[Vasopressin for therapy of persistent traumatic hemorrhagic shock: The VITRIS.at study]

Addition of terlipressin to initial volume resuscitation in a pediatric model of hemorrhagic shock improves hemodynamics and cerebral perfusion

Hemorrhagic shock is one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in pediatric trauma. Current treatment based on volume resuscitation is associated to adverse effects, and it has been proposed that vasopressors may be used in the pharmacological management of trauma. Terlipressin has demonstrated its usefulness in other pediatric critical care scenarios and its long half-life allows its use as a bolus in an outpatient critical settings. The aim of this study was to analyze whether the addition of a dose of terlipressin to the initial volume expansion produces an improvement in hemodynamic and cerebral perfusion at early stages of hemorrhagic shock in an infant animal model. We conducted an experimental randomized animal study with 1-month old pigs. After 30 minutes of hypotension (mean arterial blood pressure [MAP]<45 mmHg) induced by the withdrawal of blood over 30 min, animals were randomized to receive either normal saline (NS) 30 mL/kg (n = 8) or a bolus of 20 mcg/kg of terlipressin plus 30 mL/kg of normal saline (TP) (n = 8). Global hemodynamic and cerebral monitoring parameters, brain damage markers and histology samples were compared. After controlled bleeding, significant decreases were observed in MAP, cardiac index (CI), central venous pressure, global end-diastolic volume index (GEDI), left cardiac output index, SvO₂, intracranial pressure, carotid blood flow, bispectral index (BIS), cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and increases in systemic vascular resistance index, heart rate and lactate. After treatment, MAP, GEDI, CI, CPP and BIS remained significantly higher in the TP group. The addition of a dose of terlipressin to initial fluid resuscitation was associated with hemodynamic improvement, intracranial pressure maintenance and better cerebral perfusion, which would mean protection from ischemic injury. Brain monitoring through BIS was able to detect changes caused by hemorrhagic shock and treatment.

The impact of early administration of vasopressor agents for the resuscitation of severe hemorrhagic shock following blunt trauma

Background

When resuscitating patients with hemorrhagic shock following trauma, fluid volume restriction and permissive hypotension prior to bleeding control are emphasized along with the good outcome especially for penetrating trauma patients. However, evidence that these concepts apply well to the management of blunt trauma is lacking, and their use in blunt trauma remains controversial. This study aimed to assess the impact of vasopressor use in patients with blunt trauma in severe hemorrhagic shock.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective study, we reviewed records of blunt trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock and included patients with a probability of survival < 0.6. Vital signs on arrival, characteristics, examinations, concomitant injuries and severity, vasopressor use and dose, and volumes of crystalloids and blood infused were compared between survivors and non-survivors. Data are described as median (25–75% interquartile range) or number.

Results

Forty patients admitted from April 2014 to September 2019 were included. Median Injury Severity Score in survivors vs non-survivors was 41 (36–48) vs 45 (34–51) (p = 0.48), with no significant difference in probability of survival between the two groups (0.22 [0.12–0.48] vs 0.21 [0.08–0.46]; p = 0.93). Despite no significant difference in patient characteristics and injury severity, non-survivors were administered vasopressors significantly earlier after admission and at significantly higher doses. Total blood transfusion amount administered within 24 h after admission was significantly higher in survivors (8430 [5680–9320] vs 6540 [4550–7880] mL; p = 0.03). Max catecholamine index was significantly higher in non-survivors (2 [0–4] vs 14 [10–18]; p = 0.008), and administered vasopressors were terminated significantly earlier (12 [4–26] vs 34 [10–74] hours; p = 0.026) in survivors.

Although the variables of severity of the patients had no significant differences, vasopressor use (Odds ratio [OR] = 21.32, 95% confident interval [CI]: 3.71–121.6; p = 0.0001) and its early administration (OR = 10.56, 95%CI: 1.90–58.5; p = 0.005) indicated significant higher risk of death in this study.

Conclusion

Vasopressor administration and high-dose use for resuscitation of hemorrhagic shock following severe blunt trauma are potentially associated with increased mortality. Although the transfused volume of blood products tends to be increased when resuscitating these patients, early termination of vasopressor had better to be considered.

