RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Septic shock in critically ill patients can increases morbidity and mortality. We aimed to study the effect on outcomes when integrating point of care (POC) echocardiography in the management of septic shock patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) who are being treated according to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines. METHODS: An electronic search of MEDLINE through PubMed, clinical trials.gov and google scholar was conducted for the period from January 1990-January 2024 to identify studies of septic shock adult and pediatric patients in the ICU managed according to SSC guidelines with or without POC echocardiography. Three reviewers extracted data independent of each other. Cochrane collaboration tool was used for bias assessment. Random effect meta-analysis used to pool data. RESULTS: A total of 1701 articles identified. Seven studies included in the final report with a total of 3885 patients. POC echocardiography guided septic shock management was associated with lower in-hospital and 28-day mortality (sOR = 0.82 [95%CI: 0.71-0.95], p = 0.01), more frequent initiation of inotropic support (sOR = 2.42 [95%CI 1.92-3.03], p < 0.0001) and shorter time to achieve lactate clearance (SMD = - 0.87 h [95%CI - 1.23 h to - 0.51 h], p < 0.0001). Summary estimates did not achieve significance for effect of POC echocardiography on 24-h fluid intake (SMD = - 2.11 ml [95%CI - 5.93 ml to 1.72 ml], p = 0.28) on mechanical ventilation-free days (SMD = 0.03 days [95%CI - 0.04 to 0.10], p = 0.94). Shock reversal time analysis was less meaningful due to the small number of studies reporting outcome. CONCLUSIONS: POC echocardiography guided management in septic shock patients in the ICU can lead to a decrease in mortality, increase in initiation of inotropic support, and a decrease in lactate clearance time. Larger cohort studies and data collection and analysis are needed for further understanding and optimizing standardization of protocols for POC echocardiography use in septic shock patients in the ICU.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is a critical need to develop novel therapies for COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised trial; hospitalised patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and at least one poor prognostic biomarker, were given sirolimus (6 mg on Day 1 followed by 2 mg daily for 14 days or hospital discharge, whichever happens first) or placebo, in a 2:1 randomization scheme favouring sirolimus. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients alive and free from advanced respiratory support measures at Day 28. RESULTS: Between April 2020 and April 2021, 32 patients underwent randomization and 28 received either sirolimus (n = 18) or placebo (n = 10). Mean age was 57 years and 75 % of the subjects were men. Twenty-two subjects had at least one co-existing condition (Diabetes, hypertension, obesity, CHF, or asthma/COPD) associated with worse prognosis. Mean FiO2 requirement was 0.35. There was no difference in the proportion of patients who were alive and free from advanced respiratory support measures in the sirolimus group (n = 15, 83 %) compared with the placebo group (n = 8, 80 %). Although patients in the sirolimus group demonstrated faster improvement in oxygenation and spent less time in the hospital, these differences were not statistically significant. There was no between-group difference in the rate of change in serum biomarkers such as LDH, ferritin, d-dimer or lymphocyte count. There was a decreased risk of thromboembolic complications in patients on sirolimus compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Larger studies are warranted to evaluate the role sirolimus in COVID-19 infection.