Clinical Characteristics and Current Interventions in Shock Patients in Chinese Emergency Departments: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Predictive value of tachycardia for mortality in trauma-related haemorrhagic shock: a systematic review and meta-regression

OBJECTIVES

Heart rate (HR) is one of the physiological variables in the early assessment of trauma-related haemorrhagic shock, according to Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS). However, its efficiency as predictor of mortality is contradicted by several studies. Furthermore, the linear association between HR and the severity of shock and blood loss presented by ATLS is doubtful. This systematic review aims to update current knowledge on the role of HR in the initial haemodynamic assessment of patients who had a trauma.

DESIGN

This study is a systematic review and meta-regression that follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Web of Science databases were systematically searched through on 1 September 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Papers providing early HR and mortality data on bleeding patients who had a trauma were included. Patient cohorts were considered haemorrhagic if the inclusion criteria of the studies contained transfusion and/or positive focused assessment with sonography for trauma and/or postinjury haemodynamical instability and/or abdominal gunshot injury. Studies on burns, traumatic spinal or brain injuries were excluded. Papers published before January 2010 were not considered.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction and risk of bias were assessed by two independent investigators. The association between HR and mortality of patients who had a trauma was assessed using meta-regression analysis. As subgroup analysis, meta-regression was performed on patients who received blood products.

RESULTS

From a total of 2017 papers, 19 studies met our eligibility criteria. Our primary meta-regression did not find a significant relation (p=0.847) between HR and mortality in patients who had a trauma with haemorrhage. Our subgroup analysis included 10 studies, and it could not reveal a linear association between HR and mortality rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In accordance with the literature demonstrating the multiphasic response of HR to bleeding, our study presents the lack of linear association between postinjury HR and mortality. Modifying the pattern of HR derangements in the ATLS shock classification may result in a more precise teaching tool for young clinicians.

The medical treatment of cardiogenic shock: cardiovascular drugs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the use of vasopressors and inotropes in cardiogenic shock.

RECENT FINDINGS

The classic form or cardiogenic shock requires administration of inotropic and/or vasopressor agents to try to improve the impaired tissue perfusion. Among vasopressors various alpha-adrenergic agents, vasopressin derivatives and angiotensin can be used. The first-line therapy remains norepinephrine as it is associated with minimal adverse effects and appears to be associated by the best outcome in network meta-analyses. On the contrary, epinephrine is associated with an increased incidence of refractory shock and observational studies suggest an increased risk of death. Vasopressin may be an excellent alternative in tachycardiac patients or in the presence of pulmonary hypertension. Concerning inotropic agents, dobutamine is the first-line agent but levosimendan is an excellent alternative or additional agent in cases not responding to dobutamine. The impact on outcome of inotropic agents remains controversial.

SUMMARY

Recent studies have refined the position of the various vasopressor and inotropic agents. Norepinephrine is recommended as first-line vasopressor agent by various guidelines. Among inotropic agents, selection between the agents should be individualized and based on the hemodynamic response.

Understanding the Harms of HES: A Review of the Evidence to Date

Intravenous (IV) fluid resuscitation is one of the most common interventions in intensive care medicine. Despite clear guidelines, the choice of IV fluid is largely dependent on physician preference instead of high-quality evidence of efficacy and safety. This is particularly the case for synthetic colloids, such as hydroxyethyl starch (HES). The use of HES in critical care has been associated with increased rates of acute kidney injury (AKI), renal replacement therapy and mortality. In light of this, current guidelines and scientific and regulatory bodies do not recommend the use of HES for fluid therapy in critical illness and caution against its use in many other settings. Despite this, HES products are still debated and used. Awareness of the indications, contraindications, doses, benefits and adverse effects for IV fluids, as well as recommendations from scientific and regulatory bodies, is essential to guarantee patients' safety. Poor awareness of optimal IV fluid therapy has recently been revealed in some countries including Turkey. Therefore, we provide a review of fluids used for resuscitation, discuss safety data and adverse effects of HES, such as increased AKI and mortality, and discuss recent updates from scientific and regulatory bodies in order to raise awareness of fluid therapy. We conclude that given the lack of a clear benefit of HES in any clinical setting and the availability of safer alternatives, such as crystalloids and albumin, HES should be avoided.