapy within 1 h from sepsis recognition and 30 received vasopressor after 1 h. In-hospital mortality was 32.8% in the early vasopressor group and 26.7% in the delayed vasopressor group (p = 0.543). The adjusted odds ratio for in-hospital mortality was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.17-3.29) when comparing patients in the early vasopressor with those in the delayed vasopressor group. The fit curve from the mixed-effects model showed a relatively lower trend toward an infusion volume over time in the early vasopressor group than in the delayed vasopressor group.

Conclusion

Our study did not reach a definitive conclusion for early vasopressor administration. However, early vasopressor administration may help avoid volume overload in the long course of sepsis care.

Outcomes in participants with failure of initial antibacterial therapy for hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia prior to enrollment in the randomized, controlled phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem

BACKGROUND

Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a combination antibacterial agent comprising an anti-pseudomonal cephalosporin and β-lactamase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in adults. Participants in the ASPECT-NP trial received ceftolozane/tazobactam (3 g [2 g ceftolozane/1 g tazobactam] every 8 h) or meropenem (1 g every 8 h). Participants failing prior antibacterial therapy for the current HABP/VABP episode at study entry had lower 28-day all-cause mortality (ACM) rates with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem treatment. Here, we report a post hoc analysis examining this result.

METHODS

The phase 3, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter, noninferiority trial compared ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of adults with ventilated HABP/VABP; eligibility included those failing prior antibacterial therapy for the current HABP/VABP episode at study entry. The primary and key secondary endpoints were 28-day ACM and clinical response at test of cure (TOC), respectively. Participants who were failing prior therapy were a prospectively defined subgroup; however, subgroup analyses were not designed for noninferiority testing. The 95% CIs for treatment differences were calculated as unstratified Newcombe CIs. Post hoc analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine the impact of baseline characteristics and treatment on clinical outcomes in the subgroup who were failing prior antibacterial therapy.

RESULTS

In the ASPECT-NP trial, 12.8% of participants (93/726; ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 53; meropenem, n = 40) were failing prior antibacterial therapy at study entry. In this subgroup, 28-day ACM was higher in participants who received meropenem versus ceftolozane/tazobactam (18/40 [45.0%] vs 12/53 [22.6%]; percentage difference [95% CI]: 22.4% [3.1 to 40.1]). Rates of clinical response at TOC were 26/53 [49.1%] for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus 15/40 [37.5%] for meropenem (percentage difference [95% CI]: 11.6% [- 8.6 to 30.2]). Multivariable regression analysis determined concomitant vasopressor use and treatment with meropenem were significant factors associated with risk of 28-day ACM. Adjusting for vasopressor use, the risk of dying after treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam was approximately one-fourth the risk of dying after treatment with meropenem.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis further supports the previously demonstrated lower ACM rate for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem among participants who were failing prior therapy, despite the lack of significant differences in clinical cure rates.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov registration NCT02070757 . Registered February 25, 2014, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02070757 .

Mobilisation of critically ill patients receiving norepinephrine: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Mobilisation and exercise intervention in general are safe and feasible in critically ill patients. For patients requiring catecholamines, however, doses of norepinephrine safe for mobilisation in the intensive care unit (ICU) are not defined. This study aimed to describe mobilisation practice in our hospital and identify doses of norepinephrine that allowed a safe mobilisation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study of 16 ICUs at a university hospital in Germany with patients admitted between March 2018 and November 2021. Data were collected from our patient data management system. We analysed the effect of norepinephrine on level (ICU Mobility Scale) and frequency (units per day) of mobilisation, early mobilisation (within 72 h of ICU admission), mortality, and rate of adverse events. Data were extracted from free-text mobilisation entries using supervised machine learning (support vector machine). Statistical analyses were done using (generalised) linear (mixed-effect) models, as well as chi-square tests and ANOVAs.

