P(v-a)CO2/C(a-v)O2-directed resuscitation does not improve prognosis compared with SvO2 in severe sepsis and septic shock: A prospective multicenter randomized controlled clinical study

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 314-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Longxiang Su ◽  
Bo Tang ◽  
Yaling Liu ◽  
Guanhua Zhou ◽  
Qinghua Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Clinical Study ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock ◽  
Controlled Clinical Study

scholarly journals Echocardiography-Guided Hemodynamic Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walid S. Alhabashy ◽  
Osama M. Shalaby ◽  
Ahmed S. Elgebaly ◽  
Mohammed S. Abd El Ghafar
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Total Fluid Intake ◽  
Early Goal Directed Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Group I ◽  
Hospital Stays ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

Abstract Background: Echocardiography (ECHO) is used to guide septic shock resuscitation, but without evidence for efficacy. Therefore, we compared the outcome of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) and ECHO-guided management of hemodynamics in severe sepsis and septic shock. Materials and Methods: This is a single center, randomized controlled trial conducted on 100 adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Patients were assessed and treated with either EGDT protocol (EGDT group) or ECHO-guided resuscitation protocol (ECHO group). Results: Only 87 patients (45 in group I and 42 in group II) were analyzed. There was a significant increase of mean norepinephrine and dobutamine doses and a significant decrease in total fluids in the first 24 hours, time to normalization, time to weaning of vasopressors, total MV days, MV free days and ICU and hospital stays in ECHO group. At 30 days, the mortality rate in EGDT group was 35.6% which was significantly higher compared to 14.3% in ECHO group. At 90 days, the overall mortality was significantly higher in EGDT group compared to Echo group (40.0% vs 16.7% respectively). Hazardous ratio of mortality was 1.630 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.123 - 2.366) and 1.653 (95% CI: 1.137 - 2.404) at 30 and 90 days respectively in EGDT group compared to ECHO group. Conclusions: In severe sepsis and septic shock, ECHO-guided management of hemodynamics resulted in a decrease in mortality, lower total fluid intake, higher vasopressor and inotrope support, earlier weaning of vasopressors and less MV days, ICU and hospital stay.

1453: INFUSION OF METHYLENE BLUE IN SEVERE SEPSIS AND SEPTIC SHOCK: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (12) ◽  
pp. 439-439
Author(s):  
Hoyoung Yune ◽  
Kyuseok Kim ◽  
You Hwan Jo ◽  
Joonghee Kim ◽  
Jae Hyuk Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Methylene Blue ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

scholarly journals Right Dose Right Now: bedside data-driven personalized antibiotic dosing in severe sepsis and septic shock — rationale and design of a multicenter randomized controlled superiority trial

Trials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca F. Roggeveen ◽  
Lucas M. Fleuren ◽  
Tingjie Guo ◽  
Patrick Thoral ◽  
Harm Jan de Grooth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Target Attainment ◽  
Clinical Endpoints ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Superiority Trial ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock ◽  
Antibiotic Dosing

Abstract Background Antibiotic exposure is often inadequate in critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock and this is associated with worse outcomes. Despite markedly altered and rapidly changing pharmacokinetics in these patients, guidelines and clinicians continue to rely on standard dosing schemes. To address this challenge, we developed AutoKinetics, a clinical decision support system for antibiotic dosing. By feeding large amounts of electronic health record patient data into pharmacokinetic models, patient-specific predicted future plasma concentrations are displayed graphically. In addition, a tailored dosing advice is provided at the bedside in real time. To evaluate the effect of AutoKinetics on pharmacometric and clinical endpoints, we are conducting the Right Dose Right Now multicenter, randomized controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, non-blinded, superiority trial. Methods All adult intensive care patients with a suspected or proven infection and having either lactatemia or receiving vasopressor support are eligible for inclusion. Randomization to the AutoKinetics or control group is initiated at the bedside when prescribing at least one of four commonly administered antibiotics: ceftriaxone, ciprofloxacin, meropenem and vancomycin. Dosing advice is available for patients in the AutoKinetics group, whereas patients in the control group receive standard dosing. The primary outcome of the study is pharmacometric target attainment during the first 24 h. Power analysis revealed the need for inclusion of 42 patients per group per antibiotic. Thus, a total of 336 patients will be included, 168 in each group. Secondary pharmacometric endpoints include time to target attainment and fraction of target attainment during an entire antibiotic course. Secondary clinical endpoints include mortality, clinical cure and days free from organ support. Several other exploratory and subgroup analyses are planned. Discussion This is the first randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and safety of bedside data-driven automated antibiotic dosing advice. This is important as adequate antibiotic exposure may be crucial to treat severe sepsis and septic shock. In addition, the trial could prove to be a significant contribution to clinical pharmacometrics and serve as a stepping stone for the use of big data and artificial intelligence in the field. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), NL6501/NTR6689. Registered on 25 August 2017. European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT), 2017-002478-37. Registered on 6 November 2017.

