Coexistence of a fluid responsive state and venous congestion signals in critically ill patients: a multicenter observational proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations support guiding fluid resuscitation through the assessment of fluid responsiveness. Recently, the concept of fluid tolerance and the prevention of venous congestion (VC) have emerged as relevant aspects to be considered to avoid potentially deleterious side effects of fluid resuscitation. However, there is paucity of data on the relationship of fluid responsiveness and VC. This study aims to compare the prevalence of venous congestion in fluid responsive and fluid unresponsive critically ill patients after intensive care (ICU) admission. METHODS: Multicenter, prospective cross-sectional observational study conducted in three medical-surgical ICUs in Chile. Consecutive mechanically ventilated patients that required vasopressors and admitted < 24 h to ICU were included between November 2022 and June 2023. Patients were assessed simultaneously for fluid responsiveness and VC at a single timepoint. Fluid responsiveness status, VC signals such as central venous pressure, estimation of left ventricular filling pressures, lung, and abdominal ultrasound congestion indexes and relevant clinical data were collected. RESULTS: Ninety patients were included. Median age was 63 [45-71] years old, and median SOFA score was 9 [7-11]. Thirty-eight percent of the patients were fluid responsive (FR+), while 62% were fluid unresponsive (FR-). The most prevalent diagnosis was sepsis (41%) followed by respiratory failure (22%). The prevalence of at least one VC signal was not significantly different between FR+ and FR- groups (53% vs. 57%, p = 0.69), as well as the proportion of patients with 2 or 3 VC signals (15% vs. 21%, p = 0.4). We found no association between fluid balance, CRT status, or diagnostic group and the presence of VC signals. CONCLUSIONS: Venous congestion signals were prevalent in both fluid responsive and unresponsive critically ill patients. The presence of venous congestion was not associated with fluid balance or diagnostic group. Further studies should assess the clinical relevance of these results and their potential impact on resuscitation and monitoring practices.

Immediate Norepinephrine in Endotoxic Shock: Effects on Regional and Microcirculatory Flow.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of immediate start of norepinephrine versus initial fluid loading followed by norepinephrine on macro hemodynamics, regional splanchnic and intestinal microcirculatory flows in endotoxic shock. DESIGN: Animal experimental study. SETTING: University translational research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Fifteen Landrace pigs. INTERVENTIONS: Shock was induced by escalating dose of lipopolysaccharide. Animals were allocated to immediate start of norepinephrine (i-NE) ( n = 6) versus mandatory 1-hour fluid loading (30 mL/kg) followed by norepinephrine (i-FL) ( n = 6). Once mean arterial pressure greater than or equal to 75 mm Hg was, respectively, achieved, successive mini-fluid boluses of 4 mL/kg of Ringer Lactate were given whenever: a) arterial lactate greater than 2.0 mmol/L or decrease less than 10% per 30 min and b) fluid responsiveness was judged to be positive. Three additional animals were used as controls (Sham) ( n = 3). Time × group interactions were evaluated by repeated-measures analysis of variance. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Hypotension was significantly shorter in i-NE group (7.5 min [5.5-22.0 min] vs 49.3 min [29.5-60.0 min]; p < 0.001). Regional mesenteric and microcirculatory flows at jejunal mucosa and serosa were significantly higher in i-NE group at 4 and 6 hours after initiation of therapy ( p = 0.011, p = 0.032, and p = 0.017, respectively). Misdistribution of intestinal microcirculatory blood flow at the onset of shock was significantly reversed in i-NE group ( p < 0.001), which agreed with dynamic changes in mesenteric-lactate levels ( p = 0.01) and venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide differences ( p = 0.001). Animals allocated to i-NE showed significantly higher global end-diastolic volumes ( p = 0.015) and required significantly less resuscitation fluids ( p < 0.001) and lower doses of norepinephrine ( p = 0.001) at the end of the experiment. Pulmonary vascular permeability and extravascular lung water indexes were significantly lower in i-NE group ( p = 0.021 and p = 0.004, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In endotoxemic shock, immediate start of norepinephrine significantly improved regional splanchnic and intestinal microcirculatory flows when compared with mandatory fixed-dose fluid loading preceding norepinephrine. Immediate norepinephrine strategy was related with less resuscitation fluids and lower vasopressor doses at the end of the experiment.

