Vasopressor-free Days Research Articles

Cost Analysis of Adjunctive Hydrocortisone Therapy for Septic Shock: U.S. Payer Perspective.

To conduct a cost analysis of adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy for severe septic shock from the perspective of a third-party payer in the United States. Estimates of outcomes were aggregate data from the Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock trials. In these trials, the outcomes of interests were ICU length of stay, vasopressor-free days, ventilation-free days, and the proportion of patients receiving blood transfusion. Each outcome was monetized into a set of mutually exclusive components and was aggregated to estimate the cost-per-patient based on each trial. Cost inputs for each outcome were obtained from literature and adjusted based on the medical care consumer price index. To estimate the budget impact using adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy, per-patient avoided cost was multiplied by expected septic shock annual incidence. Deterministic one-way sensitivity analysis evaluated the robustness of the findings, and Monte Carlo simulation estimated 95% CI of the findings. A total of 103 medical-surgical ICU (69 for Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and 34 for Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock). Adults greater than or equal to 18 years old with septic shock. Adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy (hydrocortisone at a dose of 200 mg/d for 7 d for Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and hydrocortisone at a 50 mg IV bolus every 6 hr and fludrocortisone as a 50 μg tablet once daily). Per Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock, adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy showed a 90-day monetized benefit of $8,111 (95% CI, $3,914-$12,307) per patient, driven by improvements in ICU-free days, vasopressor-free days, ventilation-free days, and blood transfusion proportion. The total estimated annual impact of adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy, in 2019 dollars, was $750 million. Per Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock, adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy showed a 90-day monetized benefit of $25,539 per patient (95% CI, $22,853-$28,224), driven by improvements in ICU free-days, vasopressor-free days, and ventilation-free days. The total estimated annual impact of adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy, in 2019 dollars, was $2.3 billion. The deterministic one-way sensitivity analysis showed the cost of ICU stays to be the most influential factor in both analyses. The sensitivity analysis using the reported median showed a greater monetized benefit of $10,658 (Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock) and $30,911 (Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock) per patient. Using adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy yields a significant monetized benefit based on inputs from the Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock trials.

Adding vitamin C to hydrocortisone lacks benefit in septic shock: a historical cohort study.

PurposeSepsis has high incidence and mortality rates, particularly in the intensive care unit (ICU). Corticosteroids may improve outcomes, and vitamin C may add benefit. We aimed to assess whether vitamin C and corticosteroids improved outcomes compared with corticosteroids alone.MethodsThis historical cohort study (11 December 2016 to 21 February 2018) was conducted in the ICU of a quaternary referral hospital. Patients with an ICU admission diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock who received vitamin C and hydrocortisone within 72 hr were compared with those who received only hydrocortisone. All patients received standard sepsis care including source control, antibiotics, and fluid resuscitation. Most patients received thiamine as standard ICU care. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included ICU mortality, ventilator-free days, vasopressor-free days, dialysis use, and duration of ICU admission.ResultsOne hundred and forty-four patients were included in the study. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 64 (15) yr; 39% were female; and the mean (SD) Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation IV score was 89 (30). Eighty-eight patients did not receive vitamin C and 52 received vitamin C. There was no observed difference in hospital mortality between the non-vitamin C (36%) and vitamin C (39%) groups (adjusted odds ratio for hospital death, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.20 to 1.34; P = 0.18). There were no statistically significant differences in any secondary outcomes.ConclusionIn this small observational study of ICU patients with septic shock, the addition of vitamin C to hydrocortisone therapy did significantly affect hospital mortality or other measures of mortality or organ dysfunction.

The promise and pitfalls of composite endpoints in sepsis and COVID-19 clinical trials.

Composite endpoints reveal the tendency for statistical convention to arise locally within subfields. Composites are familiar in cardiovascular trials, yet almost unknown in sepsis. However, the VITAMINS trial in patients with septic shock adopted a composite of mortality and vasopressor-free days, and an ordinal scale describing patient status rapidly became standard in COVID studies. Aware that recent use could incite interest in such endpoints, we are motivated to flag their potential value and pitfalls for sepsis research and COVID studies.

