Focused ultrasonography for septic shock resuscitation.
Journal
Current opinion in critical care
ISSN: 1531-7072
Titre abrégé: Curr Opin Crit Care
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9504454
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
26
4
2020
medline:
1
12
2020
entrez:
26
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Severe sepsis with septic shock is the most common cause of death among critically ill patients. Mortality has decreased substantially over the last decade but recent data has shown that opportunities remain for the improvement of early and targeted therapy. This review discusses published data regarding the role of focused ultrasonography in septic shock resuscitation. Early categorization of the cardiovascular phenotypes with echocardiography can be crucial for timely diagnosis and targeted therapy of patients with septic shock. In the last few years, markers of volume status and volume responsiveness have been investigated, serving as valuable tools for targeting volume therapy in the care of both spontaneously breathing and mechanically ventilated patients. In tandem, investigators have highlighted findings of extravascular volume with ultrasonographic evaluation to compliment de-escalation of resuscitation efforts when appropriate. Furthermore, special attention has been given to resuscitation efforts of patients in septic shock with right ventricular failure. Severe sepsis with septic shock is an insidious disease process that continues to take lives. In more recent years, data have emerged suggesting the utility of bedside ultrasonography for early cardiovascular categorization, goal directed resuscitation, and appropriate cardiovascular support based on its changing phenotypes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32332287
doi: 10.1097/MCC.0000000000000730
pii: 00075198-202006000-00012
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
296-302Références
Hatfield KM, Dantes RB, Baggs J, et al. Assessing variability in hospital-level mortality among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries with hospitalizations for severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 2018; 46:1753.
Cecconi M, De Backer D, Antonelli M, et al. Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med 2014; 40:1795–1815.
Vincent J-L, De Backer D. Circulatory shock. N Engl J Med 2013; 369:1726–1734.
Nikravan S. Diaz-Gomez J, Nikravan S, Conlon T. Septic shock and its echocardiographic mimickers. Comprehensive critical care ultrasound 2nd ed. Mt.Prospect. IL: Society of Critical Care Medicine; 2020. 279–286.
Bouferrache K, Amiel J-B, Chimot L, et al. Initial resuscitation guided by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommendations and early echocardiographic assessment of hemodynamics in intensive care unit septic patients: a pilot study. Crit Care Med 2012; 40:2821–2827.
Geri G, Vignon P, Aubry A, et al. Cardiovascular clusters in septic shock combining clinical and echocardiographic parameters: a post hoc analysis. Intensive Care Med 2019; 45:657–667.
Mitchell KH, Carlbom D, Caldwell E, et al. Volume overload: prevalence, risk factors, and functional outcome in survivors of septic shock. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2015; 12:1837–1844.
Nibras F, Bughrara MD, Kevin S, et al. Echocardiographic assessment using subxiphoid-only view (EASY) compared to focused transthoracic echocardiography (FOTE): a multicenter prospective study. Crit Care Med 2020; 48:713 doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000645804.32358.c6.
doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000645804.32358.c6
Bughrara N, Diaz-Gomez JL, Pustavoitau A. Perioperative management of patients with sepsis and septic shock, Part II: Ultrasound support for resuscitation. Anesthesiol Clin 2020; 38:123–134.
Santa-Teresa P, Muñoz J, Montero I, et al. Incidence and prognosis of intra-abdominal hypertension in critically ill medical patients: a prospective epidemiological study. Ann Intensive Care 2012; 2: (Suppl 1): S3.
Payen D, de Pont A-CJM, Sakr Y, et al. A positive fluid balance is associated with a worse outcome in patients with acute renal failure. Crit Care 2008; 12:R74.
Mullens W, Abrahams Z, Francis GS, et al. Importance of venous congestion for worsening of renal function in advanced decompensated heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53:589–596.
Vignon P, Repessé X, Bégot E, et al. Comparison of echocardiographic indices used to predict fluid responsiveness in ventilated patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2016; 195:1022–1032.
Nagdev AD, Merchant RC, Tirado-Gonzalez A, et al. Emergency department bedside ultrasonographic measurement of the caval index for noninvasive determination of low central venous pressure. Ann Emerg Med 2010; 55:290–295.
Zhang Z, Xu X, Ye S, Xu L. Ultrasonographic measurement of the respiratory variation in the inferior vena cava diameter is predictive of fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Database of abstracts of reviews of effects (DARE): quality-assessed reviews – NCBI Bookshelf 2020; Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK208470/. [Accessed 7 January].
Preau S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of the inferior vena cava. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(3):e290–e297. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002090
Muller L, Toumi M, Bousquet P-J, et al. An increase in aortic blood flow after an infusion of 100 ml colloid over 1 min can predict fluid responsiveness: the mini-fluid challenge study. Anesthesiology 2011; 115:541–547.
Wu Y, Zhou S, Zhou Z, Liu B. A 10-s fluid challenge guided by transthoracic echocardiography can predict fluid responsiveness. Crit Care 2014; 18:R108.
Myatra SN, Monnet X, Teboul J-L. Use of ‘tidal volume challenge’ to improve the reliability of pulse pressure variation. Crit Care 2017; 21:60.
Biais M, Lanchon R, Sesay M, et al. Changes in stroke volume induced by lung recruitment maneuver predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients in the operating room. Anesthes 2017; 126:260–267.
Georges D, de Courson H, Lanchon R, et al. End-expiratory occlusion maneuver to predict fluid responsiveness in the intensive care unit: an echocardiographic study. Crit Care 2018; 22:32.
Jozwiak M, Depret F, Teboul J-L, et al. Predicting fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients by using combined end-expiratory and end-inspiratory occlusions with echocardiography. Crit Care Med 2017; 45:e1131–e1138.
Maw AM, Hassanin A, Ho PM, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care lung ultrasonography and chest radiography in adults with symptoms suggestive of acute decompensated heart failure. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e190703.
Shih C-Y, Yang S-S, Hu J-T, et al. Portal vein pulsatility index is a more important indicator than congestion index in the clinical evaluation of right heart function. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12:768–771.
Hu J-T, Yang S-S, Lai Y-C, et al. Percentage of peak-to-peak pulsatility of portal blood flow can predict right-sided congestive heart failure. World J Gastroenterol 2003; 9:1828–1831.
Eljaiek R, Cavayas YA, Rodrigue E, et al. High postoperative portal venous flow pulsatility indicates right ventricular dysfunction and predicts complications in cardiac surgery patients. Br J Anaesth 2019; 122:206–214.
Pulido JN, Afessa B, Masaki M, et al. Clinical spectrum, frequency, and significance of myocardial dysfunction in severe sepsis and septic shock. Mayo Clin Proc 2012; 87:620–628.
Landesberg G, Jaffe AS, Gilon D, et al. Troponin elevation in severe sepsis and septic shock: the role of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and right ventricular dilatation. Crit Care Med 2014; 42:790.
Vallabhajosyula S, Kumar M, Pandompatam G, et al. Prognostic impact of isolated right ventricular dysfunction in sepsis and septic shock: an 8-year historical cohort study. Ann Intensive Care 2017; 7:94.
Vieillard-Baron A, Naeije R, Haddad F, et al. Diagnostic workup, etiologies and management of acute right ventricle failure: a state-of-the-art paper. Intensive Care Med 2018; 44:774–790.
Rhee C, Dantes R, Epstein L, et al. Incidence and trends of sepsis in US hospitals using clinical vs claims data. JAMA 2017; 318:1241–1249.