[Future of emergency medicine in Germany 2.0]

In 2003 an article on the future of prehospital emergency medicine in Germany was published in the journal Der Anaesthesist. Emergency medicine in Germany, which at that time was almost exclusively defined as prehospital emergency rescue, has evolved and now in-hospital domains have increasingly moved into the focus. At that time, the primary goal was to connect prehospital management with a smooth transition to hospital admission and further care in the hospital and to further optimize the rescue chain from the actual emergency through to causative treatment. Now after 15 years, the authors have critically assessed the development postulated in 2003 and reevaluated it. Which aspects could be developed further and become firmly established, what is still open and which questions in preclinical and clinical emergency treatment of the population will occupy us in the coming 15 years? With a critical eye to the past, the present contribution aims to capture the essential and new topics and open questions and provide a fresh perspective for the future of emergency medicine. Regulation at the state level or even lower levels of government often stand in contrast to more sweeping and economically effective approaches at the federal level. Prehospital emergency medicine in Germany is on the whole well-positioned with respect to facilities and personnel; however, as far as the economic situation and the utilization of available systems are concerned, there is still substantial room for improvement.

Early vasopressor use following traumatic injury: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Current guidelines suggest limiting the use of vasopressors following traumatic injury; however, wide variations in practice exist. Although excessive vasoconstriction may be harmful, these agents may help reduce administration of potentially harmful resuscitation fluids. This systematic review aims to compare early vasopressor use to standard resuscitation in adults with trauma-induced shock.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until October 2016, as well as the proceedings of 10 relevant international conferences from 2005 to 2016.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials and controlled observational studies that compared the early vasopressor use with standard resuscitation in adults with acute traumatic injury.

RESULTS

Of 8001 citations, we retrieved 18 full-text articles and included 6 studies (1 randomised controlled trial and 5 observational studies), including 2 published exclusively in abstract form. Across observational studies, vasopressor use was associated with increased short-term mortality, with unadjusted risk ratios ranging from 2.31 to 7.39. However, the risk of bias was considered high in these observational studies because patients who received vasopressors were systematically sicker than patients treated without vasopressors. One clinical trial (n=78) was too imprecise to yield meaningful results. Two clinical trials are currently ongoing. No study measured long-term quality of life or cognitive function.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing data on the effects of vasopressors following traumatic injury are of very low quality according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. With emerging evidence of harm associated with aggressive fluid resuscitation and, in selected subgroups of patients, with permissive hypotension, the alternatives to vasopressor therapy are limited. Observational data showing that vasopressors are part of usual care would provide a strong justification for high-quality clinical trials of early vasopressor use during trauma resuscitation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016033437.

Early and sustained vasopressin infusion augments the hemodynamic efficacy of restrictive fluid resuscitation and improves survival in a liver laceration model of hemorrhagic shock

BACKGROUND

Current management of hemorrhagic shock favors restrictive fluid resuscitation before control of the bleeding source. We investigated the additional effects of early and sustained vasopressin infusion in a swine model of hemorrhagic shock produced by liver laceration.

METHODS

Forty male domestic pigs (32-40 kg) had a liver laceration inflicted with an X-shaped blade clamp, 32 received a second laceration at minute 7.5, and 24 received two additional lacerations at minute 15. Using a two-by-two factorial design, animals were randomized 1:1 to receive vasopressin infusion (0.04 U/kg per minute) or vehicle intraosseously from minute 7 until minute 240 and 1:1 to receive isotonic sodium chloride solution (12 mL/kg) intravenously at minute 30 or no fluids.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier curves showed greater survival after vasopressin with isotonic sodium chloride solution (8/10) compared to vasopressin without isotonic sodium chloride solution (4/10), vehicle with isotonic sodium chloride solution (3/10), or vehicle without isotonic sodium chloride solution (3/10), but the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.095 by log-rank test). However, logistic regression showed vasopressin to elicit a statistically significant benefit on survival (p = 0.042). Vasopressin augmented mean aortic pressure between 10 and 20 mm Hg without intensifying the rate of bleeding from liver laceration, which was virtually identical to that of vehicle-treated animals (33.9 ± 5.1 and 33.8 ± 4.8 mL/kg). Vasopressin increased systemic vascular resistance and reduced transcapillary fluid extravasation, augmenting the volume of isotonic sodium chloride solution retained (6.5 ± 2.7 vs 2.4 ± 2.0 mL/kg by minute 60). The cardiac output and blood flow to the myocardium, liver, spleen, kidney, small bowel, and skeletal muscle at minute 120 and minute 180 were comparable or higher in the vasopressin group.