The I-MICRO trial, Ilomedin for treatment of septic shock with persistent microperfusion defects: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial\u2014study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundSeptic shock remains a significant cause of death in critically ill patients. During septic shock, some patients will retain microcirculatory disorders despite optimal hemodynamic support (i.e., fluid resuscitation, vasopressors, inotropes). Alterations in the microcirculation are a key pathophysiological factor of organ dysfunction and death in septic shock patients. Ilomedin is a prostacyclin analog with vasodilatory effect and anti-thrombotic properties (i.e., inhibition of platelet aggregation) preferentially at the microcirculatory level. We hypothesize that early utilization of intravenous Ilomedin in septic shock patients with clinical persistence of microperfusion disorders would improve the recovery of organ dysfunction.MethodsThe I-MICRO trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. We plan to recruit 236 adult patients with septic shock and persistent microcirculatory disorders (i.e., skin mottling or increased capillary refill time) despite hemodynamic support. Participants will be randomized to receive a 48-h intravenous infusion of either Ilomedin or placebo starting at the earliest 6 h and later 24 h after septic shock. The primary outcome will be the change (delta) of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score between randomization and day 7. Secondary outcomes will include mean SOFA score during the first 7 days after randomization, mortality at day 28 post-randomization, number of ventilation-free survival days in the 28 days post-randomization, number of renal replacement therapy-free survival days in the 28 days post-randomization, number of vasopressor-free survival days in the 28 days post-randomization, and mottling score at day 1 after randomization.DiscussionThe trial aims to provide evidence on the efficacy and safety of Ilomedin in patients with septic shock and persistent microcirculatory disorders.Trial registrationNCT NCT03788837. Registered on 28 December 2018

Effect of selepressin vs placebo on ventilator- and vasopressor-free days in patients with septic shock: The SEPSIS-ACT randomized clinical trial

Effect of selepressin vs placebo on ventilator- and vasopressor-free days in patients with septic shock: The SEPSIS-ACT randomized clinical trial

Timing of renal replacement therapy for patients with acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Acute kidney injury is associated with high mortality, and the optimal time to start renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury is unknown despite several randomised controlled trials on the subject. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of earlier initiation of renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury on mortality and reported secondary outcomes. All literature in databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL was searched from January 1970 to March 2019 using terms related to renal replacement therapy, timing and randomised controlled trials. All randomised controlled trials with 25 or more adult participants suffering from acute kidney injury comparing timing of renal replacement therapy were included. The results of the selected studies were pooled and expressed in terms of risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using a random effects model. A total of 7008 records were identified; 94 were selected for full text review of which 10 were included in the final meta-analysis. The 10 studies comprised 1956 participants (989 'early' group; 967 'late' group) with 918 total deaths; the analysis demonstrated no significant differences between the 'early' and 'late' renal replacement therapy groups (RR = 0.98 (95% CI = 0.84, 1.15)) for mortality. No significant differences between groups were evident for period-wise mortality; dialysis dependence; recovery of renal function; length of intensive care unit or hospital stay; or number of renal replacement therapies, mechanical ventilation and vasopressor-free days. Current evidence does not support the use of early renal replacement therapy for patients with acute kidney injury. Data from ongoing and future randomised controlled trials are required to strengthen the evidence base in the area.

Evaluation of admission serum magnesium levels in patients with septic shock and its correlation with outcome

Background: Admission hypomagnesemia has been linked with an increased risk of septic shock. The purpose of this study was to evaluate admission serum magnesium levels in patients with septic shock and to determine its correlation with the outcomes.Methods: It was a prospective observational study. Total 50 patients fitting the Sepsis-3 definition between time period of June 2017 to November 2018 were included in the study. Patients with suspected infection were identified at the bedside with qSOFA. Admission serum magnesium levels was measured for all patients included. APACHE II scores were calculated at the end of 24 hours after admission. Routine standard of care treatment was provided to all patients. The patients were monitored for organ dysfunctions based on daily SOFA scores, ventilator free days, vasopressors free days, dialysis free days, length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospital stay. The data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences for MS Windows.Results: In this study hypomagnesemia was prevalent in 18%, normomagnesemia in 62% and hypermagnesemia in 20% of total included patients. The mean vasopressor free days in Hypomagnesemia group (7.11±12.79 days) were higher than those in normomagnesemic patients (5.06±5.51 days) and hypermagnesemia patients (1.70±3.09 days). Out of total 50 patients 18 died and 32 recovered. 11 patients out of 32 who recovered had abnormal admission serum magnesium levels whereas 8 pts out of 18 who died had abnormal admission serum magnesium levels. SOFA score in hypomagnesemic patients admitted with septic shock compared with those of normomagnesemic and hypermagnesemic patients was statistically significant.Conclusions: Author did not find any statistically significant correlation between admission magnesium levels in septic shock patients and outcomes although SOFA score was higher in hypomagnesemic patients admitted with septic shock compared with those of normomagnesemic and hypermagnesemic patients. Serum magnesium may not truly reflect body’s magnesium status. RBC magnesium may need to be studied to see whether it is a more reliable biomarker.

