scholarly journals Early diastolic dysfunction is associated with intensive care unit mortality in cancer patients presenting with septic shock

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Mourad ◽  
L. Chow-Chine ◽  
M. Faucher ◽  
A. Sannini ◽  
J.P. Brun ◽  
...  
QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aya Abdel Khalek El zawawy ◽  
Samia Abdel Mohsen Abdel Lateef ◽  
Karim Youssef Kamal Hakim ◽  
Sameh Ahmed Refaat

Abstract Background Septic shock remains the leading cause of death in the intensive care unit (ICU), with an increasing incidence and a current mortality rate of approximately 30 %. Sepsis was defined by the presence of at least two criteria of systemic inflammatory response syndrome associated with a clinically or microbiologically documented, or a highly suspected infection. Severe sepsis was defined as a sepsis associated with at least one organ failure different from that responsible for the infection. Septic shock was defined as a severe sepsis associated with low blood pressure despite adequate vascular filling which required a vasopressor support. Cardiac dysfunction in sepsis is driven primarily by release of cytokines, mitochondrial dysfunction, and tissue hypoxia that leads to cardiac myocyte injury and death. Aim of the Work The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of diastolic function on prognosis of septic shock in patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Patient and Methods This study was conducted on (50) patients with septic shock admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) from November 2017 to November 2018. Results These patients was divided according to cardiac echocardiography findings into two groups:-Group 1:- 25 patients with preserved diastolic function and diastolic dysfunction grade I; 12 Male and 13 Female were included in the study, the average age was 43.44±13.69.Group 2:- Another 25 patients with diastolic dysfunction grade II and grade III; 11 Males and 14 Females were included in the study, the average age was 47.28±15.7. Conclusion We recommend assessment of patients admitted to the ICU with septic shock via echocardiography to determine the grade of diastolic dysfunction and using diastolic dysfunction as a predictive risk factor in various score assessment of ICU patients. Our study was limited by decreased sample size and we recommend further studies with increased sample size..


2010 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 1282-1287 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Pestaña ◽  
Elena Espinosa ◽  
Julio R. Sangüesa-Molina ◽  
Raquel Ramos ◽  
Elia Pérez-Fernández ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 440.e7-440.e13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia Gómez Ravetti ◽  
Anselmo Dornas Moura ◽  
Érica Leandro Vieira ◽  
Ênio Roberto Pietra Pedroso ◽  
Antônio Lúcio Teixeira

2020 ◽  
pp. 107815522091078
Author(s):  
Emily McDonnell ◽  
Reagan Collins ◽  
Mike Hernandez ◽  
Anne Rain T. Brown

Background Corticosteroids are used as adjunctive treatment of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency in patients with septic shock. This study aims to compare the impact of hydrocortisone versus methylprednisolone on duration of septic shock in critically ill oncology patients. Methods Single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult patients receiving hydrocortisone ≥200 mg/day or methylprednisolone ≥40 mg/day with septic shock. The primary outcome was time to shock reversal defined as time to systolic blood pressure ≥90 mmHg without vasopressors for ≥24 h. Results Eighty-eight patients were included, 49 patients received hydrocortisone and 39 patients received methylprednisolone. Solid tumor malignancy was more common in the hydrocortisone group, while hematological malignancy was more common in the methylprednisolone group (p = 0.009). Time to shock reversal was similar between hydrocortisone and methylprednisolone groups (72.4 versus 70.4 h; p = 0.825). Intensive care unit mortality occurred in 51.02% versus 53.85% of patients in hydrocortisone versus methylprednisolone, respectively (p = 0.792). Patients who received methylprednisolone had higher rates of mechanical ventilation (89.74% versus 55.1%, p < 0.001) and longer intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay (4.2 versus 11.4 days and 14.3 versus 25.7 days; p < 0.001) compared to hydrocortisone. No differences were seen in incidence of steroid-related adverse effects between groups. Conclusions In oncology patients with septic shock, the use of hydrocortisone versus methylprednisolone does not appear to affect time to shock reversal.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document