CONCLUSIONS

Early and sustained vasopressin infusion provided critical hemodynamic stability during hemorrhagic shock induced by liver laceration and increased the hemodynamic efficacy of restrictive fluid resuscitation without intensifying bleeding or compromising organ blood flow resulting in improved 240-minute survival.

Vasopressors for hypotensive shock

BACKGROUND

Initial goal-directed resuscitation for hypotensive shock usually includes administration of intravenous fluids, followed by initiation of vasopressors. Despite obvious immediate effects of vasopressors on haemodynamics, their effect on patient-relevant outcomes remains controversial. This review was published originally in 2004 and was updated in 2011 and again in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to compare the effect of one vasopressor regimen (vasopressor alone, or in combination) versus another vasopressor regimen on mortality in critically ill participants with shock. We further aimed to investigate effects on other patient-relevant outcomes and to assess the influence of bias on the robustness of our effect estimates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015 Issue 6), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PASCAL BioMed, CINAHL, BIOSIS and PsycINFO (from inception to June 2015). We performed the original search in November 2003. We also asked experts in the field and searched meta-registries to identify ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing various vasopressor regimens for hypotensive shock.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors abstracted data independently. They discussed disagreements between them and resolved differences by consulting with a third review author. We used a random-effects model to combine quantitative data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 28 RCTs (3497 participants) with 1773 mortality outcomes. Six different vasopressors, given alone or in combination, were studied in 12 different comparisons.All 28 studies reported mortality outcomes; 12 studies reported length of stay. Investigators reported other morbidity outcomes in a variable and heterogeneous way. No data were available on quality of life nor on anxiety and depression outcomes. We classified 11 studies as having low risk of bias for the primary outcome of mortality; only four studies fulfilled all trial quality criteria.In summary, researchers reported no differences in total mortality in any comparisons of different vasopressors or combinations in any of the pre-defined analyses (evidence quality ranging from high to very low). More arrhythmias were observed in participants treated with dopamine than in those treated with norepinephrine (high-quality evidence). These findings were consistent among the few large studies and among studies with different levels of within-study bias risk.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of substantial differences in total mortality between several vasopressors. Dopamine increases the risk of arrhythmia compared with norepinephrine and might increase mortality. Otherwise, evidence of any other differences between any of the six vasopressors examined is insufficient. We identified low risk of bias and high-quality evidence for the comparison of norepinephrine versus dopamine and moderate to very low-quality evidence for all other comparisons, mainly because single comparisons occasionally were based on only a few participants. Increasing evidence indicates that the treatment goals most often employed are of limited clinical value. Our findings suggest that major changes in clinical practice are not needed, but that selection of vasopressors could be better individualised and could be based on clinical variables reflecting hypoperfusion.

Anesthesia in swine : optimizing a laboratory model to optimize translational research

In order to extrapolate novel therapies from the bench to the bedside (translational research), animal experiments are scientifically necessary. Swine are popular laboratory animals as their cardiorespiratory physiology is very similar to humans. Every study has to be approved by the local and/or national animal ethical committees. As swine are extremely sensitive to stress the primary goal is therefore to provide a calm, stress-free environment in both housing and experimental facilities. Swine should be properly sedated for transport and normothermia needs to be ensured. It is recommended to commence anesthesia by injecting ketamine and propofol followed by endotracheal intubation during spontaneous breathing. After intubation, anesthesia maintenance is performed with morphine or piritramide, propofol and rocuronium and routine monitoring is applied analogue to a clinical operating theater for humans. Normothermia (38.5 °C) needs to be ensured. While surgical procedures can be readily extrapolated from a human operating theater to swine, non-anesthesiologist scientists may lose the animal rapidly due to airway management problems. Vascular access can be secured by cut-downs or ultrasound-guided techniques in the inguinal and the neck region. For humane euthanasia of pigs, morphine, followed by propofol, rocuronium and potassium chloride are recommended. As radical animal right groups may threaten scientists, it is prudent that animal laboratories have unmarked entrance doors, are located in buildings that are not accessible to the public and strictly controlled access of laboratory staff is enforced. In conclusion, swine are an excellent laboratory animal for bench to bedside research and can be managed properly when basic knowledge and adequate skills on careful handling, anesthesia and surgical considerations are present.

