Timing of vasoactive agents and corticosteroid initiation in septic shock

The MINUTES bundle for the initial 30 min management of undifferentiated circulatory shock: an expert opinion

Acute circulatory shock is a life-threatening emergency requiring an efficient and timely management plan, which varies according to shock etiology and pathophysiology. Specific guidelines have been developed for each type of shock; however, there is a need for a clear timeline to promptly implement initial life-saving interventions during the early phase of shock recognition and management. A simple, easily memorable bundle of interventions could facilitate standardized management with clear targets and specified timeline. The authors propose the "MINUTES" acronym which summarizes essential interventions which should be performed within the first 30 min following shock recognition. All the interventions in the MINUTES bundle are suitable for any patient with undifferentiated shock. In addition to the acronym, we suggest a timeline for each step, balancing the feasibility and urgency of each intervention. The MINUTES acronym includes seven sequential steps which should be performed in the first 30 min following shock recognition: Maintain "ABCs", INfuse vasopressors and/or fluids (to support hemodynamic/perfusion) and INvestigate with simple blood tests, Ultrasound to detect the type of shock, Treat the underlying Etiology, and Stabilize organ perfusion.

Enhancing acute inflammatory and sepsis treatment: superiority of membrane receptor blockade

Conditions such as acute pancreatitis, ulcerative colitis, delayed graft function and infections caused by a variety of microorganisms, including gram-positive and gram-negative organisms, increase the risk of sepsis and therefore mortality. Immune dysfunction is a characterization of sepsis, so timely and effective treatment strategies are needed. The conventional approaches, such as antibiotic-based treatments, face challenges such as antibiotic resistance, and cytokine-based treatments have shown limited efficacy. To address these limitations, a novel approach focusing on membrane receptors, the initiators of the inflammatory cascade, is proposed. Membrane receptors such as Toll-like receptors, interleukin-1 receptor, endothelial protein C receptor, μ-opioid receptor, triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 1, and G-protein coupled receptors play pivotal roles in the inflammatory response, offering opportunities for rapid regulation. Various membrane receptor blockade strategies have demonstrated efficacy in both preclinical and clinical studies. These membrane receptor blockades act as early stage inflammation modulators, providing faster responses compared to conventional therapies. Importantly, these blockers exhibit immunomodulatory capabilities without inducing complete immunosuppression. Finally, this review underscores the critical need for early intervention in acute inflammatory and infectious diseases, particularly those posing a risk of progressing to sepsis. And, exploring membrane receptor blockade as an adjunctive treatment for acute inflammatory and infectious diseases presents a promising avenue. These novel approaches, when combined with antibiotics, have the potential to enhance patient outcomes, particularly in conditions prone to sepsis, while minimizing risks associated with antibiotic resistance and immune suppression.

Comparison of Early and Late Norepinephrine Administration in Patients with Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vasopressor administration at an appropriate time is crucial, but the optimal timing remains controversial.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does early vs late norepinephrine administration impact the prognosis of septic shock?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Searches were conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and KMBASE. We included studies of adults with sepsis and categorized patients into an early and late norepinephrine group according to specific time points or differences in norepinephrine use protocols. The primary outcome was overall mortality. The secondary outcomes included length of stay in the ICU, days free from ventilator use, days free from renal replacement therapy, days free from vasopressor use, adverse events, and total fluid volume.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (four randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and eight observational studies) comprising 7,281 patients were analyzed. For overall mortality, no significant difference was found between the early norepinephrine group and late norepinephrine group in RCTs (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.41-1.19) or observational studies (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.54-1.29). In the two RCTs without a restrictive fluid strategy that prioritized vasopressors and lower IV fluid volumes, the early norepinephrine group showed significantly lower mortality than the late norepinephrine group (OR, 0.49; 95%, CI, 0.25-0.96). The early norepinephrine group demonstrated more mechanical ventilator-free days in observational studies (mean difference, 4.06; 95% CI, 2.82-5.30). The incidence of pulmonary edema was lower in the early norepinephrine group in the three RCTs that reported this outcome (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25-0.74). No differences were found in the other secondary outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

Overall mortality did not differ significantly between early and late norepinephrine administration for septic shock. However, early norepinephrine administration seemed to reduce pulmonary edema incidence, and mortality improvement was observed in studies without fluid restriction interventions, favoring early norepinephrine use.

