-
1.
Addition of terlipressin to norepinephrine in septic shock and effect of renal perfusion: a pilot study
Wang, J., Shi, M., Huang, L., Li, Q., Meng, S., Xu, J., Xue, M., Xie, J., Liu, S., Huang, Y.
Renal Failure. 2022;44(1):1207-1215
Abstract
PURPOSE Terlipressin improves renal function in patients with septic shock. However, the mechanism remains unclear. Here, we aimed to evaluate the effects of terlipressin on renal perfusion in patients with septic shock. MATERIALS AND METHODS This pilot study enrolled patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit of the tertiary hospital from September 2019 to May 2020. We randomly assigned patients to terlipressin and usual care groups using a 1:1 ratio. Terlipressin was intravenously pumped at a rate of 1.3 μg/kg/hour for 24 h. We monitored renal perfusion using renal contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). The primary outcome was peak sonographic signal intensity (a renal perfusion parameter monitored by CEUS) at 24 h after enrollment. RESULTS 22 patients were enrolled in this study with 10 in the terlipressin group and 12 in the usual care group. The baseline characteristics of patients between the two groups were comparable. The peak sonographic signal intensity at 24 h after enrollment in the terlipressin group (60.5 ± 8.6 dB) was significantly higher than that in the usual care group (52.4 ± 7.0 dB; mean difference, 7.1 dB; 95% CI, 0.4-13.9; adjusted p = .04). Patients in the terlipressin group had a lower time to peak, heart rates, norepinephrine dose, and a higher stroke volume at 24 h after enrollment. No significant difference in the urine output within 24 h and incidence of acute kidney injury within 28 days was found between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Terlipressin improves renal perfusion, increases stroke volume, and decreases norepinephrine dose and heart rates in patients with septic shock.
-
2.
Assessing the Course of Organ Dysfunction Using Joint Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Modeling in the Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial
Harhay MO, Gasparini A, Walkey AJ, Weissman GE, Crowther MJ, Ratcliffe SJ, Russell JA
Crit Care Explor. 2020;2(4):e0104
Abstract
Non-mortality septic shock outcomes (e.g., Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score) are important clinical endpoints in pivotal sepsis trials. However, comparisons of observed longitudinal non-mortality outcomes between study groups can be biased if death is unequal between study groups or is associated with an intervention (i.e., informative censoring). We compared the effects of vasopressin versus norepinephrine on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score in the Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial to illustrate the use of joint modeling to help minimize potential bias from informative censoring. Design: Secondary analysis of the Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial data. Setting: Twenty-seven ICUs in Canada, Australia, and United States. Subjects: Seven hundred sixty-three participants with septic shock who received blinded vasopressin (n = 389) or norepinephrine infusions (n = 374). Measurements and Main Results: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were calculated daily until discharge, death, or day 28 after randomization. Mortality was numerically higher in the norepinephrine arm (28 d mortality of 39% vs 35%; p = 0.25), and there was a positive association between higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and patient mortality, characteristics that suggest a potential for bias from informative censoring of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores by death. The best-fitting joint longitudinal (i.e., linear mixed-effects model) and survival (i.e., Cox proportional hazards model for the time-to-death) model showed that norepinephrine was associated with a more rapid improvement in the total Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score through day 4, and then the daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores converged and overlapped for the remainder of the study period. Conclusions: Short-term reversal of organ dysfunction occurred more rapidly with norepinephrine compared with vasopressin, although differences between study arms did not persist after day 4. Joint models are an accessible methodology that could be used in critical care trials to assess the effects of interventions on the longitudinal progression of key outcomes (e.g., organ dysfunction, biomarkers, or quality of life) that may be informatively truncated by death or other censoring events.
-
3.
The effect of recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) on sepsis patients with acute severe thrombocytopenia: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RESCUE trial)
Zhou, Z., Feng, T., Xie, Y., Huang, P., Xie, H., Tian, R., Qian, B., Wang, R.