[Out-of-hospital emergency medicine in Germany, Austria and Switzerland : randomized prospective studies from 1990 to 2012]

BACKGROUND

Only randomized clinical trials can improve the outcome of life-threatening injuries or diseases but observations from England and North America suggest that the number of such randomized clinical trials is decreasing. In this study contributions from German speaking countries with regards to randomized clinical trials in emergency medicine over the last 22 years were investigated.

METHODS

The Medline database was searched from January 1990 to December 2012 for prospective randomized clinical trials in the prehospital setting using the criteria "cardiac arrest", "cardiopulmonary resuscitation", "multiple trauma", "hemorrhagic shock", "head trauma", "stroke" as well as myocardial infarction and emergency medical service. Only studies originating from Germany, Austria or Switzerland were included.

RESULTS

A total of 474 studies were found and 25 studies (5.3 %) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In the last 22 years German speaking countries have published approximately one prospective, randomized, clinical trial per year on prehospital emergency medicine. The median number of patients included in the trials was 159 (minimum 16, maximum 1,219). Most (80 %) studies originated from Germany and most (64 %) studies were conducted by anesthesiology departments. Cardiac arrest was the most frequent subject of the investigated studies. Approximately 50 % of the studies had financial support from industrial companies.

CONCLUSION

A significant increase or decrease in the number of prospective randomized clinical trials in the out-of-hospital setting could not be found in German speaking countries despite the fact that the absolute numbers of studies had increased. Only about one prospective, randomized clinical trial with an emergency medicine core tracer diagnosis originated from Germany, Austria and Switzerland per year.

Effects of intraosseous erythropoietin during hemorrhagic shock in swine

Objective

To determine whether erythropoietin given during hemorrhagic shock (HS) ameliorates organ injury while improving resuscitation and survival.

Methods

Three series of 24 pigs each were studied. In an initial series, 50% of the blood volume (BV) was removed in 30 minutes and normal saline (threefold the blood removed) started at minute 90 infusing each third in 30, 60, and 150 minutes with shed blood reinfused at minute 330 (HS-50_BV). In a second series, the same HS-50_BV protocol was used but removing an additional 15% of BV from minute 30 to 60 (HS-65_BV). In a final series, blood was removed as in HS-65_BV and intraosseous vasopressin given from minute 30 (0.04 U/kg min⁻¹) until start of shed blood reinfusion at minute 150 (HS-65_BV+VP). Normal saline was reduced to half the blood removed and given from minute 90 to 120 in half of the animals. In each series, animals were randomized 1∶1 to receive erythropoietin (1,200 U/kg) or control solution intraosseously after removing 10% of the BV.

Results

In HS-50_BV, O₂ consumption remained near baseline yielding minimal lactate increases, 88% resuscitability, and 60% survival at 72 hours. In HS-65_BV, O₂ consumption was reduced and lactate increased yielding 25% resuscitability. In HS-65_BV+VP, vasopressin promoted hemodynamic stability yielding 92% resuscitability and 83% survival at 72 hours. Erythropoietin did not affect resuscitability or subsequent survival in any of the series but increased interleukin-10, attenuated lactate increases, and ameliorated organ injury based on lesser troponin I, AST, and ALT increases and lesser neurological deficits in the HS-65_BV+VP series.

Conclusions

Erythropoietin given during HS in swine failed to alter resuscitability and 72 hour survival regardless of HS severity and concomitant treatment with fluids and vasopressin but attenuated acute organ injury. The studies also showed the efficacy of vasopressin and restrictive fluid resuscitation for hemodynamic stabilization and survival.