Conservative oxygen therapy for mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis: a post hoc analysis of data from the intensive care unit randomized trial comparing two approaches to oxygen therapy (ICU-ROX).

PurposeSepsis is a common reason for intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality in ICU patients. Despite increasing interest in treatment strategies limiting oxygen exposure in ICU patients, no trials have compared conservative vs. usual oxygen in patients with sepsis.MethodsWe undertook a post hoc analysis of the 251 patients with sepsis enrolled in a trial that compared conservative oxygen therapy with usual oxygen therapy in 1000 mechanically ventilated ICU patients. The primary end point for the current analysis was 90-day mortality. Key secondary outcomes were cause-specific mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, ventilator-free days, vasopressor-free days, and the proportion of patients receiving renal replacement therapy in the ICU.ResultsPatients with sepsis allocated to conservative oxygen therapy spent less time in the ICU with an SpO2 ≥ 97% (23.5 h [interquartile range (IQR) 8–70] vs. 47 h [IQR 11–93], absolute difference, 23 h; 95% CI 8–38), and more time receiving an FiO2 of 0.21 than patients allocated to usual oxygen therapy (20.5 h [IQR 1–79] vs. 0 h [IQR 0–10], absolute difference, 20 h; 95% CI 14–26). At 90-days, 47 of 130 patients (36.2%) assigned to conservative oxygen and 35 of 120 patients (29.2%) assigned to usual oxygen had died (absolute difference, 7 percentage points; 95% CI − 4.6 to 18.6% points; P = 0.24; interaction P = 0.35 for sepsis vs. non-sepsis). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for secondary outcomes but point estimates of treatment effects consistently favored usual oxygen therapy.ConclusionsPoint estimates for the treatment effect of conservative oxygen therapy on 90-day mortality raise the possibility of clinically important harm with this intervention in patients with sepsis; however, our post hoc analysis was not powered to detect the effects suggested and our data do not exclude clinically important benefit or harm from conservative oxygen therapy in this patient group.Clinical Trials RegistryICU-ROX Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number ACTRN12615000957594.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-019-05857-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effect of Selepressin vs Placebo on Ventilator- and Vasopressor-Free Days in Patients With Septic Shock

Norepinephrine, the first-line vasopressor for septic shock, is not always effective and has important catecholaminergic adverse effects. Selepressin, a selective vasopressin V1a receptor agonist, is a noncatecholaminergic vasopressor that may mitigate sepsis-induced vasodilatation, vascular leakage, and edema, with fewer adverse effects. To test whether selepressin improves outcome in septic shock. An adaptive phase 2b/3 randomized clinical trial comprising 2 parts that included adult patients (n = 868) with septic shock requiring more than 5 μg/min of norepinephrine. Part 1 used a Bayesian algorithm to adjust randomization probabilities to alternative selepressin dosing regimens and to trigger transition to part 2, which would compare the best-performing regimen with placebo. The trial was conducted between July 2015 and August 2017 in 63 hospitals in Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the United States, and follow-up was completed by May 2018. Random assignment to 1 of 3 dosing regimens of selepressin (starting infusion rates of 1.7, 2.5, and 3.5 ng/kg/min; n = 585) or to placebo (n = 283), all administered as continuous infusions titrated according to hemodynamic parameters. Primary end point was ventilator- and vasopressor-free days within 30 days (deaths assigned zero days) of commencing study drug. Key secondary end points were 90-day mortality, kidney replacement therapy-free days, and ICU-free days. Among 868 randomized patients, 828 received study drug (mean age, 66.3 years; 341 [41.2%] women) and comprised the primary analysis cohort, of whom 562 received 1 of 3 selepressin regimens, 266 received placebo, and 817 (98.7%) completed the trial. The trial was stopped for futility at the end of part 1. Median study drug duration was 37.8 hours (IQR, 17.8-72.4). There were no significant differences in the primary end point (ventilator- and vasopressor-free days: 15.0 vs 14.5 in the selepressin and placebo groups; difference, 0.6 [95% CI, -1.3 to 2.4]; P = .30) or key secondary end points (90-day mortality, 40.6% vs 39.4%; difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -6.5% to 8.8%]; P = .77; kidney replacement therapy-free days: 18.5 vs 18.2; difference, 0.3 [95% CI, -2.1 to 2.6]; P = .85; ICU-free days: 12.6 vs 12.2; difference, 0.5 [95% CI, -1.2 to 2.2]; P = .41). Adverse event rates included cardiac arrhythmias (27.9% vs 25.2% of patients), cardiac ischemia (6.6% vs 5.6%), mesenteric ischemia (3.2% vs 2.6%), and peripheral ischemia (2.3% vs 2.3%). Among patients with septic shock receiving norepinephrine, administration of selepressin, compared with placebo, did not result in improvement in vasopressor- and ventilator-free days within 30 days. Further research would be needed to evaluate the potential role of selepressin for other patient-centered outcomes in septic shock. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02508649.

Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock

Abnormal peripheral perfusion after septic shock resuscitation has been associated with organ dysfunction and mortality. The potential role of the clinical assessment of peripheral perfusion as a target during resuscitation in early septic shock has not been established. To determine if a peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation during early septic shock in adults is more effective than a lactate level-targeted resuscitation for reducing mortality. Multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 28 intensive care units in 5 countries. Four-hundred twenty-four patients with septic shock were included between March 2017 and March 2018. The last date of follow-up was June 12, 2018. Patients were randomized to a step-by-step resuscitation protocol aimed at either normalizing capillary refill time (n = 212) or normalizing or decreasing lactate levels at rates greater than 20% per 2 hours (n = 212), during an 8-hour intervention period. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were organ dysfunction at 72 hours after randomization, as assessed by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (range, 0 [best] to 24 [worst]); death within 90 days; mechanical ventilation-, renal replacement therapy-, and vasopressor-free days within 28 days; intensive care unit and hospital length of stay. Among 424 patients randomized (mean age, 63 years; 226 [53%] women), 416 (98%) completed the trial. By day 28, 74 patients (34.9%) in the peripheral perfusion group and 92 patients (43.4%) in the lactate group had died (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.55 to 1.02]; P = .06; risk difference, -8.5% [95% CI, -18.2% to 1.2%]). Peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation was associated with less organ dysfunction at 72 hours (mean SOFA score, 5.6 [SD, 4.3] vs 6.6 [SD, 4.7]; mean difference, -1.00 [95% CI, -1.97 to -0.02]; P = .045). There were no significant differences in the other 6 secondary outcomes. No protocol-related serious adverse reactions were confirmed. Among patients with septic shock, a resuscitation strategy targeting normalization of capillary refill time, compared with a strategy targeting serum lactate levels, did not reduce all-cause 28-day mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03078712.

Association of Corticosteroid Treatment With Outcomes in Adult Patients With Sepsis

Although corticosteroids are widely used for adults with sepsis, both the overall benefit and potential risks remain unclear. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until March 20, 2018, and updated on August 10, 2018. The terms corticosteroids, sepsis, septic shock, hydrocortisone, controlled trials, and randomized controlled trial were searched alone or in combination. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included that compared administration of corticosteroids with placebo or standard supportive care in adults with sepsis. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% CIs. Two independent reviewers completed citation screening, data abstraction, and risk assessment. Twenty-eight-day mortality. This meta-analysis included 37 RCTs (N = 9564 patients). Eleven trials were rated as low risk of bias. Corticosteroid use was associated with reduced 28-day mortality (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; I2 = 27%) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.94; I2 = 0%) and in-hospital mortality (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.99; I2 = 38%). Corticosteroids were significantly associated with increased shock reversal at day 7 (MD, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.80-3.11) and vasopressor-free days (MD, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.80-3.11) and with ICU length of stay (MD, -1.16; 95% CI, -2.12 to -0.20), the sequential organ failure assessment score at day 7 (MD, -1.38; 95% CI, -1.87 to -0.89), and time to resolution of shock (MD, -1.35; 95% CI, -1.78 to -0.91). However, corticosteroid use was associated with increased risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30) and hypernatremia (RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.24-1.99). The findings suggest that administration of corticosteroids is associated with reduced 28-day mortality compared with placebo use or standard supportive care. More research is needed to associate personalized medicine with the corticosteroid treatment to select suitable patients who are more likely to show a benefit.