Sex- and Gender-Based Analysis on Norepinephrine Use in Septic Shock: Why Is It Still a Male World?

Sex and gender are fundamental health determinants and their role as modifiers of treatment response is increasingly recognized. Norepinephrine is a cornerstone of septic shock management and its use is based on the highest level of evidence compared to dopamine. The related 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SCC) recommendation is presumably applicable to both females and males; however, a sex- and gender-based analysis is lacking, thus not allowing generalizable conclusions. This paper was aimed at exploring whether sex- and gender-disaggregated data are available in the evidence supporting this recommendation. For all the studies underpinning it, four pairs of authors, including a woman and a man, extracted data concerning sex and gender, according to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines. Nine manuscripts were included with an overall population of 2126 patients, of which 43.2% were females. No sex analysis was performed and gender was never reported. In conclusion, the present manuscript highlighted that the clinical studies underlying the SCC recommendation of NE administration in septic shock have neglected the likely role of sex and gender as modifiers of treatment response, thus missing the opportunity of sex- and gender-specific guidelines.

Prognostic implication of Vasoactive Inotropic Score in adult patients with cardiogenic shock on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Background

Vasopressors and inotropes are crucial in managing cardiogenic shock (CS) as they enhance microcirculation in patients. Numerous studies have demonstrated the adverse outcomes associated with excessive use of vasoactive drugs and the vasoactive drug scoring system has emerged as a valuable prognostic tool, particularly in pediatric patients. This study aimed to examine the prognostic significance of the Vasoactive Inotropic Score (VIS) in adult patients with CS receiving veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) treatment.

Methods

This retrospective multi-center study involved 2,453 adult patients who underwent VA-ECMO in China between 2015 and 2021. Among them, 1,742 adult patients with CS following VA-ECMO were finally included. The maximum VIS (VISmax) was determined by considering the highest doses of vasoactive and inotropic drugs administered within the first 6 hours before ECMO initiation. Based on the VISmax, patients were classified into two groups: 0-20 and >20. The primary outcome of this study was in-hospital mortality.

Results

A total of 1,146 patients were included in the high VISmax group, while 596 patients were assigned to the low VISmax group. Overall, 882 (50.6%) patients experienced in-hospital mortality, with significantly higher rates observed among those with higher VISmax scores (41.4% for VIS ≤20 versus 68.3% for VIS >20; P<0.001). Similar trends were observed for 30-day mortality (40.7% for VIS ≤20 versus 64.9% for VIS >20; P<0.001). Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that a VIS score exceeding 20 independently predicted in-hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR) 2.64; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.10-3.33; P<0.001]. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that VIS had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.65 (95% CI: 0.63-0.68; P<0.001) as a predictor of in-hospital mortality, with an optimal cutoff value of 20.1. Moreover, the VIS exhibited good predictive ability for in-hospital mortality in patients with acute myocarditis (AUC 0.70; 95% CI: 0.63-0.78; P<0.001).

Conclusions

Firstly, higher maximum level of VIS within the first 6 hours before ECMO initiation independently predicted poorer clinical outcomes in patients supported with ECMO for CS. Secondly, VIS exceeding 20 was significantly associated with increased risks of in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality. Thirdly, when categorized by the cause of CS, a high VIS exhibited good predictive ability in patients with acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and acute myocarditis.

