The Eight Unanswered and Answered Questions about the Use of Vasopressors in Septic Shock

Septic shock is mainly characterized-in addition to hypovolemia-by vasoplegia as a consequence of a release of inflammatory mediators. Systemic vasodilatation due to depressed vascular tone results in arterial hypotension, which induces or worsens organ hypoperfusion. Accordingly, vasopressor therapy is mandatory to correct hypotension and to reverse organ perfusion due to hypotension. Currently, two vasopressors are recommended to be used, norepinephrine and vasopressin. Norepinephrine, an α₁-agonist agent, is the first-line vasopressor. Vasopressin is suggested to be added to norepinephrine in cases of inadequate mean arterial pressure instead of escalating the doses of norepinephrine. However, some questions about the bedside use of these vasopressors remain. Some of these questions have been well answered, some of them not clearly addressed, and some others not yet answered. Regarding norepinephrine, we firstly reviewed the arguments in favor of the choice of norepinephrine as a first-line vasopressor. Secondly, we detailed the arguments found in the recent literature in favor of an early introduction of norepinephrine. Thirdly, we reviewed the literature referring to the issue of titrating the doses of norepinephrine using an individualized resuscitation target, and finally, we addressed the issue of escalation of doses in case of refractory shock, a remaining unanswered question. For vasopressin, we reviewed the rationale for adding vasopressin to norepinephrine. Then, we discussed the optimal time for vasopressin administration. Subsequently, we addressed the issue of the optimal vasopressin dose, and finally we discussed the best strategy to wean these two vasopressors when combined.

Effect of Vasopressin Dose on Hemodynamic Response in Obese Patients With Septic Shock: A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

No clear association between standard vasopressin doses and body mass index exists, despite potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability among patients with septic shock. It is unknown if higher doses may alter hemodynamic response.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of vasopressin dose on hemodynamic response in obese patients with septic shock.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult, obese patients with septic shock receiving catecholamine vasopressors and vasopressin. Patients were analyzed according to vasopressin dose received: standard dose (≤0.04 U/min) and high dose (>0.04 U/min). The primary outcome was percentage change in norepinephrine equivalent (NEQ) dose.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patients were included in the analysis, with 136 in the standard-dose vasopressin group and 46 in the high-dose vasopressin group. There was no difference in percentage change in NEQ dose at 6 hours after standard- or high-dose vasopressin attainment (-28.6% vs -19.1%; P = 0.166). A greater increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) at 6 hours was observed with receipt of high-dose vasopressin (23.3% vs 15.3%; P = 0.023). Duration of shock and length of stay were significantly longer in patients who received high-dose vasopressin, with no difference in in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

This represents the first analysis comparing standard and higher doses of vasopressin in obese patients with septic shock. Receipt of high-dose vasopressin was not associated with a difference in catecholamine requirement or improved outcomes. Further studies are warranted to provide guidance on the use of high-dose vasopressin in septic shock.

Drug dosing in the critically ill obese patient: a focus on medications for hemodynamic support and prophylaxis

Medications used for supportive care or prophylaxis constitute a significant portion of drug utilization in the intensive care unit. Evidence-based guidelines are available for many aspects of supportive care but drug doses listed are typically for patients with normal body habitus and not morbid obesity. Failure to account for the pharmacokinetic changes that occur with obesity can lead to an incorrect dose and treatment failure or toxicity. This paper is intended to help clinicians design initial dosing regimens in critically ill obese patients for medications commonly used for hemodynamic support or prophylaxis. A detailed literature search of medications used for supportive care or prophylaxis listed in practice guidelines was conducted with an emphasis on obesity, pharmacokinetics and dosing. Relevant manuscripts were reviewed and strategies for dosing are provided. For medications used for hemodynamic support, a similar strategy can be used as in non-obese patients. Similarly, medications for stress ulcer prophylaxis do not need to be adjusted. Anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, on the other hand, require an individualized approach where higher doses are necessary.

Narrative Review of Controversies Involving Vasopressin Use in Septic Shock and Practical Considerations

Objective: To summarize literature evaluating vasopressin use, focusing on clinical controversies regarding initiation, dosing, and discontinuation and interaction of vasopressin with other therapies in septic shock patients. Data Sources: A PubMed English-language literature search (January 2008 to December 2019) was performed using these terms: arginine vasopressin, septic, shock, and sepsis. Citations, including controlled trials, observational studies, review articles, guidelines, and consensus statements, were reviewed. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant clinical data focusing on specific controversial questions regarding the utility of vasopressin in patients with septic shock were narratively summarized. Data Synthesis: Current literature does not strongly support the use of vasopressin as a first-line initial therapy for septic shock. Additionally, there are conflicting data for weight-based dosing of vasopressin in overweight patients. Evidence for vasopressin renal protection and interaction with corticosteroids is minimal. However, vasopressin has the ability to reduce catecholamine requirements in septic shock patients and may provide a mortality benefit in specific subgroups. Discontinuation of vasopressin last, not second to last, in resolving septic shock may reduce hypotension development. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review addresses specific clinical controversies that drive vasopressin use in septic shock patients in real-world practice. Conclusion: Vasopressin should remain second-line adjunct to norepinephrine to augment mean arterial pressures. Dosing should be initiated at 0.03 U/min, and higher doses offer minimal benefit. There are conflicting data on the impact of weight on vasopressin response. Studies have failed to show renal benefit with vasopressin use or an interaction with corticosteroid therapy.

