Abstract

INTRODUCTION The ultrasound measurement of inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter change during respiratory phase to guide fluid resuscitation in shock patients is widely performed, but the benefit on reducing the mortality of sepsis patients is questionable. The study objective was to evaluate the 30-day mortality rate of patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion (SITH) and septic shock (SS) treated with ultrasound-guided fluid management (UGFM) using ultrasonographic change of the IVC diameter during respiration compared with those treated with the usual-care strategy. METHODS This was a randomized controlled trial conducted in an urban, university-affiliated tertiary-care hospital. Adult patients with SITH/SS were randomized to receive treatment with UGFM using respiratory change of the IVC (UGFM strategy) or with the usual-care strategy during the first six hours after emergency department (ED) arrival. We compared the 30-day mortality rate and other clinical outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS A total of 202 patients were enrolled, 101 in each group (UGFM vs usual-care strategy) for intention-to-treat analysis. There was no significant difference in 30-day overall mortality between the two groups (18.8% and 19.8% in the usual-care and UGFM strategy, respectively; p > 0.05 by log rank test). Neither was there a difference in six-hour lactate clearance, a change in the sequential organ failure assessment score, or length of hospital stay. However, the cumulative fluid amount given in 24 hours was significantly lower in the UGFM arm. CONCLUSION In our ED setting, the use of respiratory change of IVC diameter determined by point-of-care ultrasound to guide initial fluid resuscitation in SITH/SS ED patients did not improve the 30-day survival probability or other clinical parameters compared to the usual-care strategy. However, the IVC ultrasound-guided resuscitation was associated with less amount of fluid used.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The best fluid replacement strategy and the role of albumin in immunocompromised patients with sepsis is unclear. METHODS We performed a secondary analysis of immunocompromised patients enrolled in the ALBIOS trial which randomized patients with severe sepsis or septic shock to receive either 20% albumin (target 30 g per liter or more) and crystalloid or crystalloid alone during ICU stay. RESULTS Of 1818 patients originally enrolled, 304 (16.4%) were immunocompromised. One-hundred-thirty-nine (45.7%) patients were randomized in the albumin while 165 (54.2%) in the crystalloid group. At 90 days, 69 (49.6%) in the albumin group and 89 (53.9%) in the crystalloids group died (hazard ratio - HR - 0.94; 95% CI 0.69-1.29). No differences were observed with regards to 28-day mortality, SOFA score (and sub-scores), length of stay in the ICU and in the hospital, proportion of patients who had developed acute kidney injury or received renal replacement therapy, duration of mechanical ventilation. Albumin was not independently associated with a higher or lower 90-day mortality (HR 0.979, 95% CI 0.709-1.352) as compared to crystalloid. CONCLUSION Albumin replacement during the ICU stay, as compared with crystalloids alone, did not affect clinical outcomes in a cohort of immunocompromised patients with sepsis.

Abstract

The mortality rate of sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is high. This study aimed to explore the efficacy of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in sepsis-associated DIC patients by improving endothelial function. A total of 112 sepsis-associated DIC patients were randomly divided into the TPE group (n = 40), the heparin (HP) group (n = 36), and the SHAM group (n = 36). The SHAM group received conventional treatment; the HP group was treated with HP based on conventional treatment; and the TPE group received conventional treatment plus TPE. The differences in thromboelastogram (TEG), platelet (PLT), coagulation function, and the endothelial cell (EC) injury biomarkers at 6 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 7 days after TPE were compared among the three groups, and the three groups were compared in terms of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, the length of intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization, 28-day mortality rate, 28-day cumulative survival rate, the incidence of bleeding events, the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The efficacy of TPE is superior to the HP in increasing PLT, improving coagulation function, increasing the 28-day cumulative survival rate, and reducing the length of ICU hospitalization, 28-day mortality, and the incidence of bleeding events, AKI, and ARDS with statistically significant differences (P < .05). Moreover, the effect of TPE outperforms HP on the EC injury biomarkers with statistically significant differences (P < .05). Our results suggest that TPE may be more effective than HP in the treatment of patients with sepsis-associated DIC. The possible mechanism is via improving endothelial function.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Aggressive fluid administration is recommended in the resuscitation of septic patients. However, the delivery of a rapid fluid bolus might cause harm by inducing degradation of the endothelial glycocalyx. This research aimed to examine the effects of the limited infusion rate of fluid on glycocalyx shedding as measured by syndecan-1 in patients with sepsis-induced hypoperfusion. METHODS A prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label trial was conducted between November 2018 and February 2020 in an urban academic emergency department. Patients with sepsis-induced hypoperfusion, defined as hypotension or hyperlactatemia, were randomized to receive either the standard rate (30 ml/kg/h) or limited rate (10 ml/kg/h) of fluid for the first 30 ml/kg fluid resuscitation. Subsequently, the fluid rate was adjusted according to the physician's discretion but not more than that of the designated fluid rate for the total of 6 h. The primary outcome was differences in change of syndecan-1 levels at 6 h compared to baseline between standard and limited rate groups. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, organ failure, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS We included 96 patients in the intention-to-treat analysis, with 48 assigned to the standard-rate strategy and 48 to the limited-rate strategy. The median fluid volume in 6 h in the limited-rate group was 39 ml/kg (interquartile range [IQR] 35-52 ml/kg) vs. 53 ml/kg (IQR 46-64 ml/kg) in the standard-rate group (p < 0.001). Patients in the limited-rate group were less likely to received vasopressors (17% vs 42%; p = 0.007) and mechanical ventilation (20% vs 41%; p = 0.049) during the first 6 h. There were no significantly different changes in syndecan-1 levels at 6 h between the two groups (geometric mean ratio [GMR] in the limited-rate group, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.02; p = 0.07). There were no significant differences in adverse events, organ failure outcomes, or mortality between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS In sepsis resuscitation, the limited rate of fluid resuscitation compared to the standard rate did not significantly reduce changes in syndecan-1 at 6 h. TRIAL REGISTRATION Thai Clinical Trials Registry number: TCTR20181010001. Registered 8 October 2018, http://www.clinicaltrials.in.th/index.php?tp=regtrials&menu=trialsearch&smenu=fulltext&task=search&task2=view1&id=4064.

