BACKGROUND: Elevated renin has been shown to predict poor response to standard vasoactive therapies and is associated with poor outcomes in adults. Similarly, elevated renin was associated with mortality in children with septic shock. Renin concentration profiles after pediatric cardiac surgery are unknown. The purpose of this study was to characterize renin kinetics after pediatric cardiac surgery.
METHODS: Single-center retrospective study of infants who underwent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) utilizing serum samples obtained in the perioperative period to measure plasma renin concentrations (pg/mL). Time points included pre-bypass and 1, 4, and 24 h after initiation of CPB.
RESULTS: Fifty patients (65% male) with a median age 5 months (interquartile range (IQR) 3.5, 6.5) were included. Renin concentrations peaked 4 h after CPB. There was a significant difference in preoperative and 4 h post-CPB renin concentration (4 h post-CPB vs preoperative: mean difference 100.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 48.9-152.4, P < .001). Median renin concentration at 24 h after CPB was lower than the preoperative baseline.
CONCLUSIONS: We describe renin kinetics in infants after CPB. Future studies based on these data can now be performed to evaluate the associations of elevated renin concentrations with adverse outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: Cardiac surgery often necessitates considerable post-operative vasoactive-inotropic support. Given an encouraging literature on the prognostic potential of leucoglycemic index (LGI) [serum glucose (mg/dl) × total leucocytes count (cells/mm3)/1000], we aimed to evaluate whether intensive care unit (ICU)-admission LGI can predict post-operative vasopressor-inotropic requirements following cardiac surgery on cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB).
UNASSIGNED: The data of patients undergoing cardiac surgery at our tertiary care center between January 2015 and December 2020 was retrospectively reviewed. The vasopressor-inotropic requirement was estimated using the VIS (vasoactive-inotropic score) values over the first post-operative 72 hrs. Subsequently, VISi (indexed VIS) was computed as maxVIS[0-24hrs] + maxVIS[24-48hrs] +2 × maxVIS[48-72hrs]/10), and the study participants were divided into h-VISi (VISi ≥3) and l-VISi (VISi <3).
UNASSIGNED: Out of 2138 patients, 479 (22.40%) patients categorized as h-VISi. On univariate analysis: LGI, age, European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score (EuroSCORE II), left-ventricle ejection fraction, prior congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic renal failure, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, combined surgeries, CPB and aortic cross-clamp (ACC) duration, blood transfusion, and immediate post-operative glucose were significant h-VISi predictors. Subsequent to multi-variate analysis, the predictive performance of LGI (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.03-1.14; P = 0.002) prior CHF (OR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.44-3.82; P = 0.001), CPB time (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.14; P = 0.019), ACC time (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.02-1.04; P = 0.008), and EuroSCORE II (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.06-1.21; P < 0.001) remained significant. With 1484.75 emerging as the h-VISi predictive cut-off, patients with LGI ≥ 1484.75 also had a higher incidence of vasoplegia, low-cardiac output syndrome, new-onset atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, and mortality. LGI additionally exhibited a significant positive correlation with duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay (R = 0.495 and 0.564, P value < 0.001).
UNASSIGNED: An elevated LGI of greater than 1484.75 independently predicted a VISindex ≥3 following adult cardiac surgery on CPB.

暂无摘要。

Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses frequently manually titrate norepinephrine to maintain a predefined mean arterial pressure (MAP) target after high-risk surgery. However, achieving this task is often suboptimal. We have developed a closed-loop vasopressor (CLV) controller to better maintain MAP within a narrow range. After ethical committee approval, fifty-three patients admitted to the ICU following high-risk abdominal surgery were randomized to CLV or manual norepinephrine titration. In both groups, the aim was to maintain MAP in the predefined target of 80-90 mmHg. Fluid administration was standardized in the two groups using an advanced hemodynamic monitoring device. The primary outcome of our study was the percentage of time patients were in the MAP target. Over the 2-hour study period, the percentage of time with MAP in target was greater in the CLV group than in the control group (median: IQR25-75: 80 [68-88]% vs. 42 [22-65]%), difference 37.2, 95% CI (23.0-49.2); p < 0.001). Percentage time with MAP under 80 mmHg (1 [0-5]% vs. 26 [16-75]%, p < 0.001) and MAP under 65 mmHg (0 [0-0]% vs. 0 [0-4]%, p = 0.017) were both lower in the CLV group than in the control group. The percentage of time with a MAP > 90 mmHg was not statistically different between groups. In patients admitted to the ICU after high-risk abdominal surgery, closed-loop control of norepinephrine infusion better maintained a MAP target of 80 to 90 mmHg and significantly decreased postoperative hypotensive when compared to manual norepinephrine titration.