Vasopressin in hemorrhagic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized animal trials

Objective. The latest European guidelines for the management of hemorrhagic shock suggest the use of vasopressors (norepinephrine) in order to restore an adequate mean arterial pressure when fluid resuscitation therapy fails to restore blood pressure. The administration of arginine vasopressin (AVP), or its analogue terlipressin, has been proposed as an alternative treatment in the early stages of hypovolemic shock. Design. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled animal trials. Participants. A total of 433 animals from 15 studies were included. Interventions. The ability of AVP and terlipressin to reduce mortality when compared with fluid resuscitation therapy, other vasopressors (norepinephrine or epinephrine), or placebo was investigated. Measurements and Main Results. Pooled estimates showed that AVP and terlipressin consistently and significantly improve survival in hemorrhagic shock (mortality: 26/174 (15%) in the AVP group versus 164/259 (63%) in the control arms; OR = 0.09; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.15; P for effect < 0.001; P for heterogeneity = 0.30; I₂ = 14%). Conclusions. Results suggest that AVP and terlipressin improve survival in the early phases of animal models of hemorrhagic shock. Vasopressin seems to be more effective than all other treatments, including other vasopressor drugs. These results need to be confirmed by human clinical trials.

Resuscitation in a multiple casualty event

A major weakness in the emergency medical response to multiple casualty events continues to be the resuscitation component, which should consist of the systematic application of basic, advanced, and prolonged life support and definitive care within 24 hours. There have been major advances in emergency medical care over the last decade, including the feasibility of point-of-care ultrasound to aid in rapid assessment of injuries in the field, damage control resuscitation, and resuscitative surgery protocols, delivered by small trauma/resuscitation teams equipped with regional anesthesia capability for rapid deployment. Widespread adoption of these best practices may improve the delivery of resuscitative care in future multiple casualty events.

Review article: update in trauma anesthesiology: perioperative resuscitation management

The management of trauma patients has matured significantly since a systematic approach to trauma care was introduced nearly a half century ago. The resuscitation continuum emphasizes the effect that initial therapy has on the outcome of the trauma patient. The initiation of this continuum begins with prompt field medical care and efficient transportation to designated trauma centers, where lifesaving procedures are immediately undertaken. Resuscitation with packed red blood cells and plasma, in parallel with surgical or interventional radiologic source control of bleeding, are the cornerstones of trauma management. Adjunctive pharmacologic therapy can assist with resuscitation. Tranexamic acid is used in Europe with good results, but the drug is slowly being added to the pharmacy formulary of trauma centers in United States. Recombinant factor VIIa can correct abnormal coagulation values, but its outcome benefit is less clear. Vasopressin shows promise in animal studies and case reports, but has not been subjected to a large clinical trial. The concept of "early goal-directed therapy" used in sepsis may be applicable in trauma as well. An early, appropriately aggressive resuscitation with blood products, as well as adjunctive pharmacologic therapy, may attenuate the systemic inflammatory response of trauma. Future investigations will need to determine whether this approach offers a similar survival benefit.

[Preclinical management of multiples injuries: S3 guideline]

The guidelines follow the priorities established by the A-B-C-D-E scheme. They focus on the treatment of actual disturbances of vital functions and not so much on their anticipated development. Important recommendations with regard to the indication for intubation and ventilation, fluid therapy, diagnosis and treatment of severe chest injuries (tension pneumothorax in particular), management of severe traumatic brain injury, pelvic and vertebral injuries, priorities in the management of extremity fractures as well as indications for the choice of the receiving hospital are given. The recommendations are discussed in view of future concerns and developments.

Arginine vasopressin: the future of pressure-support resuscitation in hemorrhagic shock

BACKGROUND

Arginine vasopressin (AVP) is a key player in maintaining the intravascular volume and pressure during hemorrhagic shock. During the past 2 decades, animal studies, case reports, and reviews have documented the minimized blood loss and improved perfusion pressures in those receiving pressure support with AVP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A PubMed search of studies was conducted with the terms: "AVP," "arginine vasopressin," "antidiuretic hormone," "hemorrhagic shock," "hemorrhage," "circulatory shock," "fluid resuscitation," "trauma," "massive transfusion protocol," "physiology," "cerebral," "renal," "cardiac," "perfusion," "dose," and "hypotension." The studies were located by a search of a combination of these terms. Also, within-PubMed citations relating to the studies gathered from the initial search were explored. Reports discussing vasopressin in hemorrhagic states were considered. No predetermined limit was used to choose or exclude articles.