The effect of polymyxin B hemoperfusion on modulation of human leukocyte antigen DR in severe sepsis patients

BackgroundRecent randomized trials have not found that polymyxin B hemoperfusion (PMX-HP) improves outcomes for patients with sepsis. However, it remains unclear whether the therapy could provide benefit for highly selected patients. Monocyte human leukocyte antigen (mHLA-DR) expression, a critical step in the immune response, is decreased during sepsis and leads to worsening sepsis outcomes. One recent study found that PMX-HP increased mHLA-DR expression while another found that the treatment removed HLA-DR-positive cells.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial in patients with blood endotoxin activity assay (EAA) level ≥ 0.6. Patients in the PMX-HP group received a 2-h PMX-HP treatment plus standard treatment for 2 consecutive days. Patients in the non-PMX-HP group received only standard treatment. The primary outcome compared the groups on median change in mHLA-DR expression between day 3 and baseline. Secondary outcomes compared the groups on the mean or median change in CD11b expression, neutrophil chemotaxis, presepsin, cardiovascular Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (CVS SOFA) score, vasopressor dose, and EAA level between day 3 and baseline. We further compared the groups on mortality, ICU-free days, ventilator-free days, dialysis dependence status, renal recovery, serum creatinine, vasopressor-free days, and major adverse kidney events (MAKE 28), measured on day 28.ResultsFifty-nine patients were randomized to PMX-HP (n = 29) and non-PMX-HP (n = 30) groups. At baseline, mHLA-DR expression, CD11b, neutrophil chemotaxis, and clinical parameters were comparable between groups. The median change in mHLA-DR expression between day 3 and baseline was higher in PMX-HP patients than in patients receiving standard therapy alone (P = 0.027). The mean change in CD11b between day 3 and baseline was significantly lower in the PMX-HP group than in the non-PMX-HP group (P = 0.002). There were no significant changes from baseline in neutrophil chemotaxis, presepsin, CVS SOFA scores, vasopressor doses, or EAA level between groups. On day 28 after enrollment, mortality, ICU-free days, ventilator-free days, dialysis dependence status, renal recovery, serum creatinine, vasopressor-free days, and MAKE 28 were comparable between groups.ConclusionPMX-HP improved mHLA-DR expression in severe sepsis patients. Future studies should examine the potential benefit of PMX-HP in patients with low mHLA-DR expression.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02413541. Registered on 3 March 2015.

Transthoracic echocardiography and mortality in sepsis: analysis of the MIMIC-III database.

While the use of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in the ICU is rapidly expanding, the contribution of TTE to altering patient outcomes among ICU patients with sepsis has not been examined. This study was designed to examine the association of TTE with 28-day mortality specifically in that population. The MIMIC-III database was employed to identify patients with sepsis who had and had not received TTE. The statistical approaches utilized included multivariate regression, propensity score analysis, doubly robust estimation, the gradient boosted model, and an inverse probability-weighting model to ensure the robustness of our findings. Significant benefit in terms of 28-day mortality was observed among the TTE patients compared to the control (no TTE) group (odds ratio = 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.90, p < 0.001). The amount of fluid administered (2.5 vs. 2.1L on day 1, p < 0.001), use of dobutamine (2% vs. 1%, p = 0.007), and the maximum dose of norepinephrine (1.4 vs. 1mg/min, p = 0.001) were significantly higher for the TTE patients. Importantly, the TTE patients were weaned off vasopressors more quickly than those in the no TTE group (vasopressor-free days on day 28 of 21 vs. 19, p = 0.004). In a general population of critically ill patients with sepsis, use of TTE is associated with an improvement in 28-day mortality.

