Objective To systemically review the efficacy and safety of dopamine versus norepinephrine in patients with septic shock. Methods Database searches of MEDLINE, EMbase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, VIP, CNKI, and CBM (from the date of database establishment to June 2011) were conducted. Additional studies for collecting relevant data were retrieved via both references of articles and direct contact with authors. Prospectively, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dopamine compared with norepinephrine therapy in septic shock patients were selected. The quality of included trials was assessed and relevant data were extracted. Then statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1. Results Nine trials with 3 179 participants were included. The results of meta-analysis showed: compared with norepinephrine, dopamine was associated with a significant 12% elevation in the risk ratio of in-hospital death events of septic shock patients (RR=1.12, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.21, P=0.002). The risk of arrhythmias in dopamine group was 2.63-fold than that in norepinephrine group (RR=2.63, 95%CI 1.51 to 4.55, P=0.000 6). The cardiac index of septic patients in dopamine group was higher than that in norepinephrine group (MD=0.42, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.63, Plt;0.000 1). No significant difference could be found in the heart rate (MD=17.05, 95%CI –0.71 to 34.81, P=0.06) and mean arterial pressure (MD= –0.87, 95%CI –24.97 to 7.62, P=0.30). Conclusion Findings from this meta-analysis suggest that compared with dopamine, norepinephrine significantly reduces both 28-day mortality of septic shock patients and incidence rate of arrhythmias. Norepinephrine is better than dopamine in aspects of efficacy and safety.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the value of stroke volume variation (SVV) and intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI) to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated septic shock patients with spontaneous breathing. MethodsA prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Critical Care Medicine of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University. Fluid resuscitation data was collected in septic shock patients who received PiCCO monitoring from June 2013 to June 2014. Transpulmonary thermodilution data were collected before and after fluid resuscitation, including cardiac index (CI), SVV, ITBVI, and central venous pressure (CVP). Seventeen patients were defined as responders by an observed increase of≥15% in the cardiac index (CI) after fluid resuscitation, 12 patients were defined as non-responders. Pearson correlation between changes of CI (ΔCI) and SVV, ITBVI, CVP was established. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of SVV, ITBVI and CVP was calculated for predicting fluid responsiveness. ResultsBaseline CI and ITBVI were significantly lower in the responders (P < 0.05).There was no significant difference in baseline SVV between the responders and the non-responders (P > 0.05). A significant correlation was found between baseline ITBVI andΔCI (r=-0.593, P < 0.001), but no significant correlation between SVV andΔCI (r=0.037, P=0.847) or CVP andΔCI (r=0.198, P=0.302). The area under ROC curve of SVV, ITBVI and SVV for predicting fluid responsiveness was 0.640 (P=0.207), 0.865 (P=0.001), and 0.463 (P=0.565), respectively. The cut-off value of ITBVI for predicting fluid responsiveness was 784 mL/m2 with a sensitivity of 100.0% and a specificity of 70.6%. ConclusionIn mechanically ventilated septic shock patients with spontaneous breathing, ITBVI may be a valuable indicator in predicting fluid responsiveness compared with SVV.
This article reports the management of thirty elderly patients of septic shock during anesthesia. Twenty-four of them received continious epidural anesthesia, five of them were under intravenous general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation, and onr patients recerived intravenous ketamine anesthesia. The effects of these patients on enesthesia wer satisfactory. Twenty-four patients recouverd after roperation. Six patients died. The authors atresses the high risk of anesthetic management in these patients. Experiences are introduced in per-anesthetic preparation and medication selection and maintenance of anesthesia, monitoring and treatment during anesthesia and postoperative care of septic shock of the elderly.