RESULTS

A total of 12,462 patients were analysed in this study. They received a total of 59,415 mobilisation units. Of these patients, 842 (6.8%) received mobilisation under continuous norepinephrine administration. Norepinephrine administration was negatively associated with the frequency of mobilisation (adjusted difference -0.07 mobilisations per day; 95% CI - 0.09, - 0.05; p ≤ 0.001) and early mobilisation (adjusted OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.76, 0.90; p ≤ 0.001), while a higher norepinephrine dose corresponded to a lower chance to be mobilised out-of-bed (adjusted OR 0.01; 95% CI 0.00, 0.04; p ≤ 0.001). Mobilisation with norepinephrine did not significantly affect mortality (p > 0.1). Higher compared to lower doses of norepinephrine did not lead to a significant increase in adverse events in our practice (p > 0.1). We identified that mobilisation was safe with up to 0.20 µg/kg/min norepinephrine for out-of-bed (IMS ≥ 2) and 0.33 µg/kg/min for in-bed (IMS 0-1) mobilisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobilisation with norepinephrine can be done safely when considering the status of the patient and safety guidelines. We demonstrated that safe mobilisation was possible with norepinephrine doses up to 0.20 µg/kg/min for out-of-bed (IMS ≥ 2) and 0.33 µg/kg/min for in-bed (IMS 0-1) mobilisation.

Use of vasopressors for treatment of vasodilatory hypotension in dogs and cats by Diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care

OBJECTIVE

To identify the most common practices of Diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care (DACVECCs) as they relate to the recognition and treatment of hypotension in dogs and cats, particularly concerning the use of vasopressors in vasodilatory shock states.

DESIGN

A survey regarding vasopressor use was sent to all active DACVECCs using the Veterinary Information Network. Questions focused on respondent characteristics, method of recognition of hypotension, triggers for initiation of vasopressor therapy, first- and second-line vasopressor choice, and methods of determining response to therapy.

SUBJECTS

A total of 734 DACVECCs were invited to participate, and 203 Diplomates (27.7%) completed the survey.

RESULTS

For both dogs and cats, the most common first-line vasopressor was norepinephrine (87.9% in dogs and 83.1% in cats). The most common second-choice vasopressor was vasopressin (44.2% in dogs and 39.0% in cats). Cutoff values for initiating vasopressor therapy varied between species and modality used for blood pressure measurement. In general, most DACVECCs chose to initiate vasopressor therapy at a Doppler blood pressure <90 mm Hg or a mean arterial pressure of <60 or <65 mm Hg when using oscillometric or direct arterial blood pressure measurements in dogs and cats.

CONCLUSIONS

Most DACVECCs adhere to published human guidelines when choosing a first-line vasopressor. However, there is significant variability in blood pressure measurement technique, cutoffs for initiation of vasopressor use, and choice of second-line vasopressors.

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.

Modified cardiovascular SOFA score in sepsis: development and internal and external validation

BACKGROUND

The Sepsis-3 criteria introduced the system that uses the Sequential Organ-Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to define sepsis. The cardiovascular SOFA (CV SOFA) scoring system needs modification due to the change in guideline-recommended vasopressors. In this study, we aimed to develop and to validate the modified CV SOFA score.

METHODS

We developed, internally validated, and externally validated the modified CV SOFA score using the suspected infection cohort, sepsis cohort, and septic shock cohort. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The modified CV SOFA score system was constructed with consideration of the recently recommended use of the vasopressor norepinephrine with or without lactate level. The predictive validity of the modified SOFA score was evaluated by the discrimination for the primary outcome. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed using the calibration curve. We compared the prognostic performance of the original CV/total SOFA score and the modified CV/total SOFA score to detect mortality in patients with suspected infection, sepsis, or septic shock.

RESULTS

We identified 7,393 patients in the suspected cohort, 4038 patients in the sepsis cohort, and 3,107 patients in the septic shock cohort in seven Korean emergency departments (EDs). The 28-day mortality rates were 7.9%, 21.4%, and 20.5%, respectively, in the suspected infection, sepsis, and septic shock cohorts. The model performance is higher when vasopressor and lactate were used in combination than the vasopressor only used model. The modified CV/total SOFA score was well-developed and internally and externally validated in terms of discrimination and calibration. Predictive validity of the modified CV SOFA was significantly higher than that of the original CV SOFA in the development set (0.682 vs 0.624, p < 0.001), test set (0.716 vs 0.638), and all other cohorts (0.648 vs 0.557, 0.674 vs 0.589). Calibration was modest. In the suspected infection cohort, the modified model classified more patients to sepsis (66.0 vs 62.5%) and identified more patients at risk of septic mortality than the SOFA score (92.6 vs 89.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Among ED patients with suspected infection, sepsis, and septic shock, the newly-developed modified CV/total SOFA score had higher predictive validity and identified more patients at risk of septic mortality.

