Effect of Continuous Epinephrine Infusion on Survival in Critically Ill Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Blood Pressure Management for Hypotensive Patients in Intensive Care and Perioperative Cardiovascular Settings

Blood pressure is a critical physiological parameter, particularly in the context of cardiac intensive care and perioperative settings. As a primary indicator of organ perfusion, the maintenance of adequate blood pressure is imperative for the assurance of sufficient tissue oxygen delivery. Among critically ill and major surgery patients, the continuous monitoring of blood pressure is performed as a standard practice for patients. Nonetheless, uncertainties remain regarding blood pressure goals, and there is no consensus regarding blood pressure targets. This review describes the determinants of blood pressure, examine the influence of blood pressure on organ perfusion, and synthesize the current clinical evidence from various intensive care and perioperative settings to provide a concise guidance for daily clinical practice.

Beta-Blockers as an Immunologic and Autonomic Manipulator in Critically Ill Patients: A Review of the Recent Literature

The autonomic nervous system plays a key role in maintaining body hemostasis through both the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. Sympathetic overstimulation as a reflex to multiple pathologies, such as septic shock, brain injury, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest, could be harmful and lead to autonomic and immunologic dysfunction. The continuous stimulation of the beta receptors on immune cells has an inhibitory effect on these cells and may lead to immunologic dysfunction through enhancing the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin-10 (IL-10), and inhibiting the production of pro-inflammatory factors, such as interleukin-1B IL-1B and tissue necrotizing factor-alpha (TNF-alpha). Sympathetic overstimulation-induced autonomic dysfunction may also happen due to adrenergic receptor insensitivity or downregulation. Administering anti-adrenergic medication, such as beta-blockers, is a promising treatment to compensate against the undesired effects of adrenergic surge. Despite many misconceptions about beta-blockers, beta-blockers have shown a promising effect in decreasing mortality in patients with critical illness. In this review, we summarize the recently published articles that have discussed using beta-blockers as a promising treatment to decrease mortality in critically ill patients, such as patients with septic shock, traumatic brain injury, cardiogenic shock, acute decompensated heart failure, and electrical storm. We also discuss the potential pathophysiology of beta-blockers in various types of critical illness. More clinical trials are encouraged to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of beta-blockers in improving mortality among critically ill patients.

Hemodynamic Support in Sepsis

This review discusses recent evidence in managing sepsis-induced hemodynamic alterations and how it can be integrated with previous knowledge for actionable interventions in adult patients.

Risk of arrhythmia in post-resuscitative shock after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with epinephrine versus norepinephrine

OBJECTIVE

To determine the rates of clinically significant tachyarrhythmias and mortality in the management of post-resuscitative shock after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who receive a continuous epinephrine versus norepinephrine infusion.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A large multi-site health system with hospitals across the United States.

PATIENTS

Adult patients admitted for OHCA with post-resuscitative shock managed with either epinephrine or norepinephrine infusions within 6 h of ROSC.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Between May 5th, 2018, to January 31st, 2022, there were 221 patients admitted for OHCA who received post-resuscitative epinephrine or norepinephrine infusions. There was no difference in the rate of tachyarrhythmias between epinephrine and norepinephrine infusion in univariate (47.1% vs 41.7%, OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.71-2.20) or multivariable analysis (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.68-2.62). Patients treated with epinephrine were more likely to die during hospitalization than those treated with norepinephrine (90.0% vs 54.3%, OR 6.21, 95% CI 2.37-16.25, p < 0.001). Epinephrine treated patients were more likely to have re-arrest during hospital admission (55.7% vs 14.6%, OR 5.77, 95% CI 2.74-12.18, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There was no statistically significant difference in clinically significant cardiac tachyarrhythmias in post-OHCA patients treated with epinephrine versus norepinephrine infusions after ROSC. Re-arrest rates and in-hospital mortality were higher in patients who received epinephrine infusions in the first 6 h post-ROSC. Results of this study add to the literature suggesting norepinephrine may be the vasopressor of choice in post-OHCA patients with post-resuscitative shock after ROSC.

2023 Update on Sepsis and Septic Shock in Adult Patients: Management in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Sepsis/septic shock is a life-threatening and time-dependent condition that requires timely management to reduce mortality. This review aims to update physicians with regard to the main pillars of treatment for this insidious condition.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were searched from inception with special attention paid to November 2021-January 2023.