scholarly journals Echocardiography-Guided Hemodynamic Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walid S. Alhabashy ◽  
Osama M. Shalaby ◽  
Ahmed S. Elgebaly ◽  
Mohammed S. Abd El Ghafar
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Total Fluid Intake ◽  
Early Goal Directed Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Group I ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

Abstract Background: Echocardiography (ECHO) is used to guide septic shock resuscitation, but without evidence for efficacy. Therefore, we compared the outcome of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) and ECHO-guided management of hemodynamics in severe sepsis and septic shock. Methods: This is a single canter, randomized controlled trial conducted on 100 adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Patients were assessed and treated either EGDT protocol (EGDT group) or ECHO-guided resuscitation protocol (ECHO group). Results: In this study, only 87 patients with severe sepsis/septic shock were analyzed; 45 patients in group I and 42 patients in group II. There was significant increase of norepinephrine, dobutamine doses, MV free days, time to normalization, time to weaning of vasopressors, total MV days and ICU and hospital stay in EGDT group compared to ECHO group. At 30 days, the mortality rate in EGDT group was 35.6% which was significantly higher compared to 14.3% in ECHO group. At 90 days, the overall mortality was significantly higher in EGDT group compared to Echo group (40.0% vs 16.7% respectively). Hazardous ratio of mortality was 1.630 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.123 - 2.366) and 1.653 (95% CI: 1.137 - 2.404) at 30 and 90 days respectively in EGDT group compared to ECHO group.Conclusion: In severe sepsis and septic shock, ECHO-guided management of hemodynamic resulted in decrease in mortality, lower total fluid intake, vasopressor and inotrope, earlier weaning of vasopressors and less MV days, ICU and hospital stay.

Effect of fluid bolus triggers and their combination on fluid responsiveness in optimization phase of severe sepsis and septic shock resuscitation

MedPharmRes ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 27-32
Author(s):  
Bien Le ◽  
Dai Huynh ◽  
Mai Tuan ◽  
Minh Phan ◽  
Thao Pham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Septic Shock ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Fluid Responsiveness ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Fluid Bolus ◽  
Low Blood Pressure ◽  
Low Central Venous Pressure ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

Objectives: to evaluate the fluid responsiveness according to fluid bolus triggers and their combination in severe sepsis and septic shock. Design: observational study. Patients and Methods: patients with severe sepsis and septic shock who already received fluid after rescue phase of resuscitation. Fluid bolus (FB) was prescribed upon perceived hypovolemic manifestations: low central venous pressure (CVP), low blood pressure, tachycardia, low urine output (UOP), hyperlactatemia. FB was performed by Ringer lactate 500 ml/30 min and responsiveness was defined by increasing in stroke volume (SV) ≥15%. Results: 84 patients were enrolled, among them 30 responded to FB (35.7%). Demographic and hemodynamic profile before fluid bolus were similar between responders and non-responders, except CVP was lower in responders (7.3 ± 3.4 mmHg vs 9.2 ± 3.6 mmHg) (p 0.018). Fluid response in low CVP, low blood pressure, tachycardia, low UOP, hyperlactatemia were 48.6%, 47.4%, 38.5%, 37.0%, 36.8% making the odd ratio (OR) of these triggers were 2.81 (1.09-7.27), 1.60 (0.54-4.78), 1.89 (0.58-6.18), 1.15 (0.41-3.27) and 1.27 (0.46-3.53) respectively. Although CVP < 8 mmHg had a higher response rate, the association was not consistent at lower cut-offs. The combination of these triggers appeared to raise fluid response but did not reach statistical significance: 26.7% (1 trigger), 31.0% (2 triggers), 35.7% (3 triggers), 55.6% (4 triggers), 100% (5 triggers). Conclusions: fluid responsiveness was low in optimization phase of resuscitation. No fluid bolus trigger was superior to the others in term of providing a higher responsiveness, their combination did not improve fluid responsiveness as well.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document