Abstract

BACKGROUND After being used for more than a decade the use of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 130/0.38-0.45 in clinical practice was discouraged because of serious adverse events including bleeding, acute kidney injury and death. But could these adverse effects have been discovered sooner? By comparing the summary effect estimates of the adverse effects of HES 130/0.38-0.45 in different study designs we aimed to disclose any signal of this. METHODS We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library and hand-searched the reference lists of relevant studies to identify studies for inclusion. Eligible trials were randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies in patients with sepsis and randomised trials in animals with induced sepsis comparing HES 130/0.38-0.45 to any type of crystalloid. Relevant outcomes were all-cause mortality at longest follow-up, renal replacement therapy (RRT), acute kidney injury (AKI) and bleeding. We extracted data, conducted conventional meta-analyses and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence. RESULTS We included 8 RCTs including 3,273 patients, 1 observational study including 379 patients and 5 randomised animal trials including 94 test animals. There was no suggestion of interaction in subgroup analyses comparing the different study designs for any outcomes (all-cause mortality at longest follow-up P=0.33; RRT P=0.70; AKI P=0.63; bleeding P=0.20). CONCLUSIONS We observed no interaction between the summary effect estimates of RCTs, observational studies in patients and randomised animal trials for any of the outcomes. Accordingly, we found no evidence indicating that the adverse effects of HES 130/0.38-0.45 could have been discovered sooner.