How to assess tissue oxygenation?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the different techniques used to assess tissue oxygenation in critically ill patients. RECENT FINDINGS: While historically the analysis of oxygen consumption (VO2)/oxygen delivery (DO2) relationships has provided important information, methodological limitations prevent its use at bedside. PO2 measurements, while attractive, are unfortunately of limited value in the presence of microvascular blood flow heterogeneity which is observed in many critically ill conditions including sepsis. Surrogates of tissue oxygenation are hence used. Elevated lactate levels may suggest inadequate tissue oxygenation, but other sources than tissue hypoxia can also contribute to hyperlactatemia so that lactate measurements should be used in combination with other measurements of tissue oxygenation. Venous O2 saturation can be used to evaluate the adequacy of DO2 in respect to VO2, but it can be misleading normal or even high in sepsis. Measurements of Pv-aCO2 and computation of Pv-aCO2/CavO2 are very promising as physiologically sound, easy to measure, rapidly respond to therapy, and are associated with outcome. An elevated Pv-aCO2 reflects an impaired tissue perfusion while an increased Pv-aCO2/CavO2 ratio reflects tissue dysoxia. SUMMARY: Recent studies have highlighted the interest of surrogate measurements of tissue oxygenation and in particular PCO2 gradients.

A plea for personalization of the hemodynamic management of septic shock.

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.

Effects of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status versus Serum Lactate Levels among Patients with Septic Shock. A Bayesian Reanalysis of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Trial.

Rationale: A recent randomized controlled trial showed that a peripheral perfusion-guided resuscitation strategy was associated with lower mortality and less organ dysfunction when compared with lactate-guided resuscitation strategy in patients with septic shock, but the difference in the primary outcome, 28-day mortality, did not reach the proposed statistical significance threshold (P = 0.06). We tested different analytic methods to aid in the interpretation of these results.Objectives: To reassess the results of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial using both Bayesian and frequentist frameworks.Methods: All patients recruited in ANDROMEDA-SHOCK were included. Both a post hoc Bayesian analysis and a mixed logistic regression analysis were performed. The Bayesian analysis included four different priors (optimistic, neutral, null, and pessimistic) for mortality endpoints. The probability of having a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment in the lowest quartile at 72 hours was assessed using Bayesian networks.Measurements and Main Results: In the Bayesian analysis, the posterior probability that a peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation strategy is superior to lactate-targeted resuscitation at 28 days was above 90% for all priors; the probability of benefit at 90 days was above 90% for all but the pessimistic prior. Using an optimistic prior, posterior median odds ratios were 0.61 (95% credible interval, 0.41-0.90) and 0.68 (95% credible interval, 0.47-1.01) for 28-day and 90-day mortality, respectively. The comparable frequentist odds ratios for 28-day and 90-day mortality were 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.92) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.45-1.08), respectively. The odds that that patients in the peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation arm had Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores in the lower quartile at 72 hours was 1.55 (95% CI, 1.02-2.37).Conclusions: Peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation may result in lower mortality and faster resolution of organ dysfunction when compared with a lactate-targeted resuscitation strategy.