Angiotensin ii therapy in refractory septic shock: which patient can benefit most? A narrative review

Patients with septic shock who experience refractory hypotension despite adequate fluid resuscitation and high-dose noradrenaline have high mortality rates. To improve outcomes, evidence-based guidelines recommend starting a second vasopressor, such as vasopressin, if noradrenaline doses exceed 0.5 µg/kg/min. Recently, promising results have been observed in treating refractory hypotension with angiotensin II, which has been shown to increase mean arterial pressure and has been associated with improved outcomes. This narrative review aims to provide an overview of the pathophysiology of the renin-angiotensin system and the role of endogenous angiotensin II in vasodilatory shock with a focus on how angiotensin II treatment impacts clinical outcomes and on identifying the population that may benefit most from its use.

Precision fluid and vasoactive drug therapy for critically ill patients

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

Vasopressin in Sepsis and Other Shock States: State of the Art

This review of the use of vasopressin aims to be comprehensive and highly practical, based on the available scientific evidence and our extensive clinical experience with the drug. It summarizes controversies about vasopressin use in septic shock and other vasodilatory states. Vasopressin is a natural hormone with powerful vasoconstrictive effects and is responsible for the regulation of plasma osmolality by maintaining fluid homeostasis. Septic shock is defined by the need for vasopressors to correct hypotension and lactic acidosis secondary to infection, with a high mortality rate. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend vasopressin as a second-line vasopressor, added to norepinephrine. However, these guidelines do not address specific debates surrounding the use of vasopressin in real-world clinical practice.

Intravenous high-dose vitamin C monotherapy for sepsis and septic shock: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Vitamin C has been used as an adjuvant in the treatment of sepsis and septic shock; however, its role remains controversial. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of intravenous high-dose vitamin C in sepsis and septic shock patients by meta-analysis.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched to identify relevant studies. The primary outcome was defined as the short-term all-cause mortality rate. Secondary outcomes included duration of vasoactive drug use, intensive care unit length of stay, sequential organ failure assessment scores up to 96 hours after treatment and 90-day mortality. Review Manager version 5.4 was used to perform the meta-analysis. Relative risk and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals were determined using fixed- or random-effects models.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 1394 patients were eligible for assessment. Overall, the pooled results showed that high-dose vitamin C decreased short-term all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis, but no significant differences were observed in patients with septic shock. Additionally, high-dose vitamin C was associated with decreased duration of vasoactive drug use in patients with sepsis, but not in patients with septic shock. However, it did not significantly affect the duration of intensive care unit stay in RCTs of patients with sepsis and septic shock. Additionally, it did not significantly affect sequential organ failure assessment scores 96 hours post-treatment or 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that intravenous high-dose vitamin C may improve outcomes in patients with sepsis, but do not benefit patients with septic shock. Further RCTs and other studies should be conducted to determine whether vitamin C should be recommended as an adjunctive sepsis treatment.

Biochemical Changes in Cardiopulmonary Bypass in Cardiac Surgery: New Insights

Patients undergoing coronary revascularization with extracorporeal circulation or cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) may develop several biochemical changes in the microcirculation that lead to a systemic inflammatory response. Surgical incision, post-CPB reperfusion injury and blood contact with non-endothelial membranes can activate inflammatory signaling pathways that lead to the production and activation of inflammatory cells, with cytokine production and oxidative stress. This inflammatory storm can cause damage to vital organs, especially the heart, and thus lead to complications in the postoperative period. In addition to the organic pathophysiology during and after the period of exposure to extracorporeal circulation, this review addresses new perspectives for intraoperative treatment and management that may lead to a reduction in this inflammatory storm and thereby improve the prognosis and possibly reduce the mortality of these patients.

Pediatric Shock Review

Shock occurs when there is energy failure due to inadequate oxygen/glucose delivery to meet metabolic demands. Shock is a leading cause of death and disability in children worldwide. Types of shock include hypovolemic, cardiogenic, distributive, and obstructive. This review provides an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical signs and symptoms of each of these types of shock, followed by a discussion of advancements in diagnostic tests and tools and management/treatment principles for different categories of shock.