BMC infectious diseases. 2019;19(1):780
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sepsis is still a common critical disease with high morbidity and mortality in intensive care unit. Despite published guidelines for sepsis, development of antibiotic therapy and advanced organ support technologies, the mortality of sepsis patients is still 25% or more. It is necessary to distinguish the subtypes of sepsis, and the targeted therapy for the patients need to be explored. Platelets have various biological functions in hemostasis and thrombosis, host defense, inflammatory/immune responses and tissue repair/regeneration. Moreover, severe thrombocytopenia or sustained thrombocytopenia was closely associated with multiply organ dysfunction and higher mortality in sepsis patients. The clinical therapies for thrombocytopenia are platelet transfusion and platelet-elevating drugs. However, platelet transfusion has many defects in clinical practice in sepsis patients, and the impact of platelet-elevating drugs for sepsis patients is still unclear. RESCUE trial is aim to explore the effect of a platelet-elevating drug, recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO), as an effective rescue therapy on sepsis patients with acute severe thrombocytopenia. METHODS It is a randomized, open-label, multi-center, controlled trial in 5 tertiary academic hospitals including medical, surgical or general ICUs. In this study, a total of 200 sepsis patients with severe thrombocytopenia will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the control and rhTPO group. The patients will be followed up to 28 days after randomization. All patients in two groups receive the same treatment based on the guideline of Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Primary outcome is 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes are the changes of PCs, blood transfusion, biomarkers of infection and organ function, days free from advanced organ support, drug-related adverse events, the length of ICU and hospital stay. DISCUSSION RESCUE trial is the first randomized controlled trial to explore the impact of rhTPO for severe thrombocytopenia in sepsis patients diagnosed by sepsis-3.0 standard. Furthermore, RESCUE trial results will be of significant clinical value on the targeted therapy and add clinical evidence that rhTPO is an effective rescue therapy for these sepsis patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02707497. Registered Date: March 3rd, 2016. Protocol Version 3. Protocol Date: January 25th, 2019.
-
4.
Vasopressin Versus Norepinephrine for the Management of Septic Shock in Cancer Patients: The VANCS II Randomized Clinical Trial
Hajjar LA, Zambolim C, Belletti A, de Almeida JP, Gordon AC, Oliveira G, Park CHL, Fukushima JT, Rizk SI, Szeles TF, et al
Critical care medicine. 2019
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Previous trials suggest that vasopressin may improve outcomes in patients with vasodilatory shock. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether vasopressin could be superior to norepinephrine to improve outcomes in cancer patients with septic shock. DESIGN Single-center, randomized, double-blind clinical trial, and meta-analysis of randomized trials. SETTING ICU of a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS Two-hundred fifty patients 18 years old or older with cancer and septic shock. INTERVENTIONS Patients were assigned to either vasopressin or norepinephrine as first-line vasopressor therapy. An updated meta-analysis was also conducted including randomized trials published until October 2018. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. Prespecified secondary outcomes included 90-days all-cause mortality rate; number of days alive and free of advanced organ support at day 28; and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score 24 hours and 96 hours after randomization. We also measure the prevalence of adverse effects in 28 days. A total of 250 patients were randomized. The primary outcome was observed in 71 patients (56.8%) in the vasopressin group and 66 patients (52.8%) in the norepinephrine group (p = 0.52). There were no significant differences in 90-day mortality (90 patients [72.0%] and 94 patients [75.2%], respectively; p = 0.56), number of days alive and free of advanced organ support, adverse events, or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. CONCLUSIONS In cancer patients with septic shock, vasopressin as first-line vasopressor therapy was not superior to norepinephrine in reducing 28-day mortality rate.
-
5.
Elevated Syndecan-1 after Trauma and Risk of Sepsis: A Secondary Analysis of Patients from the Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) Trial
Wei S, Rodriguez EG, Chang R, Holcomb JB, Kao LS, Wade CE
Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2018;227((6):):587-595.
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endotheliopathy of trauma is characterized by breakdown of the endothelial glycocalyx. Elevated biomarkers of endotheliopathy, such as serum syndecan-1 (Synd-1) ≥ 40 ng/mL, have been associated with increased need for transfusions, complications, and mortality. We hypothesized that severely injured trauma patients who exhibit elevated Synd-1 levels shortly after admission have an increased likelihood of developing sepsis. STUDY DESIGN We analyzed a subset of PROPPR patients that survived at least 72 hours after hospital admission and determined elevated Synd-1 levels (≥ 40 ng/mL) 4 hours after hospital arrival. Sepsis was defined a priori as meeting systemic inflammatory response criteria and having a known or suspected infection. Univariate analysis was performed to identify variables associated with elevated Synd-1 levels and sepsis. Significant variables at a p-value <0.2 in the univariate analysis were chosen by purposeful selection and analyzed in a mixed effects multivariate logistic regression model to account for the 12 different study sites. RESULTS We included 512 patients. Of these, 402 (79%) had elevated Synd-1 levels, and 180 (35%) developed sepsis. Median Synd-1 levels at 4 hours after admission were 70 ng/dL (IQR 36 - 157 ng/dL) in patients who did not develop sepsis, and 165 ng/dL (IQR 67 - 336 ng/dL) in those who did (p < 0.001). Adjusting for treatment arm and site, multivariable analyses revealed that elevated Synd-1 status, injury severity score (ISS), and total blood transfused were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of developing sepsis. CONCLUSIONS Elevated Synd-1 levels 4 hours after admission in severely injured adult trauma patients who survived the initial 72 hours after hospital admission is associated with subsequent sepsis.