RESULTS

AVP is an important hormone in osmoregulation and blood pressure. During stress, such as hemorrhage, the levels have been shown to rapidly decrease. Furthermore numerous animal studies and limited human studies have shown that circulatory support with AVP is linked to improved outcomes. No large human prospective studies are available to guide its use at present, but some of its effectiveness seems to lie in its ability to increase calcium sensitivity in acidotic environs, thereby allowing for more effective maintenance of vascular tone than catecholamines. It also redirects blood from the periphery, creating a steal syndrome, and increases the oxygen supply to vital organs, minimizing blood loss, and allowing additional time for surgical repair.

CONCLUSIONS

With these encouraging data, there is hope that "pressure support" will be the "resuscitation" considered necessary for a patient's optimum survival.

Vasopressors for hypotensive shock

BACKGROUND

Initial goal directed resuscitation for shock usually includes the administration of intravenous fluids, followed by initiating vasopressors. Despite obvious immediate effects of vasopressors on haemodynamics their effect on patient relevant outcomes remains controversial. This review was originally published in 2004 and was updated in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess whether particular vasopressors reduce overall mortality, morbidity, and health-related quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PASCAL BioMed, CINAHL, BIOSIS, and PsycINFO (from inception to March 2010). The original search was performed in November 2003. We also asked experts in the field and searched meta-registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing various vasopressor regimens for hypotensive shock.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors abstracted data independently. Disagreement between the authors was discussed and resolved with a third author. We used a random-effects model for combining quantitative data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 23 randomized controlled trials involving 3212 patients, with 1629 mortality outcomes. Six different vasopressors, alone or in combination, were studied in 11 different comparisons.All 23 studies reported mortality outcomes; length of stay was reported in nine studies. Other morbidity outcomes were reported in a variable and heterogeneous way. No data were available on quality of life or anxiety and depression outcomes. We classified 10 studies as being at low risk of bias for the primary outcome mortality; only four studies fulfilled all trial quality items.In summary, there was no difference in mortality in any of the comparisons between different vasopressors or combinations. More arrhythmias were observed in patients treated with dopamine compared to norepinephrine. Norepinephrine versus dopamine, as the largest comparison in 1400 patients from six trials, yielded almost equivalence (RR 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.03). Vasopressors used as add-on therapy in comparison to placebo were not effective either. These findings were consistent among the few large studies as well as in studies with different levels of within-study bias risk.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence of no difference in mortality between norepinephrine and dopamine. Dopamine appeared to increase the risk for arrhythmia. There is not sufficient evidence of any difference between any of the six vasopressors examined. Probably the choice of vasopressors in patients with shock does not influence the outcome, rather than any vasoactive effect per se. There is not sufficient evidence that any one of the investigated vasopressors is clearly superior over others.

[Comments on the 2010 guidelines on cardiopulmonary resuscitation of the European Resuscitation Council]

ADULTS

Administer chest compressions (minimum 100/min, minimum 5 cm depth) at a ratio of 30:2 with ventilation (tidal volume 500-600 ml, inspiration time 1 s, F(I)O₂ if possible 1.0). Avoid any interruptions in chest compressions. After every single defibrillation attempt (initially biphasic 120-200 J, monophasic 360 J, subsequently with the respective highest energy), chest compressions are initiated again immediately for 2 min independent of the ECG rhythm. Tracheal intubation is the optimal method for securing the airway during resuscitation but should be performed only by experienced airway management providers. Laryngoscopy is performed during ongoing chest compressions; interruption of chest compressions for a maximum of 10 s to pass the tube through the vocal cords. Supraglottic airway devices are alternatives to tracheal intubation. Drug administration routes for adults and children: first choice i.v., second choice intraosseous (i.o.). Vasopressors: 1 mg epinephrine every 3-5 min i.v. After the third unsuccessful defibrillation amiodarone (300 mg i.v.), repetition (150 mg) possible. Sodium bicarbonate (50 ml 8.4%) only for excessive hyperkaliemia, metabolic acidosis, or intoxication with tricyclic antidepressants. Consider aminophylline (5 mg/kgBW). Thrombolysis during spontaneous circulation only for myocardial infarction or massive pulmonary embolism; during on-going cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) only when indications of massive pulmonary embolism. Active compression-decompression (ACD-CPR) and inspiratory threshold valve (ITV-CPR) are not superior to good standard CPR.