OBJECTIVE: To identify opportunities for improving hospital-based sepsis care and to inform an ongoing statewide quality improvement initiative in Michigan.
METHODS: Surveys on hospital sepsis processes, including a self-assessment of practices using a 3-point Likert scale, were administered to 51 hospitals participating in the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium, a Collaborative Quality Initiative sponsored by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, at two time points (2020, 2022). Forty-eight hospitals also submitted sepsis protocols for structured review.
METHODS: Multicenter quality improvement consortium.
METHODS: Fifty-one hospitals in Michigan.
METHODS: None.
RESULTS: Of the included hospitals, 92.2% (n = 47/51) were nonprofit, 88.2% (n = 45/51) urban, 11.8% (n = 6/51) rural, and 80.4% (n = 41/51) teaching hospitals. One hundred percent (n = 51/51) responded to the survey, and 94.1% (n = 48/51) provided a sepsis policy/protocol. All surveyed hospitals used at least one quality improvement approach, including audit/feedback (98.0%, n = 50/51) and/or clinician education (68.6%, n = 35/51). Protocols included the Sepsis-1 (18.8%, n = 9/48) or Sepsis-2 (31.3%, n = 15/48) definitions; none (n = 0/48) used Sepsis-3. All hospitals (n = 51/51) used at least one process to facilitate rapid sepsis treatment, including order sets (96.1%, n = 49/51) and/or stocking of commonly used antibiotics in at least one clinical setting (92.2%, n = 47/51). Treatment protocols included guidance on antimicrobial therapy (68.8%, n = 33/48), fluid resuscitation (70.8%, n = 34/48), and vasopressor administration (62.5%, n = 30/48). On self-assessment, hospitals reported the lowest scores for peridischarge practices, including screening for cognitive impairment (2.0%, n = 1/51 responded \"we are good at this\") and providing anticipatory guidance (3.9%, n = 2/51). There were no meaningful associations of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services\' Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: Management Bundle performance with differences in hospital characteristics or sepsis policy document characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitals used audit/feedback, order sets, and clinician education to facilitate sepsis care. Hospitals did not consistently incorporate organ dysfunction criteria into sepsis definitions. Existing processes focused on early recognition and treatment rather than recovery-based practices.

BACKGROUND: Vasopressin is recommended as a second-line vasoactive agent for the management of septic shock; however, a paucity of data to guide its optimal use remains. The aim was to evaluate the effect of time-to vasopressin initiation and norepinephrine (NE) dose at vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients presenting with septic shock.
METHODS: This was a multi-centered, retrospective, observational study conducted in patients with septic shock. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients initiated on vasopressin when NE-equivalent dose (NEE) < 0.25 mcg/kg/min or ≥ 0.25 mcg/kg/min. The primary outcome was time-to-vasopressor discontinuation (hours). Secondary outcomes included 28-day in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), fluid balance after 72 hours, and the change in NEE at 12 hours.
RESULTS: A total of 302 patients were included in this study. After propensity-score matching, 73 patients in each group were identified for analysis. There was no significant difference in the time-to-vasopressor discontinuation (hours) between the groups (88.8 [55-187.5] vs 86.7 [47-172]); p = 0.7815). Fluid balance (mL) at 72 hours was significantly lower when vasopressin was initiated at NEE < 0.25 mcg/kg/min (1769 [71-7287] vs 5762 [1463-8813]; p = 0.0077). A multivariable linear regression showed shorter time to shock resolution with earlier vasopressin initiation, defined as within 4 hours (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity-score matched cohort, vasopressin initiation at NEE < 0.25 mcg/kg/min was not associated with shorter vasopressor duration. There was a lower fluid balance at 72 hours when vasopressin was initiated at lower NE doses.

The current international sepsis guidelines from 2021 are based on the work of a panel of 60 international experts from various fields. They include a total of 93 recommendations, some of which include new aspects compared to the 2016 version of the guidelines. This article provides a subjective compilation by two internal medicine intensivists who highlight some aspects, especially of changes within the guidelines compared to the previous version. The focus is on the fields of screening, sepsis bundles, fluid and vasopressor treatment and adjuvant treatment. In addition, for the first time these guidelines address the important issue of long-term sequelae for sepsis survivors and their environment.
UNASSIGNED: Die aktuelle internationale Sepsisleitlinie aus dem Jahr 2021 basiert auf der Arbeit eines Panels von 60 internationalen Experten aus verschiedenen Bereichen. Sie beinhaltet insgesamt 93 Empfehlungen, wobei einige Empfehlungen verglichen mit der Leitlinienversion von 2016 neue Aspekte beinhalten. Der vorliegende Beitrag bietet eine subjektive Zusammenstellung zweier internistischer Intensivmediziner, die einige Aspekte aufzeigen, insbesondere Veränderungen innerhalb der Leitlinie im Vergleich zur vorherigen Version. Der Fokus liegt auf den Bereichen Screening, Sepsis-Campaign-Bündel, Flüssigkeits- und Vasopressorentherapie und adjuvante Therapien. Zudem wird in dieser Leitlinie erstmalig das wichtige Thema der Langzeitfolgen für Sepsisüberlebende und deren Umfeld angesprochen.