Potential Neuroprotective Role of Melatonin in Sepsis-Associated Encephalopathy Due to Its Scavenging and Anti-Oxidative Properties

Sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. The brain is one of the organs involved in sepsis, and sepsis-induced brain injury manifests as sepsis-associated encephalopathy (SAE). SAE may be present in up to 70% of septic patients. SAE has a very wide spectrum of clinical symptoms, ranging from mild behavioral changes through cognitive disorders to disorders of consciousness and coma. The presence of SAE increases mortality in the population of septic patients and may lead to chronic cognitive dysfunction in sepsis survivors. Therefore, therapeutic interventions with neuroprotective effects in sepsis are needed. Melatonin, a neurohormone responsible for the control of circadian rhythms, exerts many beneficial physiological effects. Its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties are well described. It is considered a potential therapeutic factor in sepsis, with positive results from studies on animal models and with encouraging results from the first human clinical trials. With its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory potential, it may also exert a neuroprotective effect in sepsis-associated encephalopathy. The review presents data on melatonin as a potential drug in SAE in the wider context of the pathophysiology of SAE and the specific actions of the pineal neurohormone.

Should we initiate vasopressors earlier in patients with septic shock: A mini systemic review

Septic shock treatment remains a major challenge for intensive care units, despite the recent prominent advances in both management and outcomes. Vasopressors serve as a cornerstone of septic shock therapy, but there is still controversy over the timing of administration. Specifically, it remains unclear whether vasopressors should be used early in the course of treatment. Here, we provide a systematic review of the literature on the timing of vasopressor administration. Research was systematically identified through PubMed, Embase and Cochrane searching according to PRISMA guidelines. Fourteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The pathophysiological basis for early vasopressor use was classified, with the exploration on indications for the early administration of mono-vasopressors or their combination with vasopressin or angiotensinII. We found that mortality was 28.1%-47.7% in the early vasopressors group, and 33.6%-54.5% in the control group. We also investigated the issue of vasopressor responsiveness. Furthermore, we acknowledged the subsequent challenge of administration of high-dose norepinephrine via peripheral veins with early vasopressor use. Based on the literature review, we propose a possible protocol for the early initiation of vasopressors in septic shock resuscitation.

Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: What Have We Learned in the Last Two Decades?

Sepsis is a clinical syndrome encompassing physiologic and biological abnormalities caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Sepsis progression into septic shock is associated with a dramatic increase in mortality, hence the importance of early identification and treatment. Over the last two decades, the definition of sepsis has evolved to improve early sepsis recognition and screening, standardize the terms used to describe sepsis and highlight its association with organ dysfunction and higher mortality. The early 2000s witnessed the birth of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), which showed a dramatic reduction in mortality leading to its wide adoption, and the surviving sepsis campaign (SSC), which has been instrumental in developing and updating sepsis guidelines over the last 20 years. Outside of early fluid resuscitation and antibiotic therapy, sepsis management has transitioned to a less aggressive approach over the last few years, shying away from routine mixed venous oxygen saturation and central venous pressure monitoring and excessive fluids resuscitation, inotropes use, and red blood cell transfusions. Peripheral vasopressor use was deemed safe and is rising, and resuscitation with balanced crystalloids and a restrictive fluid strategy was explored. This review will address some of sepsis management's most important yet controversial components and summarize the available evidence from the last two decades.

Hemodynamic management of septic shock: beyond the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines

Although the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines provide standardized and generalized guidance, they are less individualized. This review focuses on recent updates in the hemodynamic management of septic shock. Monitoring and intervention for septic shock should be personalized according to the phase of shock. In the salvage phase, fluid resuscitation and vasopressors should be given to provide life-saving tissue perfusion. During the optimization phase, tissue perfusion should be optimized. In the stabilization and de-escalation phases, minimal fluid infusion and safe fluid removal should be performed, respectively, while preserving organ perfusion. There is controversy surrounding the use of restrictive versus liberal fluid strategies after initial resuscitation. Fluid administration after initial resuscitation should depend upon the patient's fluid responsiveness and requires individualized management. A number of dynamic tests have been proposed to monitor fluid responsiveness, which can help clinicians decide whether to give fluid or not. The optimal timing for the initiation of vasopressor agents is unknown. Recent data suggest that early vasopressor initiation should be considered. Inotropes can be considered in patients with decreased cardiac contractility associated with impaired tissue perfusion despite adequate volume status and arterial blood pressure. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation should be considered for refractory septic shock with severe cardiac systolic dysfunction.