Effect of High-Flow Oxygen Therapy vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and Clinical Recovery in Patients With Severe COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The effect of high-flow oxygen therapy vs conventional oxygen therapy has not been established in the setting of severe COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of high-flow oxygen therapy through a nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy on need for endotracheal intubation and clinical recovery in severe COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open-label clinical trial conducted in emergency and intensive care units in 3 hospitals in Colombia. A total of 220 adults with respiratory distress and a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen of less than 200 due to COVID-19 were randomized from August 2020 to January 2021, with last follow-up on February 10, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula (n = 109) or conventional oxygen therapy (n = 111). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The co-primary outcomes were need for intubation and time to clinical recovery until day 28 as assessed by a 7-category ordinal scale (range, 1-7, with higher scores indicating a worse condition). Effects of treatments were calculated with a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for hypoxemia severity, age, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 220 randomized patients, 199 were included in the analysis (median age, 60 years; n = 65 women [32.7%]). Intubation occurred in 34 (34.3%) randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy and in 51 (51.0%) randomized to conventional oxygen therapy (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.96; P = .03). The median time to clinical recovery within 28 days was 11 (IQR, 9-14) days in patients randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy vs 14 (IQR, 11-19) days in those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00-1.92; P = .047). Suspected bacterial pneumonia occurred in 13 patients (13.1%) randomized to high-flow oxygen and in 17 (17.0%) of those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy, while bacteremia was detected in 7 (7.1%) vs 11 (11.0%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with severe COVID-19, use of high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula significantly decreased need for mechanical ventilation support and time to clinical recovery compared with conventional low-flow oxygen therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04609462.

Septic shock: a microcirculation disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this study was to discuss the implication of microvascular dysfunction in septic shock. RECENT FINDINGS: Resuscitation of sepsis has focused on systemic haemodynamics and, more recently, on peripheral perfusion indices. However, central microvascular perfusion is altered in sepsis and these alterations often persist despite normalization of various macro haemodynamic resuscitative goals. Endothelial dysfunction is a key element in sepsis pathophysiology. It is responsible for the sepsis-induced hypotension. In addition, endothelial dysfunction is also implicated involved in the activation of inflammation and coagulation processes leading to amplification of the septic response and development of organ dysfunction. It also promotes an increase in permeability, mostly at venular side, and impairs microvascular perfusion and hence tissue oxygenation.Microvascular alterations are characterized by heterogeneity in blood flow distribution, with adequately perfused areas in close vicinity to not perfused areas, thus characterizing the distributive nature of septic shock. Such microvascular alterations have profound implications, as these are associated with organ dysfunction and unfavourable outcomes. Also, the response to therapy is highly variable and cannot be predicted by systemic hemodynamic assessment and hence cannot be detected by classical haemodynamic tools. SUMMARY: Microcirculation is a key element in the pathophysiology of sepsis. Even if microcirculation-targeted therapy is not yet ready for the prime time, understanding the processes implicated in microvascular dysfunction is important to prevent chasing systemic hemodynamic variables when this does not contribute to improve tissue perfusion.

Systematic assessment of fluid responsiveness during early septic shock resuscitation: secondary analysis of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial.

BACKGROUND: Fluid boluses are administered to septic shock patients with the purpose of increasing cardiac output as a means to restore tissue perfusion. Unfortunately, fluid therapy has a narrow therapeutic index, and therefore, several approaches to increase safety have been proposed. Fluid responsiveness (FR) assessment might predict which patients will effectively increase cardiac output after a fluid bolus (FR+), thus preventing potentially harmful fluid administration in non-fluid responsive (FR-) patients. However, there are scarce data on the impact of assessing FR on major outcomes. The recent ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial included systematic per-protocol assessment of FR. We performed a post hoc analysis of the study dataset with the aim of exploring the relationship between FR status at baseline, attainment of specific targets, and clinically relevant outcomes. METHODS: ANDROMEDA-SHOCK compared the effect of peripheral perfusion- vs. lactate-targeted resuscitation on 28-day mortality. FR was assessed before each fluid bolus and periodically thereafter. FR+ and FR- subgroups, independent of the original randomization, were compared for fluid administration, achievement of resuscitation targets, vasoactive agents use, and major outcomes such as organ dysfunction and support, length of stay, and 28-day mortality. RESULTS: FR could be determined in 348 patients at baseline. Two hundred and forty-two patients (70%) were categorized as fluid responders. Both groups achieved comparable successful resuscitation targets, although non-fluid responders received less resuscitation fluids (0 [0-500] vs. 1500 [1000-2500] mL; p 0.0001), exhibited less positive fluid balances, but received more vasopressor testing. No difference in clinically relevant outcomes between FR+ and FR- patients was found, including 24-h SOFA score (9 [5-12] vs. 8 [5-11], p = 0.4), need for MV (78% vs. 72%, p = 0.16), need for RRT (18% vs. 21%, p = 0.7), ICU-LOS (6 [3-11] vs. 6 [3-16] days, p = 0.2), and 28-day mortality (40% vs. 36%, p = 0.5). Only thirteen patients remained fluid responsive along the intervention period. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic assessment allowed determination of fluid responsiveness status in more than 80% of patients with early septic shock. Fluid boluses could be stopped in non-fluid responsive patients without any negative impact on clinical relevant outcomes. Our results suggest that fluid resuscitation might be safely guided by FR assessment in septic shock patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03078712. Registered retrospectively on March 13, 2017.