-
6.
Vasopressin in septic shock; assessment of sepsis biomarkers: a randomized, controlled trial
Barzegar E, Nouri M, Mousavi S, Ahmadi A, Mojtahedzadeh M
Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine : Peer-Reviewed, Official Publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. 2017;21((9)):578-584.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Vasopressin (VP) in sepsis apart from vasoconstrictive effect may have some immunomodulatory effects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of VP on different aspect of sepsis by measuring of sepsis biomarkers. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this trial, a total number of 42 septic shock patients were included. The first group received norepinephrine (NE) infusion to reach the target mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥ 65 mm Hg and the second group received arginine vasopressin (AVP) infusion in addition to NE. Serum lactate, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, pentraxin 3 (PTX3), angiopoietin 1 and 2 (Ang 1 and 2) levels were assessed. RESULTS Level of IL-6 and IL-10 decreased, but there was no significant difference between the two groups after 48 h. CRP and PTX3 levels were not also significantly different between groups. Although Angs were not statistically different, there was a trend toward higher Ang-1 in and lower Ang 2 in AVP group after 24 and 48 h. In addition, lactate level did not differ between NE and AVP groups. There was no interaction between VP and hydrocortisone use on IL-6, IL-10, and PTX3, but a significant statistical interaction on Ang 1 and Ang 2 were observed. CONCLUSIONS Although analysis of sepsis biomarkers showed no significant difference between two groups, no immunomodulatory effect for VP alone, subgroup analysis of hydrocortisone used in this study showed that the combination of glucocorticoids and AVP had a significant effect on Angs level which eventually causes less endothelial permeability and higher MAP in this group of patients.
-
7.
Effect of an early resuscitation protocol on in-hospital mortality among adults with sepsis and hypotension: a randomized clinical trial
Andrews B, Semler MW, Muchemwa L, Kelly P, Lakhi S, Heimburger DC, Mabula C, Bwalya M, Bernard GR
Jama. 2017;318((13)):1233-1240.
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Importance: The effect of an early resuscitation protocol on sepsis outcomes in developing countries remains unknown. Objective: To determine whether an early resuscitation protocol with administration of intravenous fluids, vasopressors, and blood transfusion decreases mortality among Zambian adults with sepsis and hypotension compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial of 212 adults with sepsis (suspected infection plus ≥2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria) and hypotension (systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg or mean arterial pressure ≤65 mm Hg) presenting to the emergency department at a 1500-bed referral hospital in Zambia between October 22, 2012, and November 11, 2013. Data collection concluded December 9, 2013. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to either (1) an early resuscitation protocol for sepsis (n = 107) that included intravenous fluid bolus administration with monitoring of jugular venous pressure, respiratory rate, and arterial oxygen saturation and treatment with vasopressors targeting mean arterial pressure (≥65 mm Hg) and blood transfusion (for patients with a hemoglobin level <7 g/dL) or (2) usual care (n = 105) in which treating clinicians determined hemodynamic management. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcomes included the volume of intravenous fluid received and receipt of vasopressors. Results: Among 212 patients randomized to receive either the sepsis protocol or usual care, 3 were ineligible and the remaining 209 completed the study and were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 36.7 [12.4] years; 117 men [56.0%]; 187 [89.5%] positive for the human immunodeficiency virus). The primary outcome of in-hospital mortality occurred in 51 of 106 patients (48.1%) in the sepsis protocol group compared with 34 of 103 patients (33.0%) in the usual care group (between-group difference, 15.1% [95% CI, 2.0%-28.3%]; relative risk, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.04-2.05]; P = .03). In the 6 hours after presentation to the emergency department, patients in the sepsis protocol group received a median of 3.5 L (interquartile range, 2.7-4.0 L) of intravenous fluid compared with 2.0 L (interquartile range, 1.0-2.5 L) in the usual care group (mean difference, 1.2 L [95% CI, 1.0-1.5 L]; P < .001). Fifteen patients (14.2%) in the sepsis protocol group and 2 patients (1.9%) in the usual care group received vasopressors (between-group difference, 12.3% [95% CI, 5.1%-19.4%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with sepsis and hypotension, most of whom were positive for HIV, in a resource-limited setting, a protocol for early resuscitation with administration of intravenous fluids and vasopressors increased in-hospital mortality compared with usual care. Further studies are needed to understand the effects of administration of intravenous fluid boluses and vasopressors in patients with sepsis across different low- and middle-income clinical settings and patient populations. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01663701.