Hydrocortisone plus Fludrocortisone for Adults with Septic Shock

BackgroundSeptic shock is characterized by dysregulation of the host response to infection, with circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities. We hypothesized that therapy with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone or with drotrecogin alfa (activated), which can modulate the host response, would improve the clinical outcomes of patients with septic shock.MethodsIn this multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we evaluated the effect of hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone therapy, drotrecogin alfa (activated), the combination of the three drugs, or their respective placebos. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included mortality at intensive care unit (ICU) discharge and hospital discharge and at day 28 and day 180 and the number of days alive and free of vasopressors, mechanical ventilation, or organ failure. After drotrecogin alfa (activated) was withdrawn from the market, the trial continued with a two-group parallel design. The analysis compared patients who received hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone with those who did not (placebo group).ResultsAmong the 1241 patients included in the trial, the 90-day mortality was 43.0% (264 of 614 patients) in the hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone group and 49.1% (308 of 627 patients) in the placebo group (P=0.03). The relative risk of death in the hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone group was 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 0.99). Mortality was significantly lower in the hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone group than in the placebo group at ICU discharge (35.4% vs. 41.0%, P=0.04), hospital discharge (39.0% vs. 45.3%, P=0.02), and day 180 (46.6% vs. 52.5%, P=0.04) but not at day 28 (33.7% and 38.9%, respectively; P=0.06). The number of vasopressor-free days to day 28 was significantly higher in the hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone group than in the placebo group (17 vs. 15 days, P<0.001), as was the number of organ-failure–free days (14 vs. 12 days, P=0.003). The number of ventilator-free days was similar in the two groups (11 days in the hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone group and 10 in the placebo group, P=0.07). The rate of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups, but hyperglycemia was more common in hydrocortisone-plus-fludrocortisone group.ConclusionsIn this trial involving patients with septic shock, 90-day all-cause mortality was lower among those who received hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone than among those who received placebo. (Funded by Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique 2007 of the French Ministry of Social Affairs and Health; APROCCHSS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00625209.)

Balanced crystalloids versus saline in the intensive care unit: study protocol for a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial

BackgroundSaline, the intravenous fluid most commonly administered to critically ill adults, contains a high chloride content, which may be associated with acute kidney injury and death. Whether using balanced crystalloids rather than saline decreases the risk of acute kidney injury and death among critically ill adults remains unknown.MethodsThe Isotonic Solutions and Major Adverse Renal Events Trial (SMART) is a pragmatic, cluster-level allocation, cluster-level crossover trial being conducted between 1 June 2015 and 30 April 2017 in five intensive care units at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, TN, USA. SMART compares saline (0.9% sodium chloride) with balanced crystalloids (clinician’s choice of lactated Ringer’s solution or Plasma-Lyte A®). Each intensive care unit is assigned to provide either saline or balanced crystalloids each month, with the assigned crystalloid alternating monthly over the course of the trial. All adults admitted to participating intensive care units during the study period are enrolled and followed until hospital discharge or 30 days after enrollment. The anticipated enrollment is approximately 14,000 patients. The primary outcome is Major Adverse Kidney Events within 30 days—the composite of in-hospital death, receipt of new renal replacement therapy, or persistent renal dysfunction (discharge creatinine ≥200% of baseline creatinine). Secondary clinical outcomes include in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit-free days, ventilator-free days, vasopressor-free days, and renal replacement therapy-free days. Secondary renal outcomes include new renal replacement therapy receipt, persistent renal dysfunction, and incidence of stage 2 or higher acute kidney injury.DiscussionThis ongoing pragmatic trial will provide the largest and most comprehensive comparison to date of clinical outcomes with saline versus balanced crystalloids among critically ill adults.Trial registrationFor logistical reasons, SMART was prospectively registered separately for the medical ICU (SMART-MED; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02444988; registered on 11 May 2015; date of first patient enrollment: 1 June 2015) and the nonmedical ICUs (SMART-SURG; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02547779; registered on 9 September 2015; date of first patient enrollment: 1 October 2015).

Role of nebulized heparin inhalation on mechanically ventilated critically ill patients