Identification of Potential Biomarkers of Septic Shock Based on Pathway and Transcriptome Analyses of Immune-Related Genes

Immunoregulation is crucial to septic shock (SS) but has not been clearly explained. Our aim was to explore potential biomarkers for SS by pathway and transcriptional analyses of immune-related genes to improve early detection. GSE57065 and GSE95233 microarray data were used to screen differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in SS. Gene Ontology and KEGG (Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) pathway enrichment analyses of DEGs were performed, and correlations between immune cell and pathway enrichment scores were analyzed. The predictive value of candidate genes was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. GSE66099, GSE4607, and GSE13904 datasets were used for external validation. Blood samples from six patients and six controls were collected for validation by qRT-PCR and western blotting. In total, 550 DEGs in SS were identified; these genes were involved in the immune response, inflammation, and infection. Immune-related pathways and levels of infiltration of CD4 + TCM, CD8 + T cells, and preadipocytes differed between SS cases and controls. Seventeen genes were identified as potential biomarkers of SS (areas under ROC curves >0.9). The downregulation of CD8A, CD247, CD3G, LCK, and HLA-DRA in SS was experimentally confirmed. We identified several immune-related biomarkers in SS that may improve early identification of disease risk.

Hydrocortisone versus vasopressin for the management of adult patients with septic shock refractory to norepinephrine: A multicenter retrospective study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Significant practice variation exists when selecting between hydrocortisone and vasopressin as second line agents in patients with septic shock in need of escalating doses of norepinephrine. The goal of this study was to assess differences in clinical outcomes between these two agents.

DESIGN

Multicenter, retrospective, observational study.

SETTING

Ten Ascension Health hospitals.

PATIENTS

Adult patients with presumed septic shock receiving norepinephrine prior to study drug initiation between December 2015 and August 2021.

INTERVENTION

Vasopressin (0.03-0.04 units/min) or hydrocortisone (200-300 mg/day).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 768 patients were included with a median (interquartile range) SOFA score of 10 (8-13), norepinephrine dose of 0.3 mcg/kg/min (0.1-0.5 mcg/kg/min), and lactate of 3.8 mmol/L (2.4-7.0 mmol/L) at initiation of the study drug. A significant difference in 28-day mortality was noted favoring hydrocortisone as an adjunct to norepinephrine after controlling for potential confounding factors (OR 0.46 [95% CI, 0.32-0.66]); similar results were seen following propensity score matching. Compared to vasopressin, hydrocortisone initiation was also associated with a higher rate of hemodynamic responsiveness (91.9% vs. 68.2%, p < 0.01), improved resolution of shock (68.8% vs. 31.5%, p < 0.01), and reduced recurrence of shock within 72 h (8.7% vs. 20.7%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of hydrocortisone to norepinephrine was associated with a lower 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock, compared to the addition of vasopressin.

Changes in Cortisol Secretion and Corticosteroid Receptors in COVID-19 and Non COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients with Sepsis/Septic Shock and Scope for Treatment

Sepsis is associated with dysregulated cortisol secretion, leading to abnormal levels of cortisol in the blood. In the early stages of the condition, cortisol levels are typically elevated due to increased secretion from the adrenal glands. However, as the disease progresses, cortisol levels may decline due to impaired adrenal function, leading to relative adrenal insufficiency. The latter is thought to be caused by a combination of factors, including impaired adrenal function, decreased production of corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) by the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, and increased breakdown of cortisol. The dysregulation of cortisol secretion in sepsis is thought to contribute to the pathophysiology of the disease by impairing the body's ability to mount an appropriate inflammatory response. Given the dysregulation of cortisol secretion and corticosteroid receptors in sepsis, there has been considerable interest in the use of steroids as a treatment. However, clinical trials have yielded mixed results and corticosteroid use in sepsis remains controversial. In this review, we will discuss the changes in cortisol secretion and corticosteroid receptors in critically ill patients with sepsis/septic shock. We will also make special note of COVID-19 patients, who presented a recent challenge for ICU management, and explore the scope for corticosteroid administration in both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 septic patients.

PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF LOW-DOSE ADRENOCORTICOTROPIC HORMONE TEST IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS

ABSTRACT

Background: Previous trials evaluated the incidence of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) using 250 μg adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH). However, this supraphysiological dose could result in false-positive levels. We aimed to determine the incidence of CIRCI in septic patients using a 1 μg ACTH stress test. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study on 39 patients with septic shock. Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency was defined as a Δ max cortisol <9 μg/dL after 1 μg ACTH stress test. The primary outcome of the study was death. Secondary outcomes included days of vasopressors, days of mechanical ventilation (MV), amount of fluid per day, the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and days of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Results: The incidence of CIRCI in our cohort was 43.6% using 1 μg ACTH. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of ICU scores, laboratory investigations, vasopressors, MV days, amount of fluid per day, and the ICU stay ( P = > 0.05). The CIRCI group had lower median survival and survival probability rates (5 days and 48.4%, respectively) compared with the non-CIRCI group (7 days and 49.5%, respectively). In addition, the CIRCI group had a shorter time to develop AKI and a higher probability of developing AKI (4 days and 44.6%, respectively) in comparison with the non-CIRCI group (6 days and 45.57%, respectively). Conclusion: We concluded that the CIRCI group had a lower mean survival rate and a higher incidence of AKI. We recommend the use of 1 μg ACTH test in septic shock patients to identify this subgroup of patients.

Initiating angiotensin II at lower vasopressor doses in vasodilatory shock: an exploratory post-hoc analysis of the ATHOS-3 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

High dose vasopressors portend poor outcome in vasodilatory shock. We aimed to evaluate the impact of baseline vasopressor dose on outcomes in patients treated with angiotensin II (AT II).

METHODS

Exploratory post-hoc analysis of the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock (ATHOS-3) trial data. The ATHOS-3 trial randomized 321 patients with vasodilatory shock, who remained hypotensive (mean arterial pressure of 55-70 mmHg) despite receiving standard of care vasopressor support at a norepinephrine-equivalent dose (NED) > 0.2 µg/kg/min, to receive AT II or placebo, both in addition to standard of care vasopressors. Patients were grouped into low (≤ 0.25 µg/kg/min; n = 104) or high (> 0.25 µg/kg/min; n = 217) NED at the time of study drug initiation. The primary outcome was the difference in 28-day survival between the AT II and placebo subgroups in those with a baseline NED ≤ 0.25 µg/kg/min at the time of study drug initiation.

RESULTS

Of 321 patients, the median baseline NED in the low-NED subgroup was similar in the AT II (n = 56) and placebo (n = 48) groups (median of each arm 0.21 µg/kg/min, p = 0.45). In the high-NED subgroup, the median baseline NEDs were also similar (0.47 µg/kg/min AT II group, n = 107 vs. 0.45 µg/kg/min placebo group, n = 110, p = 0.75). After adjusting for severity of illness, those randomized to AT II in the low-NED subgroup were half as likely to die at 28-days compared to placebo (HR 0.509; 95% CI 0.274-0.945, p = 0.03). No differences in 28-day survival between AT II and placebo groups were found in the high-NED subgroup (HR 0.933; 95% CI 0.644-1.350, p = 0.71). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the low-NED AT II subgroup compared to the placebo low-NED subgroup, though differences were not statistically significant, and were comparable in the high-NED subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

This exploratory post-hoc analysis of phase 3 clinical trial data suggests a potential benefit of AT II introduction at lower doses of other vasopressor agents. These data may inform design of a prospective trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The ATHOS-3 trial was registered in the clinicaltrials.gov repository (no. NCT02338843). Registered 14 January 2015.