CHILDREN

Most effective improvement of outcome by prevention of full cardiorespiratory arrest. Basic life support: initially five rescue breaths, followed by chest compressions (100-120/min depth about one third of chest diameter), compression-ventilation ratio 15:2. Foreign body airway obstruction with insufficient cough: alternate back blows and chest compressions (infants), or abdominal compressions (children >1 year). Treatment of potentially reversible causes: ("4 Hs and 4 Ts") hypoxia and hypovolaemia, hypokalaemia and hyperkalaemia, hypothermia, and tension pneumothorax, tamponade, toxic/therapeutic disturbances, thrombosis (coronary/pulmonary). Advanced life support: adrenaline (epinephrine) 10 µg/kgBW i.v. or i.o. every 3-5 min. Defibrillation (4 J/kgBW; monophasic or biphasic) followed by 2 min CPR, then ECG and pulse check. NEWBORNS: Initially inflate the lungs with bag-valve mask ventilation (p(AW) 20-40 cmH₂O). If heart rate remains <60/min, start chest compressions (120 chest compressions/min) and ventilation with a ratio 3:1. Maintain normothermia in preterm babies by covering them with foodgrade plastic wrap or similar. POSTRESUSCITATION PHASE: Early protocol-based intensive care stabilization; initiate mild hypothermia early regardless of initial cardiac rhythm [32-34°C for 12-24 h (adults) or 24 h (children); slow rewarming (<0.5°C/h)]. Consider percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with presumed cardiac ischemia. Prediction of CPR outcome is not possible at the scene, determine neurological outcome <72 h after cardiac arrest with somatosensory evoked potentials, biochemical tests and neurological examination. ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME: Even if only a weak suspicion of an acute coronary syndrome is present, record a prehospital 12-lead ECG. In parallel to pain therapy, administer aspirin (160-325 mg p.o. or i.v.) and clopidogrel (75-600 mg depending on strategy); in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and planned PCI also prasugrel (60 mg p.o.). Antithrombins, such as heparin (60 IU/kgBW, max. 4000 IU), enoxaparin, bivalirudin or fondaparinux depending on the diagnosis (STEMI or non-STEMI-ACS) and the planned therapeutic strategy. In STEMI define reperfusion strategy depending on duration of symptoms until PCI, age and location of infarction. TRAUMA: In severe hemorrhagic shock, definitive control of bleeding is the most important goal. For successful CPR of trauma patients a minimal intravascular volume status and management of hypoxia are essential. Aggressive fluid resuscitation, hyperventilation and excessive ventilation pressure may impair outcome in patients with severe hemorrhagic shock.

TRAINING

Any CPR training is better than nothing; simplification of contents and processes is the main aim.

Vasopressin for hemorrhagic shock management: revisiting the potential value in civilian and combat casualty care

The evolution of trauma care is driven by a synergistic relationship between civilian and military medical systems. Although the characteristics of civilian injuries differ from those encountered on the battlefield, the pathophysiologic process of dying is the same and dominated by exsanguination and central nervous trauma. As such, therapies that interfere with the physiologic ability to compensate hemorrhage may play a key role to buy time until hemostatic surgery can be initiated. From a variety of remedies with the potential to prolong the compensation phase or to reverse the decompensation phase of shock, arginine vasopressin (AVP) is one of the most promising and best-evaluated drugs. Animal studies and various case report series provide some evidence that AVP may improve blood pressure even when conventional therapies fail, thus preventing hypovolemic cardiac arrest and enabling resuscitation from fatal hemorrhage. On the basis of this civilian experience, it seems reasonable to consider AVP for hypotensive resuscitation in the austere, resource-constrained battlefield environment. However, the significance of AVP as a rescue medication for life-threatening hemorrhage has yet to be proven.