Vasoactive Agent Use in Septic Shock: Beyond First-Line Recommendations

Septic shock is a life-threatening disorder associated with high mortality rates requiring rapid identification and intervention. Vasoactive agents are often required to maintain goal hemodynamics and preserve tissue perfusion. However, guidance regarding the proper administration of adjunct agents for the management of septic shock is limited in patients who are refractory to norepinephrine. This review summarizes vasopressor agents and describes the nuanced application of these agents in patients with septic shock, specifically focusing on clinical scenarios with limited guidance including patients who are nonresponsive to first-line agents and individuals with mixed shock states, tachyarrhythmias, obesity, valvular abnormalities, or other comorbid conditions.

Impact of Norepinephrine Weight-Based Dosing Compared With Non-Weight-Based Dosing in Achieving Time to Goal Mean Arterial Pressure in Obese Patients With Septic Shock

Obesity presents a growing challenge in critically ill patients because of variable medication pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Vasopressors used in the treatment of septic shock, including norepinephrine, are dosed using weight-based (WB) or non-weight-based (NWB) strategies. Retrospective research has evaluated the effect of total body weight and body mass index on vasopressor requirements, consequently finding that obese patients require less total vasopressor per kilogram to obtain clinical end points such as mean arterial pressure. Although this effect is not completely understood, this may suggest that a NWB dosing strategy is preferred over a WB strategy in obese patients to minimize potential for error.

Effect of Body Weight on Hemodynamic Response in Patients Receiving Fixed-Dose Vasopressin for Septic Shock

Background: Fixed-dose vasopressin is an adjunctive therapy to norepinephrine (NE) to raise mean arterial pressure (MAP) and decrease NE requirements in patients with septic shock. It is unknown if weight affects hemodynamic response to vasopressin or if a weight-based vasopressin strategy is superior to fixed dosing. Objective: The primary objective was to evaluate effect of body weight on response to vasopressin as measured by change in MAP 1 hour post–vasopressin initiation. Methods: A single-center, retrospective study was performed in patients with septic shock. Baseline characteristics, catecholamine and vasopressin requirement, response to therapy, and adverse events were collected. Results: Forty patients were included who received a fixed-dose vasopressin in addition to catecholamine infusions. No correlation was found in the primary outcome of change in MAP at 1 hour after vasopressin initiation compared with vasopressin dose relative to patient weight or body mass index (BMI). Change in MAP at 6 and 12 hours was not significant. In the obese population (n = 9), there was a significant negative correlation between BMI and change in MAP at 6 hours (correlation coefficient r = −0.951; P = 0.0009). Linear regression analysis confirmed that vasopressin dose relative toweight was independently associated with change in MAP at 1, 6, and 12 hours, whereas changes in NE dosing were not. Conclusion: Increasing weight-based dosing of vasopressin did not correlate with change in MAP when used with catecholamine vasopressors in septic shock. However, fixed-dose vasopressin may not be sufficient in obese septic shock patients with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2.

Norepinephrine Dosing in Obese and Nonobese Patients With Septic Shock

BACKGROUND

Whether or not norepinephrine infusions for support of hemodynamic status in patients with septic shock should be weight based is unknown. This situation is particularly pertinent in patients who are extremely overweight or obese.

OBJECTIVE

To compare dosing requirements and effect of norepinephrine on blood pressure in obese and nonobese patients with septic shock.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study, data on adult patients with septic shock who received norepinephrine infusion for support of hemodynamic status in a tertiary care, academic medical center were analyzed. Patients were categorized as obese (body mass index ≥ 30) or nonobese (body mass index < 30). The primary outcome was dosing requirements of norepinephrine at 60 minutes after the start of the infusion. The secondary outcome was the log-transformed ratio of mean arterial pressure to norepinephrine.

RESULTS

The final cohort consisted of 100 obese and 100 nonobese patients. Mean norepinephrine infusion rate at 60 minutes was 0.09 (SD, 0.08) μg/kg per minute in the obese group and 0.13 (SD, 0.14) μg/kg per minute in the nonobese group (P = .006). The non-weight-based dose at 60 minutes was 9 μg/min in obese patients and 8 μg/min in nonobese patients (P = .72). The log transformed mean arterial pressure to norepinephrine ratio at 60 minutes was 2.5 (SD, 0.9) in obese patients and 2.5 (SD, 0.8) in nonobese patients (P = .54) CONCLUSIONS: Compared with nonobese patients, obese patients with septic shock require lower weight-based doses of norepinephrine and similar total norepinephrine doses.