RESULTS

The management of sepsis/septic shock is challenging and involves different pathophysiological aspects, encompassing empirical antimicrobial treatment (which is promptly administered after microbial tests), fluid (crystalloids) replacement (to be established according to fluid tolerance and fluid responsiveness), and vasoactive agents (e.g., norepinephrine (NE)), which are employed to maintain mean arterial pressure above 65 mmHg and reduce the risk of fluid overload. In cases of refractory shock, vasopressin (rather than epinephrine) should be combined with NE to reach an acceptable level of pressure control. If mechanical ventilation is indicated, the tidal volume should be reduced from 10 to 6 mL/kg. Heparin is administered to prevent venous thromboembolism, and glycemic control is recommended. The efficacy of other treatments (e.g., proton-pump inhibitors, sodium bicarbonate, etc.) is largely debated, and such treatments might be used on a case-to-case basis.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of sepsis/septic shock has significantly progressed in the last few years. Improving knowledge of the main therapeutic cornerstones of this challenging condition is crucial to achieve better patient outcomes.

The pharmacotherapeutic options in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock

INTRODUCTION

Septic and vasoplegic shock are common types of vasodilatory shock (VS) with high mortality. After fluid resuscitation and the use of catecholamine-mediated vasopressors (CMV), vasopressin, angiotensin II, methylene blue (MB) and hydroxocobalamin can be added to maintain blood pressure.

AREAS COVERED

VS treatment utilizes a phased approach with secondary vasopressors added to vasopressor agents to maintain an acceptable mean arterial pressure (MAP). This review covers additional vasopressors and adjunctive therapies used when fluid and catecholamine-mediated vasopressors fail to maintain target MAP.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence supporting additional vasopressor agents in catecholamine resistant VS is limited to case reports, series, and a few randomized control trials (RCTs) to guide recommendations. Vasopressin is the most common agent added next when MAPs are not adequately supported with CMV. VS patients failing fluids and vasopressors with cardiomyopathy may have cardiotonic agents such as dobutamine or milrinone added before or after vasopressin. Angiotensin II, another class of vasopressor is used in VS to maintain adequate MAP. MB and/or hydoxocobalamin, vitamin C, thiamine and corticosteroids are adjunctive therapies used in refractory VS. More RCTs are needed to confirm the utility of these drugs, at what doses, which combinations and in what order they should be given.

Vasopressors in Septic Shock: The Quest for Refinement

How to cite this article: Pichamuthu K. Vasopressors in Septic Shock: The Quest for Refinement. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(6):659-660.

[Resuscitation strategy for patients with sepsis and septic shock]

Fluid and vasopressor resuscitation is, along with antimicrobial therapy and control of the focus of infection, a basic issue of the treatment of sepsis and septic shock. There is currently no accepted protocol that we can follow for the resuscitation of these patients and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign proposes controversial measures and without sufficient evidence support to establish firm recommendations. We propose a resuscitation strategy adapted to the situation of each patient: in the patient in whom community sepsis is suspected, we consider that the early administration of 30mL/kg of crystalloids is effective and safe; in the patient with nosocomial sepsis, we must carry out a more in-depth evaluation before initiating aggressive resuscitation. In patients who do not respond to initial resuscitation, it is necessary to increase monitoring level and, depending on the hemodynamic profile, administer more fluids, a second vasopressor or inotropes.

Sepsis and Septic Shock: Evolving Evidence, Evolving Paradigms

Sepsis and septic shock represent important infection-related medical emergencies that result in significant morbidity and mortality. The prevalence and microbiology of these processes are evolving. Nonetheless, timely and appropriate antibiotic therapy continues to represent the most important determinant of survival. Recent trials have clarified that crystalloids are preferred for initial resuscitation, and balanced crystalloids appear superior to 0.9% saline. Controversy remains regarding not only the rate and rapidity of fluid resuscitation but also about the timing and use of vasopressors to maintain blood pressure. While some newer alternative vasopressors may have a role in sepsis, more evidence supporting their use is required. Conflicting data exist regarding the impact of corticosteroids on mortality in septic shock. However, these reports indicate that adjunctive hydrocortisone can lead to more rapid shock reversal.

