Tag Archives: Septic Shock

Impact of Source Control in Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. (Betters)

Posted on by
Reply

Martínez ML, et al. Impact of Source Control in Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. Crit Care Med. 2017 Jan;45(1):11-19.

OBJECTIVES: Time to clearance of pathogens is probably critical to outcome in septic shock. Current guidelines recommend intervention for source control within 12 hours after diagnosis. We aimed to determine the epidemiology of source control in the management of sepsis and to analyze the impact of timing to source control on mortality.

DESIGN: Prospective observational analysis of the Antibiotic Intervention in Severe Sepsis study, a Spanish national multicenter educational intervention to improve antibiotherapy in sepsis.

SETTING: Ninety-nine medical-surgical ICUs in Spain.

PATIENTS: We enrolled 3,663 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock during three 4-month periods between 2011 and 2013.

INTERVENTIONS: Source control and hospital mortality.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1,173 patients (32%) underwent source control, predominantly for abdominal, urinary, and soft-tissue infections. Compared with patients who did not require source control, patients who underwent source control were older, with a greater prevalence of shock, major organ dysfunction, bacteremia, inflammatory markers, and lactic acidemia. In addition, compliance with the resuscitation bundle was worse in those undergoing source control. In patients who underwent source control, crude ICU mortality was lower (21.2% vs 25.1%; p = 0.010); after adjustment for confounding factors, hospital mortality was also lower (odds ratio, 0.809 [95% CI, 0.658-0.994]; p = 0.044). In this observational database analysis, source control after 12 hours was not associated with higher mortality (27.6% vs 26.8%; p = 0.789).

CONCLUSIONS: Despite greater severity and worse compliance with resuscitation bundles, mortality was lower in septic patients who underwent source control than in those who did not. The time to source control could not be linked to survival in this observational database.

Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Dopamine and Epinephrine in Pediatric Fluid-Refractory Hypotensive Septic Shock. (Carroll)

Posted on by
Reply

Ramaswamy KN, et al. Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Dopamine and Epinephrine in Pediatric Fluid-Refractory Hypotensive Septic Shock. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Nov;17(11):e502-e512.

OBJECTIVE: We compared efficacy of dopamine and epinephrine as first-line vasoactive therapy in achieving resolution of shock in fluid-refractory hypotensive cold septic shock.

DESIGN: Double-blind, pilot, randomized controlled study.

SETTING: Pediatric emergency and ICU of a tertiary care teaching hospital.

PATIENTS: Consecutive children 3 months to 12 years old, with fluid-refractory hypotensive septic shock, were enrolled between July 2013 and December 2014.

INTERVENTION: Enrolled children were randomized to receive either dopamine (in incremental doses, 10 to 15 to 20 μg/kg/min) or epinephrine (0.1 to 0.2 to 0.3 μg/kg/min) till end points of resolution of shock were achieved. After reaching maximum doses of test drugs, open-label vasoactive was started as per discretion of treating team. Primary outcome was resolution of shock within first hour of resuscitation. The study was registered (CTRI/2014/02/004393) and was approved by institute ethics committee.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We enrolled 29 children in epinephrine group and 31 in dopamine group. Resolution of shock within first hour was achieved in greater proportion of children receiving epinephrine (n = 12; 41%) than dopamine (n = 4; 13%) (odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.3-17.2; p = 0.019); the trend persisted even at 6 hours (48.3% vs 29%; p = 0.184). Children in epinephrine group had lower Sequential Organ Function Assessment score on day 3 (8 vs 12; p = 0.05) and more organ failure-free days (24 vs 20 d; p = 0.022). No significant difference in adverse events (16.1% vs 13.8%; p = 0.80) and mortality (58.1% vs 48.3%; p = 0.605) was observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: Epinephrine is more effective than dopamine in achieving resolution of fluid-refractory hypotensive cold shock within the first hour of resuscitation and improving organ functions.

Elevated Plasma Angiopoietin-2 Levels Are Associated With Fluid Overload, Organ Dysfunction, and Mortality in Human Septic Shock (Patel)

Posted on by
Reply

Fisher J, et al. Elevated Plasma Angiopoietin-2 Levels Are Associated With Fluid Overload, Organ Dysfunction, and Mortality in Human Septic Shock. Crit Care Med. 2016 Nov;44(11):2018-2027.