Preventing cardiac arrest during hemorrhagic shock with vasopressin

The optimal strategy of stabilizing hemodynamic function in uncontrolled traumatic hemorrhagic shock states is unclear. Although fluid replacement is established in controlled hemorrhagic shock, its use in uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock is controversial, because it may worsen bleeding. In the refractory phase of severe hemorrhagic shock, arginine vasopressin has been shown to be beneficial in selected cases due to an increase in arterial blood pressure, shift of blood away from a subdiaphragmatic bleeding site toward the heart and brain, and decrease in fluid-resuscitation requirements. Especially in patients with severe traumatic brain injury, rapid stabilization of cardiocirculatory function is essential to ensure adequate brain perfusion, thus, to prevent neurologic damage and to improve outcome. In addition, despite wide distribution of highly developed and professional emergency medical systems in western industrialized countries, survival chances of patients with uncontrolled traumatic hemorrhagic shock in the preclinical setting are still poor.

Arginine vasopressin: a promising rescue drug in the treatment of uncontrolled haemorrhagic shock

Haemorrhagic shock is one of the most frequent types of shock. If haemorrhage cannot be controlled and fluid resuscitation as well as catecholamines are insufficient to stabilize cardiovascular function, uncontrolled haemorrhagic shock occurs. Several approaches have been suggested as promising alternatives to volume resuscitation. The rationale for the use of arginine vasopressin (AVP) is the pharmacologic amplification of the neuroendocrine stress response. AVP-mediated vasoconstriction is the first physiologic step to haemostasis and shifts blood away from the bleeding site towards the heart, lungs and brain. Particularly, when uncontrolled haemorrhage is accompanied by traumatic brain injury this may help to reduce secondary neurological damage. Since AVP can prevent acute death only transiently, it must comprehensively be combined with rapid hospital admission, immediate control of haemorrhage followed by aggressive fluid resuscitation and blood transfusion. This review article summarizes current experimental and clinical evidence on the use of AVP in uncontrolled haemorrhagic shock.

Bench-to-bedside review: latest results in hemorrhagic shock

Hemorrhagic shock is a leading cause of death in trauma patients worldwide. Bleeding control, maintenance of tissue oxygenation with fluid resuscitation, coagulation support, and maintenance of normothermia remain mainstays of therapy for patients with hemorrhagic shock. Although now widely practised as standard in the USA and Europe, shock resuscitation strategies involving blood replacement and fluid volume loading to regain tissue perfusion and oxygenation vary between trauma centers; the primary cause of this is the scarcity of published evidence and lack of randomized controlled clinical trials. Despite enormous efforts to improve outcomes after severe hemorrhage, novel strategies based on experimental data have not resulted in profound changes in treatment philosophy. Recent clinical and experimental studies indicated the important influences of sex and genetics on pathophysiological mechanisms after hemorrhage. Those findings might provide one explanation why several promising experimental approaches have failed in the clinical arena. In this respect, more clinically relevant animal models should be used to investigate pathophysiology and novel treatment approaches. This review points out new therapeutic strategies, namely immunomodulation, cardiovascular maintenance, small volume resuscitation, and so on, that have been introduced in clinics or are in the process of being transferred from bench to bedside. Control of hemorrhage in the earliest phases of care, recognition and monitoring of individual risk factors, and therapeutic modulation of the inflammatory immune response will probably constitute the next generation of therapy in hemorrhagic shock. Further randomized controlled multicenter clinical trials are needed that utilize standardized criteria for enrolling patients, but existing ethical requirements must be maintained.

Haemorrhagic shock therapy

BACKGROUND

Severe injury is often associated with haemorrhagic shock and this is the most common cause of preventable mortality after injury. Care of the injured patient in shock involves an overlapping continuum of care beginning during the prehospital phase of care and extending through the interventional and critical care phases.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review emerging therapies in the treatment of haemorrhagic shock.

METHODS

A review of recent clinical articles (1996 - 2007) examining therapeutic measures for haemorrhagic shock treatment was undertaken.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the mainstay of therapy continues to be obtaining haemostasis and restoring tissue perfusion, a multitude of novel strategies are emerging, including advanced haemostatic agents, hypertonic resuscitation and massive transfusion protocols, as well as blood substitutes and an improved understanding of damage control principles, thereby allowing increased survival and improved outcomes in the severely injured patient with major haemorrhage.