Mechanical ventilation is one of the most important tools in the treatment of respiratory failure in critically ill patients, but it may cause lung injury and inflammatory response in the whole body. The aim of our study was to justify the effect of nebulized heparin on morbidity, oxygenation parameters, lung mechanics, and mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients who are assumed to require mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h for different indications. This study was conducted on 50 ICU patients who were in need of mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h. They were grouped randomly into two groups. One of the two groups was given nebulized heparin sodium until weaning or for a maximum of 14 days. Patients with coagulopathy or scheduled for any invasive intervention that may lead to bleeding were excluded. In addition, patients who were weaned or who died before day 4of admission were also excluded. Both groups were followed up for a maximum of 28 days. The study medication was reduced or withheld if any significant bleeding occurred. The endpoint results were primary oxygenation parameters [mainly arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/inspired oxygen fraction (FIO2)] and ventilator-free days. All other data were recorded and analyzed to find out the adverse positive effect of heparin nebulization. Data analysis revealed that the following data showed no statistically significant difference within groups over time or between the two groups: PaCO2, pH, PaO2, HCO3, SO2, PaO2/FIO2, FIO2×mean airway pressure/PaO2, peak inspiratory pressure, mean airway pressure, tumor necrosis factor α , systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, hemoglobin, hematocrit value, white blood cells count, platelet count, prothrombin concentration, international normalized ratio, presence of bloody sputum, ICU-free days at day 28, ventilator-free days at day 28, acute renal failure-free days at day 28, vasopressor-free days at day 28, and mortality and sputum culture results at day 4. However, the following data showed a statistically significant difference in the heparin-treated group: plateau pressure showed a statistically significant decrease between days 1 and 4 in the heparin-treated group (P=0.003) and a statistically significant difference when we compared the percentage change between the two groups (P=0.015). Compliance rate showed a statistically significant increase between days 1 and 4 in the heparin-treated group (P=0.019) but when we compared the percentage change between the two groups the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.256). Activated partial thromboplastin time showed a statistically significant increase between days 1 and 4 in the heparin-treated group (P=0.001), but when we compared the percentage change between the two groups the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.153). No cases of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was noted in the heparin-treated group, nor was there major bleeding or need for blood transfusion related to the tested medication in this group. We recommend nebulized heparin as a safe drug that has a favorable effect in patients receiving mechanical ventilation especially with reduced compliance as in cases of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Pseudocholinesterase as a predictor of mortality and morbidity in organophosphorus poisoning.

Background:Organophosphorus (OP) pesticide poisoning is a major clinical and public health problem in India. Mortality rate remains high at 15%–30%.Aims:This prospective, observational study examines the relationship between pseudocholinesterase (PChE) activity and morbidity and mortality in OP poisoning.Setting and Design:OP poisoning cases admitted to a tertiary care center Intensive Care Unit (ICU) over 5 years from 2010 to 2014 were studied.Methods:Patients <16 years of age, those on steroids and those with neuromuscular weakness, were excluded from the study. Serum PChE level at admission was estimated and the severity of poisoning assessed accordingly. Primary outcome measures were ICU length of stay and ventilator-free days. Secondary outcome measures included vasopressor-free days, amount of atropine given, hospital length of stay, and ICU mortality.Results:There were 37 patients included in the study, aged between 24 and 44 years, of which 65% were male. They were divided into two groups according to PChE levels. Group A with PChE levels more than 1000 IU/L had twenty patients and Group B with levels <1000 IU/L had 17 patients. Group B had longer ICU length of stay (P < 0.001) and fewer ventilator-free days (P < 0.001). They also had a fewer vasopressor-free days and a longer stay in hospital.Conclusions:PChE level at presentation is a reliable indicator of the severity of OP poisoning and a predictor of the need for mechanical ventilation and the duration of stay in the ICU.

High Level of Endotoxemia Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Is Associated With Severity and Duration of Postcardiac Arrest Shock.

To investigate the contribution of endotoxemia to the severity of postcardiac arrest shock. A prospective monocentric study. A tertiary hospital in Paris, France. Patients admitted in our ICU after a successfully resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. None. Endotoxin measurement was performed in the 12 hours following return of spontaneous circulation using the endotoxin activity assay. Endotoxin level was classified as low (< 0.4 endotoxin activity), intermediate (0.4 to < 0.6 endotoxin activity), or high (≥ 0.6 endotoxin activity) according to manufacture guidelines. Severity of shock was assessed by the vasopressor-free days and by the mean daily dose of vasopressor to insure a mean arterial pressure of 65-75 mm Hg. Among 92 patients included in the study, 60 presented a postcardiac arrest shock. Endotoxemia level was higher in patients with postcardiac arrest shock. Among these patients, by multivariate linear regression, high endotoxin class (adjusted estimate -2.0; 95% CI, -3.90 to -0.11), public place of cardiac arrest (adjusted estimate, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.007 to 2.93), and time to return of spontaneous circulation (adjusted estimate -0.08; 95% CI, -0.13 to -0.03) were independently associated with the number of vasopressor-free days. Furthermore, high endotoxin class (adjusted estimate, 97.95; 95% CI, 20.5 to 175.4) and a nonshockable rhythm (adjusted estimate, 59.9; 95% CI, 6.2 to 113.7) were the sole factors independently associated with the mean daily dose of vasopressors. In patients successfully resuscitated from cardiac arrest with a postcardiac arrest shock, high level of endotoxemia is independently associated with duration of postcardiac arrest shock and the amount of vasopressive drugs. Whether treatment targeting endotoxemia could be beneficial in the management of postcardiac arrest shock needs to be studied in further randomized controlled studies.