OBJECTIVES: Angiopoietins modulate endothelial permeability via endothelial cell junctions. Angiopoietin-2 blocks the angiopoietin-1/Tie-2 interaction that stabilizes these junctions, and elevated plasma angiopoietin-2 levels are associated with vascular leakage. We hypothesized that plasma angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 levels are associated with indirect markers of increased vascular permeability, organ dysfunction, mortality, and plasma proinflammatory cytokine levels in human septic shock.

DESIGN: Multicenter observational cohort study derived from a randomized controlled trial (Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial of vasopressin versus norepinephrine in septic shock).

SETTING: ICUs of hospitals in Canada, Australia, and the United States.

PATIENTS: Three hundred forty-one patients in the randomized, controlled Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial trial of vasopressin versus norepinephrine in septic shock.

INTERVENTIONS: None.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured plasma levels of angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 at study baseline and determined their association with percent fluid overload and acute organ dysfunction and generated a receiver operating characteristic curve for plasma angiopoietin-2 levels versus acute kidney injury. We also determined the association of angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 levels with hemodynamics, mortality, and plasma cytokine levels. Plasma angiopoietin-2 levels were directly associated with percent fluid overload at baseline (rs = 0.18; p = 0.0008) and at 6 hours (rs = 0.13; p = 0.023), but not at 24 hours (rs = 0.041; p = 0.46). Plasma angiopoietin-2 levels were associated with the development of hepatic (p < 0.0001) and coagulation (p < 0.0001) dysfunction and acute kidney injury (p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic curve had an area under the curve of 0.73 for acute kidney injury. angiopoietin-2 levels were also inversely associated with days alive (r = -0.24; p = 0.010) and positively associated with increased 7-day (log-rank trend chi-square = 5.9; p = 0.015) and 28-day (log-rank chi square = 4.9; p = 0.027) mortality. A threshold of angiopoietin-2 levels above the first quartile (> 5,807 pg/mL) was observed to be associated with increased mortality risk, which aligns with prior studies. Plasma angiopoietin-2 levels were positively associated with plasma cytokine levels, including tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6 at baseline (rs = 0.39; p < 0.0001 and rs = 0.51; p < 0.0001) and at 24 hours (rs = 0.29; p < 0.0001 and rs = 0.41; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: Increased plasma angiopoietin-2 levels are associated with increased fluid overload, hepatic and coagulation dysfunction, acute kidney injury, mortality, and plasma cytokines in human septic shock. angiopoietin-2 activation may increase vascular leakage leading to increased fluid requirements, organ dysfunction, and death from septic shock.

Pediatric Sepsis Biomarker Risk Model-II: Redefining the Pediatric Sepsis Biomarker Risk Model With Septic Shock Phenotype. (Patel)

Posted on by
Reply

Wong HR, et al. Pediatric Sepsis Biomarker Risk Model-II: Redefining the Pediatric Sepsis Biomarker Risk Model With Septic Shock Phenotype. Crit Care Med. 2016 Nov;44(11):2010-2017.

OBJECTIVE: The Pediatric Sepsis Biomarker Risk Model (PERSEVERE), a pediatric sepsis risk model, uses biomarkers to estimate baseline mortality risk for pediatric septic shock. It is unknown how PERSEVERE performs within distinct septic shock phenotypes. We tested PERSEVERE in children with septic shock and thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure (TAMOF), and in those without new onset thrombocytopenia but with multiple organ failure (MOF).

DESIGN: PERSEVERE-based mortality risk was generated for each study subject (n = 660). A priori, we determined that if PERSEVERE did not perform well in both the TAMOF and the MOF cohorts, we would revise PERSEVERE to incorporate admission platelet counts.

SETTING: Multiple PICUs in the United States.

INTERVENTIONS: Standard care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: PERSEVERE performed well in the TAMOF cohort (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves [AUC], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.77-0.90]), but less well in the MOF cohort (AUC, 0.71 [0.61-0.80]). PERSEVERE was revised using 424 subjects previously reported in the derivation phase. PERSEVERE-II had an AUC of 0.89 (0.85-0.93) and performed equally well across TAMOF and MOF cohorts. PERSEVERE-II performed well when tested in 236 newly enrolled subjects. Sample size calculations for a clinical trial testing the efficacy of plasma exchange for children with septic shock and TAMOF indicated PERSEVERE-II-based stratification could substantially reduce the number of patients necessary, when compared with no stratification.

CONCLUSIONS: Testing PERSEVERE in the context of septic shock phenotypes prompted a revision incorporating platelet count. PERSEVERE-II performs well upon testing, independent of TAMOF or MOF status. PERSEVERE-II could potentially serve as a prognostic enrichment tool.