Effect of Early Administration of Vasopressin on New-Onset Arrhythmia Development in Patients With Septic Shock: A Retrospective, Observational Cohort Study.

Background: Adjunctive vasopressin use in septic shock reduces catecholamine requirements and is associated with a lower incidence of new-onset arrhythmias (NOAs). The association of vasopressin timing on NOA development is ill-described. Objective: To determine whether early administration of vasopressin was associated with a lower incidence of NOA in septic shock patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis of intensive care unit (ICU) patients at a large, academic medical center. Septic shock patients who required vasopressin and norepinephrine were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded for receipt of other vasoactive agents, history of cardiac arrhythmias, or outside hospital admission. Early vasopressin was defined as receipt within 6 hours of septic shock onset. The primary outcome was incidence of NOA. Results: In total, 436 patients, 220 (50.4%) in the early and 216 (49.6%) in the late vasopressin group, were included. Early vasopressin was not associated with a lower incidence of NOA compared with late vasopressin (9% vs 7%, median absolute difference [95% confidence interval, CI]: -2.1 [-7.2, 3.0], P = 0.41). Early vasopressin patients were observed to have shorter shock duration (2 vs 4 days, median absolute difference [95% CI]: 2 [1, 2], P < 0.001), and ICU length of stay (6 vs 7 days, median absolute difference [95% CI]: 1 [0, 2], P = 0.02). Conclusions and Relevance: Early vasopressin use was not associated with a lower incidence of NOA. Additional studies are needed to elucidate the effect of vasopressin timing on NOA and other clinical outcomes.

Effect of Vasopressin Dose on Hemodynamic Response in Obese Patients With Septic Shock: A Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: No clear association between standard vasopressin doses and body mass index exists, despite potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability among patients with septic shock. It is unknown if higher doses may alter hemodynamic response. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of vasopressin dose on hemodynamic response in obese patients with septic shock. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult, obese patients with septic shock receiving catecholamine vasopressors and vasopressin. Patients were analyzed according to vasopressin dose received: standard dose (≤0.04 U/min) and high dose (>0.04 U/min). The primary outcome was percentage change in norepinephrine equivalent (NEQ) dose. RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were included in the analysis, with 136 in the standard-dose vasopressin group and 46 in the high-dose vasopressin group. There was no difference in percentage change in NEQ dose at 6 hours after standard- or high-dose vasopressin attainment (-28.6% vs -19.1%; P = 0.166). A greater increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) at 6 hours was observed with receipt of high-dose vasopressin (23.3% vs 15.3%; P = 0.023). Duration of shock and length of stay were significantly longer in patients who received high-dose vasopressin, with no difference in in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This represents the first analysis comparing standard and higher doses of vasopressin in obese patients with septic shock. Receipt of high-dose vasopressin was not associated with a difference in catecholamine requirement or improved outcomes. Further studies are warranted to provide guidance on the use of high-dose vasopressin in septic shock.

Evaluation of Amiodarone Use for New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critically Ill Patients With Septic Shock.

Objective: To describe the use of amiodarone in critically ill, septic shock patients experiencing new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) during the acute resuscitative phase of septic shock. Methods: Single-center, retrospective review of adult medical or surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients with septic shock and NOAF. All patients received amiodarone for NOAF during the acute resuscitative phase of septic shock. The cohort was analyzed via descriptive statistics. Associations between amiodarone exposure and clinical outcomes were analyzed via a Cox proportional-hazards model. An a priori defined sensitivity analysis of hospital survivors was also employed. Main Results: A total of 239 patients were included in the analysis. Patients had a median baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index of 4 (interquartile range [IQR]: 2-6) and were acutely ill with a median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score of 18 (IQR: 13-22) and an incidence of mechanical ventilation of 85%. In-hospital mortality was 56% with median ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS) of 9 and 15 days, respectively. Included patients received a median of 2760 (IQR: 1110-6415) mg of intravenous (IV) amiodarone during their ICU stay. Receipt of more than or equal to 2700 mg of amiodarone was identified as an independent factor associated with longer ICU LOS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.28). In a sensitivity analysis of hospital survivors (n = 105), receipt of more than or equal to 2700 mg of amiodarone remained independently associated with longer ICU LOS (HR: 1.64; 95% CI, 1.05-2.58). Conclusions: Exposure to more than or equal to 2700 mg of amiodarone in the setting of NOAF and septic shock is positively correlated with longer ICU LOS. Identifying opportunities to limit amiodarone exposure and address/resolve potential precipitating causes of NOAF in this clinical scenario may reduce the morbidity associated with septic shock.

Evaluation of Time to Therapeutic Anticoagulation and Associated Outcomes in Critically Ill, Obese Patients With Pulmonary Embolism Receiving Unfractionated Heparin.

BACKGROUND: Delays in time to therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) have been associated with poor outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between time to therapeutic anticoagulation and in-hospital mortality in critically ill, obese patients with acute PE. METHODS: This study examined 204 critically ill patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 receiving unfractionated heparin (UFH) for PE treatment. Patients achieving therapeutic anticoagulation within 24 hours of UFH initiation (early) were compared to those in >24 hours (delayed). Additional end points included 30-day mortality, median time to therapeutic aPTT, proportion of therapeutic and supratherapeutic aPTT values, hemodynamic deterioration, thrombolytic therapy after UFH initiation, length of stay, and bleeding. RESULTS: No difference in in-hospital or 30-day all-cause mortality was seen (odds ratio [OR]: 1.33, confidence interval [CI]: 0.647-2.72; OR: 1.003, CI: 0.514-1.96). Patients in the early group had a greater proportion of therapeutic aPTT values (66.7% vs 50%, P < .001) and higher percentage of supratherapeutic aPTT values (20.9% vs 11.3%, P < .001); however, no increase in clinically significant bleeding was evident (15.2% vs 10.9%, P = .366). CONCLUSION: In this population, a shorter time to therapeutic aPTT was not associated with improved survival.

Oral Metolazone Versus Intravenous Chlorothiazide as an Adjunct to Loop Diuretics for Diuresis in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Background: Thiazide diuretics are often utilized to overcome loop diuretic resistance when treating acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). In addition to a large cost advantage, several pharmacokinetic advantages exist when administering oral metolazone (MTZ) compared with intravenous (IV) chlorothiazide (CTZ), yet many providers are reluctant to utilize an oral formulation to treat ADHF. The purpose of this study was to compare the increase in 24-hour total urine output (UOP) after adding MTZ or CTZ to IV loop diuretics (LD) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and Results: From September 2013 to August 2016, 1002 patients admitted for ADHF received either MTZ or CTZ in addition to LD. Patients were excluded for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (n = 469), <24-hour LD or UOP data prior to drug initiation (n = 129), or low dose MTZ/CTZ (n = 91). A total of 168 patients were included with 64% receiving CTZ. No significant difference was observed between the increase in 24-hour total UOP after MTZ or CTZ initiation (1458 [514, 2401] mL vs 1820 [890, 2750] mL, P = .251). Conclusions: Both MTZ and CTZ similarly increased UOP when utilized as an adjunct to IV LD. These results suggest that while thiazide agents can substantially increase UOP in ADHF patients with HFrEF, MTZ and CTZ have comparable effects.