Effects of very early start of norepinephrine in patients with septic shock: a propensity score-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Optimal timing for the start of vasopressors (VP) in septic shock has not been widely studied since it is assumed that fluids must be administered in advance. We sought to evaluate whether a very early start of VP, even without completing the initial fluid loading, might impact clinical outcomes in septic shock. METHODS: A total of 337 patients with sepsis requiring VP support for at least 6 h were initially selected from a prospectively collected database in a 90-bed mixed-ICU during a 24-month period. They were classified into very-early (VE-VPs) or delayed vasopressor start (D-VPs) categories according to whether norepinephrine was initiated or not within/before the next hour of the first resuscitative fluid load. Then, VE-VPs (n = 93) patients were 1:1 propensity matched to D-VPs (n = 93) based on age; source of admission (emergency room, general wards, intensive care unit); chronic and acute comorbidities; and lactate, heart rate, systolic, and diastolic pressure at vasopressor start. A risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazard model was fitted to assess the association between VE-VPs and day 28 mortality. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed also including those patients requiring VP support for less than 6 h. RESULTS: Patients subjected to VE-VPs received significantly less resuscitation fluids at vasopressor starting (0[0-510] vs. 1500[650-2300] mL, p < 0.001) and during the first 8 h of resuscitation (1100[500-1900] vs. 2600[1600-3800] mL, p < 0.001), with no significant increase in acute renal failure and/or renal replacement therapy requirements. VE-VPs was related with significant lower net fluid balances 8 and 24 h after VPs. VE-VPs was also associated with a significant reduction in the risk of death compared to D-VPs (HR 0.31, CI95% 0.17-0.57, p < 0.001) at day 28. Such association was maintained after including patients receiving vasopressors for < 6 h. CONCLUSION: A very early start of vasopressor support seems to be safe, might limit the amount of fluids to resuscitate septic shock, and could lead to better clinical outcomes.

Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: 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. Objective: 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. Design, Setting, and Participants: 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. Interventions: 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. Main Outcomes and Measures: 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. Results: 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. Conclusions and Relevance: 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. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03078712.

Persistently high venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide differences during early resuscitation are associated with poor outcomes in septic shock.

