Should we start vasopressors very early in septic shock?

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.

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.

Should Vasopressors Be Started Early in Septic Shock?

Sepsis can influence blood volume, its distribution, vascular tone, and cardiac function. Persistent hypotension or the need for vasopressors after volume resuscitation is part of the definition of septic shock. Since increased positive fluid balance has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality in sepsis, timing of vasopressors in the treatment of septic shock seems crucial. However, conclusive evidence on timing and sequence of interventions with the goal to restore tissue perfusion is lacking. The aim of this narrative review is to depict the pathophysiology of hypotension in sepsis, evaluate how common interventions to treat hypotension interfere with physiology, and to give a resume of the results from clinical studies focusing on targets and timing of vasopressor in sepsis. The majority of studies comparing early versus late administration of vasopressors in septic shock are rather small, single-center, and retrospective. The range of "early" is between 1 and 12 hours. The available studies suggest a mean arterial pressure of 60 to 65 mm Hg as a threshold for increased risk of morbidity and mortality, whereas higher blood pressure targets do not seem to add further benefits. The data, albeit mostly from observational studies, speak for combining vasopressors with fluids rather "early" in the treatment of septic shock (within a 0-3-hour window). Nevertheless, the optimal resuscitation strategy should take into account the source of infection, the pathophysiology, the time and clinical course preceding the diagnosis of sepsis, and also comorbidities and sepsis-induced organ dysfunction.

Sepsis-Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Concepts

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition and a global disease burden. Today, the heterogeneous syndrome is defined as severe organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection, with renewed emphasis on immune pathophysiology. Despite all efforts of experimental and clinical research during the last three decades, the ability to positively influence course and outcome of the syndrome remains limited. Evidence-based therapy still consists of basic causal and supportive measures, while adjuvant interventions such as blood purification or targeted immunotherapy largely remain without proof of effectiveness so far. With this review, we aim to provide an overview of sepsis immune pathophysiology, to update the choice of therapeutic approaches targeting different immunological mechanisms in the course of sepsis and septic shock, and to call for a paradigm shift from the pathogen to the host response as a potentially more promising angle.