Objective To investigate the value of pulse indicator continuous cardiac output ( PiCCO) monitoring in the treatment of septic shock.Methods Patients with septic shock were selected in intensive care unit ( ICU) . After initial empirical resuscitating and using vasoactive drugs, the patients with circulation instability were connected with the PiCCO temperature probe to monitor hemodynamics and to resuscitate in the target of intrathoracic blood volume index ( ITBVI) , cardiac index ( CI) , extravascular lung water index ( EVLWI) . Hemodynamic parameters, oxygen metabolic variability and 24h-fluid management after 0h ( before) , 8h, 24h, the rate of implementing resuscitation goals, oxygen metabolic variability and fluid resuscitation at different times in the guidance of PiCCO parameters were compared. The data of age, APACHEⅡ score, central venous pressure ( CVP) , CI, ITBVI, mean arterial pressure ( MAP) , systemic vascular resistance index ( SVRI) and EVLWI after 0h and 24h were substituted into the regression equation by the multiple linear regression, to determine the indexes which would affect the 28-day prognosis. Results A total of 80 patients with septic shock were recruited in the study. Comparing fluid resuscitation at different times in the guidance of PiCCO,MAP( 73.6 ±13.4 and 75.1 ±10.2 mm Hg) , ITBVI ( 843.5 ±168.9 and 891.5 ±232.9 mL/m2 ) and CI ( 3.2 ±1.1 and 3.9 ±0. 4 L· min-1 · m-2 ) on 8h and 24h were significantly higher than that at 0h ( 69.1 ±21.4 mm Hg, 781.2±146.7 mL/m2 and 2.7 ±1.5 L·min-1·m-2 ) , and Lac( 2.0 ±1.4 and 1.1 ±1.0 mmol /L) and SVRI ( 1 624. 2 ±301. 7 and 1 543.6 ±435.4 d·s·m2·cm-5 ) were declined than that at 0h( 3.1 ±2.4 mmol /L and 1 796.2 ±399.1 d·s·m2 ·cm-5 ) ( Plt;0.05) . The rate of implementing resuscitation goals at 8h ( 64.7% ) and 24h ( 66.9% ) were significantly higher than that at 0h ( 55.7% ) ( Plt;0.05) , but there was no significant difference between 8h and 24h ( Pgt;0.05) . All of the patients were divided into a survival group ( n=54) and a death group ( n=26) . The rate of implementing resuscitation goals at 0h and 24h in the survival group ( 57.1% and 71.3% ) were significantly higher than that of the death group( 28.6% and 39.3% ) . By the prognosis on 28-day as the dependent variability in the multiple linear regression, multiple linear regression equation were established, and there was significantly difference ( F=55.03, Plt;0.05) . By the layer-wise screening, equation was fitted, both the CI ( R=0.431) and ITBVI ( R=0.627) at beginning and EVLWI ( R= 0.305) at 24h were determined to influence the 28-day prognosis. Conclusions The fluid resuscitation under the guidance of PiCCO can achieve the goal better and improve the prognosis. CI, ITBVI and EVLWI were useful goaldirectors for the prognosis evaluation in critical ill patients.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of pulse indicating continuous cardiac output (PICCO) monitoring for guiding the treatment of patients with septic shock.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data, VIP and CNKI were electronically searched from inception to February 2017 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about PICCO monitoring on treatment guidance of patients with septic shock. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using Stata 12.0 software.ResultsA total of 20 RCTs involving 1 253 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed: compared with central venous pressure (CVP) measurements, the treatment of sepsis bundles informed by PICCO could significantly shorten the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (MD=–2.74, 95%CI –3.40 to –2.09, P<0.001), reduce the ICU mortality (RR=0.49, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.67, P<0.001) and 28-day mortality (RR=0.61, 95%CI 0.43 to 0.87, P=0.006).ConclusionCurrent evidence shows the PICCO monitoring can significantly improve the prognosis of septic shock. Due to limited and quantity quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
Objective To provide a comprehensive overview of model performance and predictive efficacy of machine learning techniques to predict septic shock in children, in order to target and improve the quality and predictive power of models for future studies. MethodsTo systematically review all studies in four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, CNKI, WanFang Data) on machine learning prediction of septic shock in children before April 1, 2024. Two investigators independently conducted literature screening, literature data extraction and bias assessment, and conducted a systematic review of basic information, research data, study design and prediction models. Model discrimination, which area under the curve (AUC), was pooled using a random-effects model and meta-analysis was performed. Subgroup analyses were performed according to sample sizes, machine learning models, types of predictors, number of predictors, etc. And publication bias and sensitivity analyses were performed for the included literature. Results A total of 11 studies were included, of which 2 were at low risk of bias, 7 were at unknown risk of bias, and 2 were at high risk of bias. The data used in the included studies included both public and non-public electronic medical record databases, and the machine learning models used included logistic regression, random forest, support vector machine, and XGBoost, etc. The predictive models constructed based on different databases appeared to have different results in terms of the characteristic variables, so identifying the key variables of the predictive models requires further validation on other datasets. Meta-analysis showed the pooled AUC of 0.812 (95%CI 0.763 to 0.860, P<0.001), and further subgroup analyses showed that larger sample sizes (≥1 000) and predictor variable types significantly improved the predictive effect of the model, and the difference in AUC was statistically significant (95%CI not overlapping). The funnel plot showed that there was publication bias in the study, and when the extreme AUC values were excluded, the meta-analysis yielded a total AUC of 0.815 (95%CI 0.769 to 0.861, P<0.001), indicating that the extreme AUC values were insensitive. ConclusionMachine learning technology has shown some potential in predicting septic shock in children, but the quality of existing research needs to be strengthened, and future research work should improve the quality of research and improve the prediction effect of the model by expanding the sample size.