暂无摘要。

Extravasation is the leakage of intravenous solutions into surrounding tissues, which can be influenced by drug properties, infusion techniques, and patient-related risk factors. Although peripheral administration of vesicants may increase the risk of extravasation injuries, the time and resources required for central venous catheter placement may delay administration of time-sensitive therapies. Recent literature gathered from the growing use of peripheral vasopressors and hypertonic sodium suggests low risk of harm for initiating these emergent therapies peripherally, which may prevent delays and improve patient outcomes. Physiochemical causes of tissue injury include vasoconstriction, pH-mediated, osmolar-mediated, and cytotoxic mechanisms of extravasation injuries. Acidic agents, such as promethazine, amiodarone, and vancomycin, may cause edema, sloughing, and necrosis secondary to cellular desiccation. Alternatively, basic agents, such as phenytoin and acyclovir, may be more caustic due to deeper tissue penetration of the dissociated hydroxide ions. Osmotically active agents cause cellular damage as a result of osmotic shifts across cellular membranes in addition to agent-specific toxicities, such as calcium-induced vasoconstriction and calcifications or arginine-induced leakage of potassium causing apoptosis. A new category has been proposed to identify absorption-refractory mechanisms of injury in which agents such as propofol and lipids may persist in the extravasated space and cause necrosis or compartment syndrome. Pharmacological antidotes may be useful in select extravasations but requires prompt recognition and frequently complex administration strategies. Historically, intradermal phentolamine has been the preferred agent for vasopressor extravasations, but frequent supply shortages have led to the emergence of terbutaline, a β2 -agonist, as an acceptable alternative treatment option. For hyperosmolar and pH-related mechanisms of injuries, hyaluronidase is most commonly used to facilitate absorption and dispersion of injected agents. However, extravasation management is largely supportive and requires a protocolized multidisciplinary approach for early detection, treatment, and timely surgical referral when required to minimize adverse events.

Although guidelines provide excellent expert guidance for managing patients with septic shock, they leave room for personalization according to patients\' condition. Hemodynamic monitoring depends on the evolution phase: salvage, optimization, stabilization, and de-escalation. Initially during the salvage phase, monitoring to identify shock etiology and severity should include arterial pressure and lactate measurements together with clinical examination, particularly skin mottling and capillary refill time. Low diastolic blood pressure may trigger vasopressor initiation. At this stage, echocardiography may be useful to identify significant cardiac dysfunction. During the optimization phase, echocardiographic monitoring should be pursued and completed by the assessment of tissue perfusion through central or mixed-venous oxygen saturation, lactate, and carbon dioxide veno-arterial gradient. Transpulmonary thermodilution and the pulmonary artery catheter should be considered in the most severe patients. Fluid therapy also depends on shock phases. While administered liberally during the resuscitation phase, fluid responsiveness should be assessed during the optimization phase. During stabilization, fluid infusion should be minimized. In the de-escalation phase, safe fluid withdrawal could be achieved by ensuring tissue perfusion is preserved. Norepinephrine is recommended as first-line vasopressor therapy, while vasopressin may be preferred in some patients. Essential questions remain regarding optimal vasopressor selection, combination therapy, and the most effective and safest escalation. Serum renin and the angiotensin I/II ratio may identify patients who benefit most from angiotensin II. The optimal therapeutic strategy for shock requiring high-dose vasopressors is scant. In all cases, vasopressor therapy should be individualized, based on clinical evaluation and blood flow measurements to avoid excessive vasoconstriction. Inotropes should be considered in patients with decreased cardiac contractility associated with impaired tissue perfusion. Based on pharmacologic properties, we suggest as the first test a limited dose of dobutamine, to add enoximone or milrinone in the second line and substitute or add levosimendan if inefficient. Regarding adjunctive therapies, while hydrocortisone is nowadays advised in patients receiving high doses of vasopressors, patients responding to corticosteroids may be identified in the future by the analysis of selected cytokines or specific transcriptomic endotypes. To conclude, although some general rules apply for shock management, a personalized approach should be considered for hemodynamic monitoring and support.