The use of metaraminol as a vasopressor in critically unwell patients: a narrative review and a survey of UK practice

Background

Major international guidelines state that norepinephrine should be used as the first-line vasopressor to achieve adequate blood pressure in patients with hypotension or shock. However, recent observational studies report that in the United Kingdom and Australia, metaraminol is often used as second line medication for cardiovascular support.

Aim of the study

The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of metaraminol use for management of shock in critically unwell patients and carry out a survey evaluating whether UK critical care units use metaraminol and under which circumstances.

Methods

A systematic review literature search was conducted. A short telephone survey consisting of 6 questions regarding metaraminol use was conducted across 30 UK critical care units which included a mix of tertiary and district general intensive care units.

Results

Twenty-six of thirty contacted centres responded to our survey. Metaraminol was used in 88% of them in various settings and circumstances (emergency department, theatres, medical emergencies on medical wards), with 67% reporting use of metaraminol infusions in the critical care setting. The systematic literature review revealed several case reports and only two studies conducted in the last 20 years investigating the effect of metaraminol as a stand-alone vasopressor. Both studies focused on different aspects of metaraminol use and the data was incomparable, hence we decided not to perform a meta-analysis.

Conclusions

Metaraminol is widely used as a vasopressor inside and outside of the critical care setting in the UK despite limited evidence supporting its safety and efficacy for treating shock. Further service evaluation, observational studies and prospective randomised controlled trials are warranted to validate the role and safety profile of metaraminol in the treatment of the critically unwell patient.

Prehospital Bundle of Care Based on Antibiotic Therapy and Hemodynamic Optimization Is Associated With a 30-Day Mortality Decrease in Patients With Septic Shock

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the association between the 30-day mortality in patients with septic shock (SS) and a prehospital bundle of care completion, antibiotic therapy administration, and hemodynamic optimization defined as a fluid expansion of at least 10 mL.kg-1.hr-1.

DESIGN

To assess the association between prehospital BUndle of Care (BUC) completion and 30-day mortality, the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) propensity method was performed.

SETTING

International guidelines recommend early treatment implementation in order to reduce SS mortality. More than one single treatment, a bundle of care, including antibiotic therapy and hemodynamic optimization, is more efficient.

PATIENTS

From May 2016 to March 2021, patients with SS requiring prehospital mobile ICU (mICU) intervention were retrospectively analyzed.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Among the 529 patients with SS requiring action by the mICU enrolled in this study, 354 (67%) were analyzed. Presumed pulmonary, digestive, and urinary infections were the cause of the SS in 49%, 25%, and 13% of the cases, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality was 32%. Seventy-one patients (20%) received prehospital antibiotic therapy and fluid expansion. Log binomial regression weighted with IPTW resulted in a significant association between 30-day mortality and prehospital BUC completion (respiratory rate [RR] of 0.56 [0.33-0.89]; p = 0.02 and adjusted RR 0.52 [0.27-0.93]; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

A prehospital bundle of care, based on antibiotic therapy and hemodynamic optimization, is associated with a 30-day mortality decrease among patients suffering from SS cared for by an mICU.

First-line Vasopressor Use in Septic Shock and Route of Administration: An Epidemiologic Study

RATIONALE

Norepinephrine is a first-line agent for treatment of hypotension in septic shock. However, its frequency of use, and potential barriers to its use are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the frequency of use of norepinephrine in septic shock, to identify potential barriers to its use, and to evaluate trends in use of vasopressors over time.

METHODS

Retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with septic shock in Alberta, Canada between July 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018. The primary outcome was receipt of a first-line vasopressor other than norepinephrine ("non-norepinephrine vasopressor"). Predictors of receiving a non-norepinephrine vasopressor were assessed using a multivariable-adjusted, multilevel logistic regression model with intensive care unit (ICU) as a random effect.