Vasopressor and inotrope treatment for septic shock: An umbrella review of reviews

PURPOSE

To review the characteristics, findings and quality of systematic reviews (SRs) on the effect of any vasopressor/inotrope on outcomes in adult patients with sepsis compared with either no treatment, another vasopressor or inotrope or fluids.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed and Embase (January 1993-March 2021). Descriptive statistics were used.

RESULTS

Among the 28 SRs identified, mortality was the primary outcome in most (26/28) and mortality was usually (23/28) studied using randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Fifteen SRs focused exclusively on patients with sepsis or septic shock. Sepsis and septic shock were always grouped for the analysis. Publication bias was consistently low when studied. The most consistent findings were a survival advantage with norepinephrine versus dopamine, which disappeared in analyses restricted to 28-day mortality, and more arrhythmias with dopamine. However, these analyses were dominated by a single study. Only 2 SRs were judged to be of moderate-high quality. Lack of blinding and attrition bias may have affected the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of SRs on the effect of vasopressors/inotropes on the outcomes of adult patients with sepsis can be improved, but high-quality, multicenter, RCTs should be preferred to additional SRs on this topic.

Epinephrine administration in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients is associated with mortality: a retrospective cohort study

Aims

Knowledge about the impact of epinephrine on the outcome in venoarterial (VA) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients is limited, and existing data are conflicting.

Methods and results

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a 1500 bed tertiary university hospital. Five hundred and eighty‐nine VA‐ECMO patients were analysed. The median age was 57 years [47–65], 68% of male. The major indications for ECMO were post‐cardiotomy cardiogenic shock (CS) (38%) and medical CS (36%). Two hundred and sixty‐two (44.5%) patients received epinephrine alone or associated with another catecholamine while on ECMO. Baseline factors significantly associated with epinephrine administration were younger age, higher sequential organ failure assessment score, cardiac arrest at implantation, and intra‐aortic balloon pump support at implantation, whereas medical CS and dobutamine administration were significantly associated with a lower risk of epinephrine administration. Epinephrine administration was independently associated with death [hazard ratio = 1.68 (1.44–2.23); P < 0.01]. A sensitivity analysis with propensity score inverse probability weighting in complete cases confirmed a significant association of epinephrine administration with death [hazard ratio = 1.69 (1.43–2.00); P < 0.001].

Conclusions

Among patients who required VA‐ECMO, epinephrine administration was associated with an increased risk for death.

[Perioperative pharmacological circulatory support in daily clinical routine]

Perioperative phases of hypotension are associated with an increase in postoperative complications and organ damage. Whereas some years ago hemodynamic stabilization was primarily carried out by volume supplementation, in recent years the use and dosing of cardiovascular-active substances has significantly increased. But like intravascular volume therapy, also substances with a cardiovascular effect have therapeutic margins, and thus, potential side effects. This review article discusses indications for each cardiovascular-active agent, weighing up advantages and disadvantages. Special attention is paid to the question how to administrate them: central venous catheter vs. peripheral indwelling venous cannula. The authors come to the conclusion that it is not a question of whether it is principally allowed to apply cardiovascular-active drugs via peripheral veins but more importantly, what should be taken into consideration if a peripheral venous access is used. This article provides concise recommendations.

Vasopressors in septic shock: which, when, and how much?

In addition to fluid resuscitation, the vasopressor therapy is a fundamental treatment of septic shock-induced hypotension as it aims at correcting the vascular tone depression and then at improving organ perfusion pressure. Experts’ recommendations currently position norepinephrine (NE) as the first-line vasopressor in septic shock. Vasopressin and its analogues are only second-line vasopressors as strong recent evidence suggests no benefit of their early administration in spite of promising preliminary data. Early administration of NE may allow achieving the initial mean arterial pressure (MAP) target faster and reducing the risk of fluid overload. The diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) as a marker of vascular tone, helps identifying the patients who need NE urgently. Available data suggest a MAP of 65 mmHg as the initial target but a more individualized approach is often required depending on several factors such as history of chronic hypertension or value of central venous pressure (CVP). In cases of refractory hypotension, increasing NE up to doses ≥1 µg/kg/min could be an option. However, current experts’ guidelines suggest to combine NE with other vasopressors such as vasopressin, with the intent to rising the MAP to target or to decrease the NE dosage.