2023 Update on Sepsis and Septic Shock in Adult Patients: Management in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Sepsis/septic shock is a life-threatening and time-dependent condition that requires timely management to reduce mortality. This review aims to update physicians with regard to the main pillars of treatment for this insidious condition.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were searched from inception with special attention paid to November 2021-January 2023.

RESULTS

The management of sepsis/septic shock is challenging and involves different pathophysiological aspects, encompassing empirical antimicrobial treatment (which is promptly administered after microbial tests), fluid (crystalloids) replacement (to be established according to fluid tolerance and fluid responsiveness), and vasoactive agents (e.g., norepinephrine (NE)), which are employed to maintain mean arterial pressure above 65 mmHg and reduce the risk of fluid overload. In cases of refractory shock, vasopressin (rather than epinephrine) should be combined with NE to reach an acceptable level of pressure control. If mechanical ventilation is indicated, the tidal volume should be reduced from 10 to 6 mL/kg. Heparin is administered to prevent venous thromboembolism, and glycemic control is recommended. The efficacy of other treatments (e.g., proton-pump inhibitors, sodium bicarbonate, etc.) is largely debated, and such treatments might be used on a case-to-case basis.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of sepsis/septic shock has significantly progressed in the last few years. Improving knowledge of the main therapeutic cornerstones of this challenging condition is crucial to achieve better patient outcomes.

Not all Shock States Are Created Equal: A Review of the Diagnosis and Management of Septic, Hypovolemic, Cardiogenic, Obstructive, and Distributive Shock

Shock in the critically ill patient is common and associated with poor outcomes. Categories include distributive, hypovolemic, obstructive, and cardiogenic, of which distributive (and usually septic distributive) shock is by far the most common. Clinical history, physical examination, and hemodynamic assessments & monitoring help differentiate these states. Specific management necessitates interventions to correct the triggering etiology as well as ongoing resuscitation to maintain physiologic milieu. One shock state may convert to another and may have an undifferentiated presentation; therefore, continual re-assessment is essential. This review provides guidance for intensivists for management of all shock states based on available scientific evidence.

An updated "norepinephrine equivalent" score in intensive care as a marker of shock severity

Vasopressors and fluids are the cornerstones for the treatment of shock. The current international guidelines on shock recommend norepinephrine as the first-line vasopressor and vasopressin as the second-line vasopressor. In clinical practice, due to drug availability, local practice variations, special settings, and ongoing research, several alternative vasoconstrictors and adjuncts are used in the absence of precise equivalent doses. Norepinephrine equivalence (NEE) is frequently used in clinical trials to overcome this heterogeneity and describe vasopressor support in a standardized manner. NEE quantifies the total amount of vasopressors, considering the potency of each such agent, which typically includes catecholamines, derivatives, and vasopressin. Intensive care studies use NEE as an eligibility criterion and also an outcome measure. On the other hand, NEE has several pitfalls which clinicians should know, important the lack of conversion of novel vasopressors such as angiotensin II and also adjuncts such as methylene blue, including a lack of high-quality data to support the equation and validate its predictive performance in all types of critical care practice. This review describes the history of NEE and suggests an updated formula incorporating novel vasopressors and adjuncts.

Kommentar zu „Intravenöse Vitamin C-Gabe: 28-Tage-Ergebnis septischer Patienten verschlechtert?“

Rarely the results of a study were expected so eagerly as the LOVIT trial, an acronym for “Lessening Organ Dysfunction with Vitamin C” 1. This blinded multicentric randomised trial (RCT) is a well-performed study 1 testing high-dose intravenous vitamin C (IVVC) (50 mg/kg every 6 h for 96hrs). With 872 patients, the trial is the largest so far. The results are sobering, as the patients receiving IVVC had a worse primary composite outcome compared to the placebo group: of note, the different components of the outcome (death or persistent organ dysfunction), did not differ significantly when considered individually 2.