Impact of statin therapy on mortality in patients with sepsis-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) depends on ARDS severity: a prospective observational cohort study

BackgroundPrevious investigations have presumed a potential therapeutic effect of statin therapy in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Statins are expected to attenuate inflammation in the lungs of patients with ARDS due to their anti-inflammatory effects. Clinical investigations of the role of statin therapy have revealed contradictory results. This study aimed to investigate whether pretreatment and continuous therapy with statins in patients with sepsis-associated ARDS are associated with 28-day survival according to disease severity (mild, moderate, or severe).MethodsPatients with sepsis-associated ARDS from the surgical intensive care were enrolled in this prospective observational investigation. ARDS was classified into three groups (mild, moderate, and severe); 28-day mortality was recorded as the primary outcome variable and organ failure was recorded as secondary outcome variable. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and the requirements for organ support were evaluated throughout the observational period to assess organ failure.Results404 patients with sepsis-associated ARDS were enrolled in this investigation. The distribution of the ARDS subgroups was 13 %, 59 %, and 28 % for mild, moderate, and severe disease, respectively. Statin therapy improved 28-day survival exclusively in the patients with severe ARDS compared with patients without statin therapy (88.5 % and 62.5 %, respectively; P = 0.0193). To exclude the effects of several confounders, we performed multivariate Cox regression analysis, which showed that statin therapy remained a significant covariate for mortality (hazard ratio, 5.46; 95 % CI, 1.38–21.70; P = 0.0156). Moreover, after carrying a propensity score-matching in the severe ARDS cohort, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis confirmed the improved 28-day survival among patients with statin therapy (P = 0.0205). Patients with severe ARDS who received statin therapy had significantly more vasopressor-free days compared with those without statin therapy (13 ± 7 and 9 ± 7, respectively; P = 0.0034), and they also required less extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy and had more ECMO-free days (18 ± 9 and 15 ± 9, respectively; P = 0.0873).ConclusionsThis investigation suggests a beneficial effect of continuous statin therapy in patients with severe sepsis-associated ARDS and a history of prior statin therapy. Further study is warranted to elucidate this potential effect.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0368-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The impact of serial lactate monitoring on emergency department resuscitation interventions and clinical outcomes in severe sepsis and septic shock: an observational cohort study.

Monitoring in the setting of critical illness must be linked to beneficial therapy to affect clinical outcome. Elevated serum lactate is associated with an increase in mortality in emergency department (ED) patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. The reduction of lactate levels toward normal during acute resuscitation is associated with improved clinical outcomes. The majority of data demonstrating the interventions used to achieve a reduction in lactate levels and the associated clinical outcomes have been obtained during protocolized randomized trials. We therefore conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of 243 adult patients with severe sepsis and septic shock to assess the interventions associated with nonprotocolized serial lactate monitoring and to assess clinical outcomes. A multivariable model was used to assess outcome differences between the serial lactate (SL) and no serial lactate (NL) cohorts. The SL group received more crystalloid resuscitation (3.6 L vs. 2.5 L; P < 0.01), central venous oxygen saturation monitoring (30% vs. 12%; P < 0.01), and central venous pressure monitoring (23.5% vs. 11.8%; P = 0.02). By day 28, a total of 31 patients in the SL group (23.5%) and 44 in the NL group (39.6%) had died. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the lack of serial lactate monitoring was independently associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12 - 3.89; P = 0.02). The SL group also showed greater improvement in 24-h Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (1.16 vs. 0.19; P = 0.03), decreased intensive care unit length of stay in days (4.6 vs. 6.0; P = 0.04), and more ventilator-free (19.9 vs. 16; P = 0.05) and vasopressor-free (21.6 vs. 17.9; P = 0.02) days. In the setting of routine clinical care, serial lactate monitoring is associated with an increase in crystalloid administration, resuscitation interventions, and improved clinical outcomes in ED patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. This suggests that serial lactate monitoring, targeting a reduction in lactate levels to normal, is a generalizable resuscitation target in the ED.