-
8.
Selepressin, a novel selective vasopressin V1A agonist, is an effective substitute for norepinephrine in a phase IIa randomized, placebo-controlled trial in septic shock patients
Russell JA, Vincent JL, Kjolbye AL, Olsson H, Blemings A, Spapen H, Carl P, Laterre PF, Grundemar L
Critical Care (London, England). 2017;21((1)):213.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vasopressin is widely used for vasopressor support in septic shock patients, but experimental evidence suggests that selective V1A agonists are superior. The initial pharmacodynamic effects, pharmacokinetics, and safety of selepressin, a novel V1A-selective vasopressin analogue, was examined in a phase IIa trial in septic shock patients. METHODS This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial in 53 patients in early septic shock (aged ≥18 years, fluid resuscitation, requiring vasopressor support) who received selepressin 1.25 ng/kg/minute (n = 10), 2.5 ng/kg/minute (n = 19), 3.75 ng/kg/minute (n = 2), or placebo (n = 21) until shock resolution or a maximum of 7 days. If mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg was not maintained, open-label norepinephrine was added. Co-primary endpoints were maintenance of MAP >60 mmHg without norepinephrine, norepinephrine dose, and proportion of patients maintaining MAP >60 mmHg with or without norepinephrine over 7 days. Secondary endpoints included cumulative fluid balance, organ dysfunction, pharmacokinetics, and safety. RESULTS A higher proportion of the patients receiving 2.5 ng/kg/minute selepressin maintained MAP >60 mmHg without norepinephrine (about 50% and 70% at 12 and 24 h, respectively) vs. 1.25 ng/kg/minute selepressin and placebo (p < 0.01). The 7-day cumulative doses of norepinephrine were 761, 659, and 249 mug/kg (placebo 1.25 ng/kg/minute and 2.5 ng/kg/minute, respectively; 2.5 ng/kg/minute vs. placebo; p < 0.01). Norepinephrine infusion was weaned more rapidly in selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute vs. placebo (0.04 vs. 0.18 mug/kg/minute at 24 h, p < 0.001), successfully maintaining target MAP and reducing norepinephrine dose vs. placebo (first 24 h, p < 0.001). Cumulative net fluid balance was lower from day 5 onward in the selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute group vs. placebo (p < 0.05). The selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute group had a greater proportion of days alive and free of ventilation vs. placebo (p < 0.02). Selepressin (2.5 ng/kg/minute) was well tolerated, with a similar frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events for selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute and placebo. Two patients were infused at 3.75 ng/kg/minute, one of whom had the study drug infusion discontinued for possible safety reasons, with subsequent discontinuation of this dose group. CONCLUSIONS In septic shock patients, selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute was able to rapidly replace norepinephrine while maintaining adequate MAP, and it may improve fluid balance and shorten the time of mechanical ventilation. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01000649 . Registered on September 30, 2009.
-
9.