INTRODUCTION: Venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide difference (Pv-aCO2) may reflect the adequacy of blood flow during shock states. We sought to test whether the development of Pv-aCO2 during the very early phases of resuscitation is related to multi-organ dysfunction and outcomes in a population of septic shock patients resuscitated targeting the usual oxygen-derived and hemodynamic parameters. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study in a 60-bed mixed ICU in a University affiliated Hospital. 85 patients with a new septic shock episode were included. A Pv-aCO2 value ≥ 6 mmHg was considered to be high. Patients were classified in four predefined groups according to the Pv-aCO2 evolution during the first 6 hours of resuscitation: (1) persistently high Pv-aCO2 (high at T0 and T6); (2) increasing Pv-aCO2 (normal at T0, high at T6); (3) decreasing Pv-aCO2 (high at T0, normal at T6); and (4) persistently normal Pv-aCO2 (normal at T0 and T6). Multiorgan dysfunction at day-3 was compared for predefined groups and a Kaplan Meier curve was constructed to show the survival probabilities at day-28 using a log-rank test to evaluate differences between groups. A Spearman-Rho was used to test the agreement between cardiac output and Pv-aCO2. Finally, we calculated the mortality risk ratios at day-28 among patients attaining normal oxygen parameters but with a concomitantly increased Pv-aCO2. RESULTS: Patients with persistently high and increasing Pv-aCO2 at T6 had significant higher SOFA scores at day-3 (p < 0.001) and higher mortality rates at day-28 (log rank test: 19.21, p < 0.001) compared with patients who evolved with normal Pv-aCO2 at T6. Interestingly, a poor agreement between cardiac output and Pv-aCO2 was observed (r2 = 0.025, p < 0.01) at different points of resuscitation. Patients who reached a central venous saturation (ScvO)2 ≥ 70% or mixed venous oxygen saturation (SvO2) ≥ 65% but with concomitantly high Pv-aCO2 at different developmental points (i.e., T0, T6 and T12) had a significant mortality risk ratio at day-28. CONCLUSION: The persistence of high Pv-aCO2 during the early resuscitation of septic shock was associated with more severe multi-organ dysfunction and worse outcomes at day-28. Although mechanisms conducting to increase Pv-aCO2 during septic shock are insufficiently understood, Pv-aCO2 could identify a high risk of death in apparently resuscitated patients.

Cost Analysis of High-Flow Oxygen Therapy Compared with Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Severe COVID-19 in Colombia: Data from a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: A randomized clinical trial (HiFlo-COVID-19 Trial) showed that among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) significantly reduced the need for invasive mechanical ventilation support and time for clinical recovery compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). However, the cost of this strategy is unknown. Objective: We examined total cost of HFOT treatment compared with COT in real-world setting. Methods: We conducted a post-trial-based cost analysis from the perspective of a managed competition healthcare system, using actual records of billed costs. Cost categories include general ward, intensive care unit, procedures, imaging, laboratories, medications, supplies, and others. Results: A total of 188 participants (mean age 60, 33% female) were included. Average costs (and standard deviation) in the HFOT group were USD $7992 (7394) and in the COT group USD $ 10,190 (9402). Differences, however, did not reach statistical significance (P=0.093). However, resource use was always less costly for the HNFO group, with an overall percentage decrease of 27%. Two categories make up 72% of all savings: medications (41%) and intensive care unit (31%). Conclusion: For patients in ICU with severe COVID-19 the cost of treatment with HFOT as compared to COT is likely to be cost-saving due to less use of medications and length of stay in ICU.

Prophylactic platelet transfusion and risk of bleeding associated with ultrasound-guided central venous access in patients with severe thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Reported risk of bleeding complications after central catheter access in patients with thrombocytopenia is highly variable. Current guidelines recommend routine prophylactic platelet (PLT) transfusion before central venous catheter placement in patients with severe thrombocytopenia. Nevertheless, the strength of such recommendations is weak and supported by observational studies including few patients with very low PLT counts (<20 × 109 /L). This study aims to assess the risk of bleeding complications related to using or not using prophylactic PLT transfusion before ultrasound-guided central venous access in patients with very low PLT counts. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with very low PLT counts (<20 × 109 /L) subjected to ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization between January 2011 and November 2019 in a university hospital. Bleeding complications were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess the risk of major and minor bleeding complications comparing patients who did or did not receive prophylactic PLT transfusion for the procedure. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to handle missing data. A two-tailed p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Among 221 patients with very low PLT counts, 72 received prophylactic PLT transfusions while 149 did not. Baseline characteristics were similar between transfused and nontransfused patients. No major bleeding events were identified, while minor bleeding events were recognized in 35.7% of patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant differences in bleeding complications between patients who received prophylactic PLT transfusions and those who did not (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.45-1.55, p = 0.567). Additional complete case and sensitivity analyses yielded results similar to those of the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center retrospective cohort study of ultrasound-guided central venous access in patients with very low PLT counts, no major bleeding was identified, and prophylactic PLT transfusions did not significantly decrease minor bleeding events.