Abstract

PURPOSE This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of high-dose (> 0.2 L/kg of treated plasma per day) coupled plasma filtration-adsorption (CPFA) in treating patients with septic shock. METHODS Multicentre, randomised, adaptive trial, performed in 12 Italian intensive care units (ICUs). Patients aged 14 or more, admitted to the ICU with septic shock, or had developed it during the stay were eligible. The final outcome was mortality at discharge from the last hospital at which the patient received care. RESULTS Between May 2015, and October 2017, 115 patients were randomised. The first interim analysis revealed a number of early deaths, prompting an unplanned analysis. Last hospital mortality was non-significantly higher in the CPFA (55.6%) than in the control group (46.2%, p = 0.35). The 90-day survival curves diverged in favour of the controls early after randomisation and remained separated afterwards (p = 0.100). An unplanned analysis showed higher mortality in CPFA compared to controls among patients without severe renal failure (p = 0.025); a dose-response relationship was observed between treated plasma volume and mortality (p = 0.010). CONCLUSION The COMPACT-2 trial was stopped due to the possible harmful effect of CPFA in patients with septic shock. The harmful effect, if present, was particularly marked in the early phase of septic shock. Patients not requiring renal replacement therapy seemed most exposed to the possible harm, with evidence of a dose-response effect. Until the mechanisms behind these results are fully understood, the use of CPFA for the treatment of patients with septic shock is not recommended.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Early lactate-guided resuscitation was endorsed in the guidelines of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign as a key strategy to decrease the mortality of patients admitted to the ICU department with septic shock. However, its effectiveness in elderly Asian patients is uncertain. METHOD We conducted a single-center trial to test the effectiveness of the early lactate-guided resuscitation of older Asian patients at the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University. Eligible septic shock patients who consented to participation in the study were randomly assigned to receive early lactate-guided treatment or regular treatment as controls. RESULT A total of 82 patients met the hyperlactatemia criteria and participated in the trial. Forty-two patients received early lactate-guided treatment (lactate group) and 40 received regular treatment (control group). The lactate group received more fluids at initial 6 hours (3.3 ± 1.4 vs 2.4 ± 1.7 L, P = 0.01), but similar proportions of patients in both groups required the use of vasopressors and vasodilators. Patients in the lactate group showed significantly reduced ICU needs compared to the control group, which were weaned from mechanical ventilation more quickly (median 7, IQR 4 to 14 vs median 9, IQR 4.3 to 17.8, P = 0.02) and transferred out of the ICU earlier (median 4.5, IQR 2.8 to 7.3 vs median 6, IQR 3.2 to 8, P = 0.01). However, the hospital mortality (35.7% vs 42.5%, P = 0.35) and ICU mortality (31.0% vs 37.5%, P = 0.38) for both groups were not reduced. CONCLUSION For critically ill patients (elderly Asian patients) admitted to the ICU department with hyperlactatemia, early lactate-guided treatment reduced ICU needs but did not reduce mortality.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Based on the 2018 update of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, the Committee for Quality Improvement of the NHSs of England recommended the instigation of the elements of the 'Sepsis-6 bundle' within 1 hour to adult patients screened positive for sepsis. This bundle includes a bolus infusion of 30 mL/kg crystalloids in the ED. Besides the UK, both in the USA and Australia, compliance with similar 1-hour targets became an important quality indicator. However, the supporting evidence may neither be contemporaneous nor necessarily valid for emergency medicine settings. METHOD A systematic review was designed and registered at PROSPERO to assess available emergency medicine/prehospital evidence published between 2012 and 2020, investigating the clinical benefits associated with a bolus infusion of a minimum 30 mL/kg crystalloids within 1 hour to adult patients screened positive for sepsis. Due to the small number of papers that addressed this volume of fluids in 1 hour, we expanded the search to include studies looking at 1-6 hours. RESULTS Seven full-text articles were identified, which investigated various aspects of the fluid resuscitation in adult sepsis. However, none answered completely to the original research question aimed to determine either the effect of time-to-crystalloids or the optimal fluid volume of resuscitation. Our findings demonstrated that in the USA/UK/Australia/Canada, adult ED septic patients receive 23-43 mL/kg of crystalloids during the first 6 hours of resuscitation without significant differences either in mortality or in adverse effects. CONCLUSION This systematic review did not find high-quality evidence supporting the administration of 30 mL/kg crystalloid bolus to adult septic patients within 1 hour of presentation in the ED. Future research must investigate both the benefits and the potential harms of the recommended intervention.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The effect of early vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock is uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of early start of vasopressin support within 6 h after the diagnosis on clinical outcomes in septic shock patients. METHODS We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies from inception to the 1st of February 2021. We included studies involving adult patients (> 16 years)with septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality and in the experimental group patients in the studies receiving vasopressin infusion within 6 h after diagnosis of septic shock and in the control group patients in the studies receiving no vasopressin infusion or vasopressin infusion 6 h after diagnosis of septic shock, clearly comparing with clinically relevant secondary outcomes(use of renal replacement therapy(RRT),new onset arrhythmias, ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS Five studies including 788 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that short-term mortality between the two groups was no difference (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.48; P = 0.6; χ2 = 0.83; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes demonstrated that the use of RRT was less in the experimental group than that of the control group (OR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.88; P = 0.007; χ2 = 3.15; I2 = 36%).The new onset arrhythmias between the two groups was no statistically significant difference (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.1; P = 0.10; χ2 = 4.7; I2 = 36%). There was no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay(mean difference = 0.16; 95% CI, - 0.91 to 1.22; P = 0.77; χ2 = 6.08; I2 = 34%) and length of hospitalization (mean difference = -2.41; 95% CI, -6.61 to 1.78; P = 0.26; χ2 = 8.57; I2 = 53%) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Early initiation of vasopressin in patients within 6 h of septic shock onset was not associated with decreased short-term mortality, new onset arrhythmias, shorter ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization, but can reduce the use of RRT. Further large-scale RCTs are still needed to evaluate the benefit of starting vasopressin in the early phase of septic shock.

Abstract

AIMS: Sepsis and septic shock are common causes of hospitalization and mortality in patients with cirrhosis. There is no data on the choice of fluid and resuscitation protocols in sepsis-induced hypotension in cirrhosis. METHODS In this open-label trial conducted at a single center, we enrolled 308 cirrhotics with sepsis-induced hypotension and randomized them to receive either 5% albumin or normal saline. The primary endpoint was a reversal of hypotension [mean arterial pressure, MAP, ≥ 65 mmHg] at 3 h. Secondary endpoints included serial effects on heart rate, arterial lactate and urine output. RESULTS 154 patients each received 5% albumin (males, 79.8%, mean MAP 52.9 ± 7.0 mm Hg) or 0.9% saline (85.1%, 53.4 ± 6.3 mm Hg) with comparable baseline parameters and liver disease severity. Reversal of hypotension was higher in patients receiving 5% albumin than saline at the end of one hour [25.3% and 11.7%, p = 0.03, Odds ratio (95% CI)-1.9 (1.08-3.42)] and at the end of three hours [11.7% and 3.2%, p = 0.008, 3.9 (1.42-10.9)]. Sustained reduction in heart rate and hyperlactatemia (p < 0.001) was better in the albumin group. At one week, the proportion of patients surviving was higher in the albumin group than those receiving saline (43.5% vs 38.3%, p = 0.03). Female gender and SOFA ≥ 11 were predictors of non-response to fluid. CONCLUSIONS 5% human albumin is safe and beneficial in reversing sepsis-induced hypotension compared to normal saline in patients with cirrhosis improving clinically assessable parameters of systemic hemodynamics, tissue perfusion and in-hospital short-term survival of cirrhosis patients with sepsis.