Benefits and harms of red blood cell transfusions in patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit
Holst LB
Danish Medical Journal. 2016;63((2)):B5209.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) is widely used for non-bleeding patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit (ICU). The evidence for effect and safety are limited showing conflicting results and transfused RBCs have the potential to harm subgroups of critically ill patients. Our aim was to assess the benefits and harms of RBC transfusion in patients with septic shock in a randomised clinical trial and to conduct an up-to-date systematic review with meta-analysis of all randomised clinical trials comparing different transfusion strategies. METHODS We planned and conducted a randomised, partly blinded, clinical trial assigning patients with septic shock in the ICU and a haemoglobin level of 9 g/dl (5.6 mM) or below to receive single units of pre-storage leukoreduced RBCs at a lower haemoglobin threshold level of 7 g/dl (4.3 mM) or below or a higher haemoglobin threshold level of 9 g/dl (5.6 mM) or below. The primary outcome was death by day 90 after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were need for life support, severe adverse reactions, ischaemic events in the ICU and days alive and out of hospital. Secondly, we conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials comparing benefits and harms of using restrictive (range of lower haemoglobin thresholds) versus liberal (range of higher haemoglobin threshold) transfusion trigger strategies to guide RBC transfusion and pooled results in meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses. RESULTS Of the 1005 patients that underwent randomisation 998 were included in analysis of the primary outcome of mortality. Ninety days after randomisation, 216 of 502 patients (43%) in the lower threshold group had died compared to 223 of 496 (45%) patients in the higher threshold group (relative risk (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.09, p=0.44). The number of patients who required life support, who had ischaemic events, severe adverse reactions and number of days alive and out of hospital were similar in the two groups. Patients in the lower threshold group received 1588 units of RBCs compared to 3088 units in the higher group. A total of 176 (36%) patients in the lower threshold group never received RBCs in the ICU compared with six patients (1%) in the higher threshold group. The systematic review identified 31 trials with a total of 9813 patients in different clinical settings. In meta-analyses restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies were not associated with the RR of death (0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.05, 5607 patients in eight trials with lower risk of bias), overall morbidity (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12, 4517 patients in six trials with lower risk of bias), fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.83, 4630 patients in six trials with lower risk of bias). Trial sequential analysis on mortality and myocardial infarction showed that required information sizes had not been reached but use of restrictive transfusion strategies was associated with reduced numbers of RBC units transfused (mean difference -1.43, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.86) and reduced proportion of patients transfused (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.63). CONCLUSION The TRISS trial provided evidence for the safe use of 7 g/dl as transfusion trigger in patients with septic shock and reduced the number of units transfused with about half. In line with this, the updated systematic review including data from several recent trials showed no associations with mortality or other adverse events when comparing restrictive to liberal RBC transfusion strategies, however, restrictive transfusion strategies reduce the exposure of patients to RBC transfusions and reduce number of transfused RBC units. Given the fact that liberal transfusion strategies have not been proven beneficial, a more restrictive approach should be considered. Results from the TRISS trial together with other recent trials have the potential to alter the international guidelines for transfusing critically ill patients. Several guidelines have been updated the last years recommending the
-
10.
Blood transfusions in septic shock: is 7.0 g/dL really the appropriate threshold?
Mazza BF, Freitas FG, Barros MM, Azevedo LC, Machado FR
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2015;27((1)):36-43.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the immediate effects of red blood cell transfusion on central venous oxygen saturation and lactate levels in septic shock patients with different transfusion triggers. METHODS We included patients with a diagnosis of septic shock within the last 48 hours and hemoglobin levels below 9.0 g/dL Patients were randomized for immediate transfusion with hemoglobin concentrations maintained above 9.0 g/dL (Group Hb9) or to withhold transfusion unless hemoglobin felt bellow 7.0 g/dL (Group Hb7). Hemoglobin, lactate, central venous oxygen saturation levels were determined before and one hour after each transfusion. RESULTS We included 46 patients and 74 transfusions. Patients in Group Hb7 had a significant reduction in median lactate from 2.44 (2.00 - 3.22) mMol/L to 2.21 (1.80 - 2.79) mMol/L, p = 0.005, which was not observed in Group Hb9 [1.90 (1.80 - 2.65) mMol/L to 2.00 (1.70 - 2.41) mMol/L, p = 0.23]. Central venous oxygen saturation levels increased in Group Hb7 [68.0 (64.0 - 72.0)% to 72.0 (69.0 - 75.0)%, p < 0.0001] but not in Group Hb9 [72.0 (69.0 - 74.0)% to 72.0 (71.0 - 73.0)%, p = 0.98]. Patients with elevated lactate or central venous oxygen saturation < 70% at baseline had a significant increase in these variables, regardless of baseline hemoglobin levels. Patients with normal values did not show a decrease in either group. CONCLUSION Red blood cell transfusion increased central venous oxygen saturation and decreased lactate levels in patients with hypoperfusion regardless of their baseline hemoglobin levels. Transfusion did not appear to impair these variables in patients without hypoperfusion. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01611753.