Objective To investigate the value of central venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide difference/arterial-to-venous oxygen difference ratio [P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2] in predicting oxygen metabolism after fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock. Methods A prospective observational study was carried out on septic shock patients admitted in the intensive care unit of Nanjng Drum Tower Hospital from November 2013 to April 2014. All patients underwent fluid challenge (300 ml saline for 20 min, rapid intravenous infusion). The patients were divided into a fluid responded group (ΔCI≥10%) and a fluid unresponded group (ΔCI＜10%), according to the change of cardiac output index (ΔCI) after fluid challenge. Then the patients were divided into two subgroups in the fluid responded group, namely a ΔVO2≥10% group and a ΔVO2＜10% group, according to the change of VO2 (ΔVO2). Cardiac output index (CI) were determined by pulse indicator continuous cardiac output (PICCO). Hemoglobin, arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2), arterial oxygen (PaO2), arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), arterial blood lactate, central venous carbon dioxide (PcvCO2), central venous oxygen (PcvO2) and central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) were measured by blood gas analysis. P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2 and oxygen consumption (VO2) were calculated. P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2 before and after fluid challenge was compared between two subgroups. Results Fluid challenges were performed in 23 instances in 18 patients, among which 17 instances were defined as the fluid responded group. Compared with the fluid unresponded group, P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2, arterial lactate and ScvO2 had no significant difference [P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2](mm Hg/ml): 2.05±0.75vs. 1.58±0.67; arterial lactate (mmol/l): 3.78±2.50vs. 3.26±2.42; ScvO2(%): 73.71±9.64vs. 70.30±12.01,P＞0.05] in the fluid responded group before resuscitation. In the fluid responded group, there were 10 instances in the ΔVO2≥10% group and 7 instances in the ΔVO2＜10% group. P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2 (mm Hg/ml) was significantly higher in the ΔVO2≥10% group before resuscitation compared with the ΔVO2＜10% group (2.43±0.73vs. 1.51±0.37,P＜0.01). Lactate (mmol/l) was also higher in the ΔVO2≥10% group before resuscitation (4.53±2.52vs. 1.46±0.82,P＜0.01). ScvO2 (%) had no significant difference between two groups (70.79±9.15vs. 72.13±13.42,P＞0.05). The areas under ROC curve (AUCs) of P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2, lactate and ScvO2 for predicting ΔVO2≥10% were 0.843, 0.921, and 0.529, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2≥1.885 mm Hg/ml for predicting ΔVO2≥10% after fluid resuscitation were 70% and 86%, respectively. Conclusion For septic shock patients with fluid responsiveness, P(cv-a)CO2/C(a-cv)O2 can predict oxygen metabolism after fluid resuscitation and can be used as a reliable parameter to guide fluid resuscitation.
ObjectiveTo explore the influence of norepinephrine on the prediction of fluid responsiveness by passive leg raising (PLR) during septic shock. MethodsForty-six septic shock patients in intensive care unit of Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital were prospectively observed from September to November 2012. Among which 36 septic shock patients were enrolled with a positive PLR test (defined by an increase in stroke volume index ≥10%). A PLR test was performed at baseline (PLR1). A second PLR test (PLR2) was performed at returning to supine position for 10 min and the dose of norepinephrine was increased to maintain MAP ≥65 mmHg for 20 min. The changes of heart rate(HR),mean arterial pressure(MAP),central venous pressure(CVP),cardiac index(CI),stroke volume index(SVI),index of systemic vascular resistance(SVRI),global end-diastolic volume index(GEDVI),and cardiac function index(CFI) were monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution technique (PiCCO). ResultsPLR1 significantly increased SVI by (20.54±9.63)%,CI by (20.57±9.89)%,MAP by (7.64±5.77)%,and CVP by (25.83±23.39)%. As the dose of norepinephrine increased,SVI was increased by (16.97±9.06)%,CI by (16.78±8.39)%,GEDVI by (9.08±4.47)%,MAP by (28.07±12.48)%,and CVP by (7.86±8.52)%. PLR2 increased SVI by (13.74±8.79)%,CI by (13.79±9.08)%,MAP by (2.93±5.06)%,and CVP by (13.36±14.74)%. The PLR2 and the dose increase of norepinephrine augmented SVI to a significantly lesser extent than the PLR1 performed at baseline (both P<0.05). However,SVI increased by <10% in 6 patients while the baseline PLR was positive in these patients. ConclusionIn septic patients with a positive PLR at baseline,norepinephrine increases cardiac preload and cardiac output and influences the fluid responsiveness.