Current practice and evolving concepts in septic shock resuscitation.

Clinical and pathophysiological understanding of septic shock has progressed exponentially in the previous decades, translating into a steady decrease in septic shock-related morbidity and mortality. Even though large randomized, controlled trials have addressed fundamental aspects of septic shock resuscitation, many questions still exist. In this review, we will describe the current standards of septic shock resuscitation, but the emphasis will be placed on evolving concepts in different domains such as clinical resuscitation targets, adequate use of fluids and vasoactive drugs, refractory shock, and the use of extracorporeal therapies. Multiple research opportunities remain open, and collaborative endeavors should be performed to fill in these gaps.

Inodilators in septic shock: should these be used?

Septic shock involves a complex interaction between abnormal vasodilation, relative and/or absolute hypovolemia, myocardial dysfunction, and altered blood flow distribution to the tissues. Fluid administration, vasopressor support and inotropes, represent fundamental pieces of quantitative resuscitation protocols directed to assist the restoration of impaired tissue perfusion during septic shock. Indeed, current recommendations on sepsis management include the use of inotropes in the case of myocardial dysfunction, as suggested by a low cardiac output, increased filling pressures, or persisting signals of tissue hypoperfusion despite an adequate correction of intravascular volume and mean arterial pressure by fluid administration and vasopressor support. Evidence supporting the use of inotropes in sepsis and septic shock is mainly based on physiological studies. Most of them suggest a beneficial effect of inotropes on macro hemodynamics especially when sepsis coexists with myocardial dysfunction; others, however, have demonstrated variable results on regional splanchnic circulation, while others suggest favorable effects on microvascular distribution independently of its impact on cardiac output. Conversely, impact of inodilators on clinical outcomes in this context has been more controversial. Use of dobutamine has not been consistently related with more favorable clinical results, while systematic administration of levosimendan in sepsis do not prevent the development of multiorgan dysfunction, even in patients with evidence of myocardial dysfunction. Nevertheless, a recent metanalysis of clinical studies suggests that cardiovascular support regimens based on inodilators in sepsis and septic shock could provide some beneficial effect on mortality, while other one corroborated such effect on mortality specially in patients with proved lower cardiac output. Thus, using or not inotropes during sepsis and septic shock remains as controversy matter that deserves more research efforts.

Microcirculatory dysfunction and dead-space ventilation in early ARDS: a hypothesis-generating observational study.

BACKGROUND: Ventilation/perfusion inequalities impair gas exchange in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although increased dead-space ventilation (VD/VT) has been described in ARDS, its mechanism is not clearly understood. We sought to evaluate the relationships between dynamic variations in VD/VT and extra-pulmonary microcirculatory blood flow detected at sublingual mucosa hypothesizing that an altered microcirculation, which is a generalized phenomenon during severe inflammatory conditions, could influence ventilation/perfusion mismatching manifested by increases in VD/VT fraction during early stages of ARDS. METHODS: Forty-two consecutive patients with early moderate and severe ARDS were included. PEEP was set targeting the best respiratory-system compliance after a PEEP-decremental recruitment maneuver. After 60 min of stabilization, hemodynamics and respiratory mechanics were recorded and blood gases collected. VD/VT was calculated from the CO2 production ([Formula: see text]) and CO2 exhaled fraction ([Formula: see text]) measurements by volumetric capnography. Sublingual microcirculatory images were simultaneously acquired using a sidestream dark-field device for an ulterior blinded semi-quantitative analysis. All measurements were repeated 24 h after. RESULTS: Percentage of small vessels perfused (PPV) and microcirculatory flow index (MFI) were inverse and significantly related to VD/VT at baseline (Spearman's rho = - 0.76 and - 0.63, p < 0.001; R2 = 0.63, and 0.48, p < 0.001, respectively) and 24 h after (Spearman's rho = - 0.71, and - 0.65; p < 0.001; R2 = 0.66 and 0.60, p < 0.001, respectively). Other respiratory, macro-hemodynamic and oxygenation parameters did not correlate with VD/VT. Variations in PPV between baseline and 24 h were inverse and significantly related to simultaneous changes in VD/VT (Spearman's rho = - 0.66, p < 0.001; R2 = 0.67, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Increased heterogeneity of microcirculatory blood flow evaluated at sublingual mucosa seems to be related to increases in VD/VT, while respiratory mechanics and oxygenation parameters do not. Whether there is a cause-effect relationship between microcirculatory dysfunction and dead-space ventilation in ARDS should be addressed in future research.