RESULTS

Among 6343 patients with septic shock, the proportion of patients receiving non-norepinephrine vasopressors as first-line treatment decreased steadily from 11.5% in 2012 to 3.0% in 2018. Two factors most strongly associated with their receipt were having peripheral intravenous access only (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 6.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.58-8.26, p<0.001) and year of admission (aOR 0.74 per year after 2012, 95% CI 0.69-0.80, p<0.001). Other factors that had associations after adjustment included admission to a non-teaching hospital (aOR 2.19, 95% CI 1.23-3.89, p=0.007), admission to a coronary care unit (aOR 2.56, 95% CI 1.001-6.54, p=0.05), SOFA score (aOR 0.92 per unit increase, 95% CI 0.88-0.96, p<0.001) and heart rate (aOR 0.92 per 10 beat per minute increase, 95% CI 0.87-0.97, p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of patients in Alberta, Canada, we found a steady decrease in use of first-line vasopressors other than norepinephrine in septic shock. The strongest factor associated with their use was the presence of only peripheral venous access, suggesting this may still be considered a barrier to administration of norepinephrine.

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.

Early echocardiography by treating physicians and outcome in the critically ill: An ancillary study from the prospective multicenter trial FROG-ICU

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the association between the use of early echocardiography performed by the treating physician certified in critical care ultrasound and mortality in ICU patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

FROG-ICU was a multi-center cohort designed to investigate the outcome of critically ill patients. Of the 1359 patients admitted to centers where echocardiography was available, 372 patients underwent echocardiography during the initial 3 days.

RESULTS

Of the ICU patients admitted for cardiac disease, 47.4% underwent echocardiography, and those patients had the lowest left ventricular ejection fraction 40 [31-58] % and the lowest cardiac output 4.2 [3.2-5.7] L/min compared to patients admitted for other causes (p < 0.001 for both). One-year mortality was 36.8% and 39.9% in patients with and without echocardiography, respectively [HR 0.92 (95% CI 0.75-1.11)]. This result was confirmed after multivariable Cox regression analysis [HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.71-1.08)]. Subgroup analyses suggest that among patients admitted to ICU for cardiac disease, those managed with echocardiography had a lower risk of one-year mortality [HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.43-0.98)].

CONCLUSIONS

Early echocardiography by treating physicians was not associated with short- or long-term survival in ICU patients. In subgroups, early echocardiography improved survival in ICU patients admitted for cardiac disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01367093.

Predictors of Requirement of Inotrope Among Patients With Early Sepsis: Special Reference to Microcirculatory Parameters

Introduction

The management of septic shock and refractory septic shock is essential in preventing sepsis-related death. The handheld vital microscope is a new modality of investigation for sepsis for microcirculatory assessment. This study aimed to identify predictors of inotrope requirements among patients with early sepsis and impending septic shock with particular reference to sublingual microcirculation assessment parameters.

Methodology

We conducted an observational cross-sectional hospital-based study in central India. The formal sample size was calculated to be 52 patients using a convenient sampling technique. The study was initiated with ethics approval (IHEC-LOP/2019/ MD0090) with consent from the patients. We used the MicroScan (MicroVision Medical, Netherlands) Video Microscope System (No.16A00102) to obtain sidestream dark-field imaging along with the AVA 4.3C software (MicroVision Medical).

Results

Of 51 cases, 60.8% were women, and 39.2% were men, and the study population had a mean age of 41.0 ± 14.9 years. Patients were recruited from medical wards (64.7%) and emergency departments (35.3%). The most common site of infection was gastrointestinal (33.3%), followed by respiratory infections (25.5%) and genitourinary infections (11.8%). The quick sequential organ failure assessment score was 2.0 ± 0.1. Eight patients required inotropes, and six patients died. High respiratory rates and lactate levels were important predictors of inotrope requirements in patients with early sepsis. Sublingual microcirculatory parameters at baseline did not significantly affect the requirement of inotropes consequently.

Conclusions

Sublingual microscopy is a suggested tool for the management of sepsis. However, without clearly defined cut-off values, handheld vital microscopy could not predict fluid responsiveness among patients with early sepsis. Also, it would be difficult to incorporate this technology into regular practice without equipment upgrades and image acquisition software.