ObjectiveTo investigate the influence of norepinephrine on pulmonary vessel pressure in animal model of septic shock. MethodsTwelve health mongrel dogs were randomly divided into a control group (n=5, intravenously injected with normal saline 1 mL/kg) and an endotoxin group(n=7, intravenously injected with lipopolysaccharide 1 mg/kg). When the systemic blood pressure decreased by more than 40% of baseline before administration, the dogs in two groups were intravenously injected with NE 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1. The interval of each dose was more than 10 minutes. The changes of the pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), pulmonary venous pressure (PVP), and systemic arterial rressure (SAP) were recorded and compared between two groups. ResultsIn the control group, PAP didn't change significantly after administration (P < 0.05), however, PVP increased obviously after NE administration in dose of 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1 (P < 0.05), and SAP increased obviously after NE administration in dose of 1.0, 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1 (P < 0.01). In the endotoxin group, PAP increased obviously after NE administration in dose of 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1 (P < 0.05), while PVP didn't change significantly (P > 0.05), and SAP increased obviously after NE administration in dose of 1.0, 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1 (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in SAP (P < 0.05), not in PAP and PVP (P > 0.05), between two groups after NE administration at dose of 1.0, 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1. The PVP/SAP and PAP/SAP values didn't change significantly after administration in the control group (P > 0.05). In the endotoxin group, the PVP/SAP and PAP/SAP values increased significantly after LPS administration, and decreased slightly after NE administration in dose of 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1 (P < 0.05). ConclusionsNE administration in septic shock can not increase the angiotasis of the pulmonary vein. NE administration in dose of 2.0 and 5.0μg·kg-1·min-1 can cause the increase of PAP and SAP, but the increase of PAP is lower than the increase of SAP.
ObjectiveTo explore the value of inferior vena cava inspiratory collapsibility (ΔIVC) in guiding septic shock resuscitation with early goal-directed therapy (EGDT).MethodsA single center, randomized controlled trial was conducted at an 812-bed hospital in Mianyang, Sichuan. Adult patients with early septic shock in the intensive care unit were assessed and treated at defined intervals over 6 h using an ΔIVC-guided resuscitation protocol or an EGDT protocol. Feasibility outcomes were fluid balance and norepinephrine administration. The primary clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality rate, 90-day survival rate. Secondary outcomes included incidence of acute kidney injury and consumption of health resources.ResultsSixty-eight patients with septic shock were enrolled in this study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. The ΔIVC-guided septic shock resuscitation group was lower than the EGDT group in the ICU 24 h fluid replacement (L): 3.8 (4.0, 5.3) vs. 4.7 (4.0, 6.6), 72 h liquid positive balance (L): 0.2 (–0.65, 1.2) vs. 2.5 (0.0, 4.1), intensive care unit length of stay (d): 7.5 (5.0, 14.0) vs. 15.0 (7.0, 21.5), mechanical ventilation cumulative time (d): 3.0 (0.0, 7.0) vs. 7.5 (2.2, 12.0), ICU costs (ten thousand yuan): 3.4 (2.1, 5.9) vs. 8.6 (4.2, 16.5), bedside blood purification treatment costs (ten thousand yuan): 2.3 (1.1, 3.3) vs. 6.8 (2.1, 10.0) (P<0.05). No difference was observed in the incidence of acute kidney injury (P > 0.05), in-hospital mortality and 90-day survival between the two groups (log-rank χ2=0.35, P>0.05).ConclusionsAmong patients with septic shock, a ΔIVC-guided septic shock resuscitation, compared with EGDT, did not reduce in-hospital mortality. It might prevent the risk of over resuscitation, shorten the duration of mechanical ventilation, and lead to a better utilization of intensive care unit resources.