Diastolic shock index and clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock.

BACKGROUND: Loss of vascular tone is a key pathophysiological feature of septic shock. Combination of gradual diastolic hypotension and tachycardia could reflect more serious vasodilatory conditions. We sought to evaluate the relationships between heart rate (HR) to diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) ratios and clinical outcomes during early phases of septic shock. METHODS: Diastolic shock index (DSI) was defined as the ratio between HR and DAP. DSI calculated just before starting vasopressors (Pre-VPs/DSI) in a preliminary cohort of 337 patients with septic shock (January 2015 to February 2017) and at vasopressor start (VPs/DSI) in 424 patients with septic shock included in a recent randomized controlled trial (ANDROMEDA-SHOCK; March 2017 to April 2018) was partitioned into five quantiles to estimate the relative risks (RR) of death with respect to the mean risk of each population (assumed to be 1). Matched HR and DAP subsamples were created to evaluate the effect of the individual components of the DSI on RRs. In addition, time-course of DSI and interaction between DSI and vasopressor dose (DSI*NE.dose) were compared between survivors and non-survivors from both populations, while ROC curves were used to identify variables predicting mortality. Finally, as exploratory observation, effect of early start of vasopressors was evaluated at each Pre-VPs/DSI quintile from the preliminary cohort. RESULTS: Risk of death progressively increased at gradual increments of Pre-VPs/DSI or VPs/DSI (One-way ANOVA, p < 0.001). Progressive DAP decrease or HR increase was associated with higher mortality risks only when DSI concomitantly increased. Areas under the ROC curve for Pre-VPs/DSI, SOFA and initial lactate were similar, while mean arterial pressure and systolic shock index showed poor performances to predict mortality. Time-course of DSI and DSI*NE.dose was significantly higher in non-survivors from both populations (repeated-measures ANOVA, p < 0.001). Very early start of vasopressors exhibited an apparent benefit at higher Pre-VPs/DSI quintile. CONCLUSIONS: DSI at pre-vasopressor and vasopressor start points might represent a very early identifier of patients at high risk of death. Isolated DAP or HR values do not clearly identify such risk. Usefulness of DSI to trigger or to direct therapeutic interventions in early resuscitation of septic shock need to be addressed in future studies.

Non-invasive ventilation and airway exchange catheter using a novel adapter in a difficult airway patient with post-extubation respiratory failure.

Post-extubation respiratory failure in patients with difficult airway is considered a challenge for the health team. Some intratracheal devices such as airway exchange catheters (AECs) could be used during scheduled tube removing to ensure a rapid access to airway in the case of requiring emergent reintubation. Nevertheless, using such devices could impede adequate non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) support because of the air leaks generated by interfering with mask interfaces. We describe the case of a woman with a very difficult airway in whom an AEC was placed before scheduled extubation and then developed post-extubation respiratory failure. Mask interface was adequately sealed by using a novel tube adapter for NIMV and successful non-invasive ventilation was provided while maintaining the AEC placed in the trachea until the emergency reintubation risk was overcome.