Early Sequential Microcirculation Assessment In Shocked Patients as a Predictor of Outcome: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.
Journal
Shock (Augusta, Ga.)
ISSN: 1540-0514
Titre abrégé: Shock
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9421564
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 05 2021
01 05 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
23
8
2020
medline:
14
1
2022
entrez:
23
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A dysfunctional microcirculation is universal in shock and is often dissociated from global hemodynamic parameters. Persistent microcirculatory derangements reflect ongoing tissue hypoperfusion and organ injury. The initial microcirculatory dysfunction and subsequent resolution could potentially guide therapy and predict outcomes. We evaluated the microcirculation early in a heterogenous shocked population. Microcirculatory resolution was correlated with measures of tissue perfusion and global hemodynamics. The relationship between the microcirculation over 24 h and outcome were evaluated. We prospectively recruited patients with all forms of shock, based on global hemodynamics and evidence of organ hypoperfusion. A 30-bed adult intensive care unit (ICU). Eighty-two shocked patients. Following the diagnosis of shock, patients underwent a sublingual microcirculation examination using Sidestream Dark Field Imaging. The median age of patients was 66 years old (interquartile range [IQR] 54-71), with an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II of 27 (IQR 20-32). Microcirculatory parameters included Percentage Perfused Vessels (PPV), De Backer Score, and a heterogeneity index in patients with septic shock, according to the second consensus guidelines Additional parameters collected: temperature, heart rate and arterial pressure, cumulative fluid balance, and vasopressor use. Arterial blood samples were taken at the time of microcirculatory assessments, providing HCO3, lactate concentrations, PaO2, and PaCO2 measurements. A statistically significant improvement in PPV and the heterogeneity index was demonstrated. This improvement was mirrored by biomarkers of perfusion; however, the global hemodynamic parameter changes were not significantly different over the 24-h period. The early microcirculatory improvement was not predictive of an improvement in acute kidney injury, length of stay, ICU, or hospital mortality. Early sequential evaluation of the microcirculation in shocked patients, demonstrated statistically significant improvement in the PPV and microvascular heterogeneity with standard care. These improvements were mirrored by biomarkers of organ perfusion; however, the changes in global hemodynamics were not as pronounced in this early phase. Early improvement in the microcirculation did not predict clinical outcome.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32826808
pii: 00024382-202105000-00003
doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001578
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
581-586Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 by the Shock Society.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
Ince C, Boerma EC, Cecconi M, De Backer D, Shapiro NI, Duranteau J, Pinsky M, Artigas A, Teboul J-L, Reiss IK, et al. Second consensus on the assessment of sublingual microcirculation in critically ill patients: results from a task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med 2018; 44 (3):281–299.
Kanoore Edul VS, Dubin A, Ince C. The microcirculation as a therapeutic target in the treatment of sepsis and shock. Semin Respir Criti Care Med 2011; 32 (5):558–568.
De Backer D, Donadello K, Sakr Y, Ospina-Tascon G, Salgado D, Scolletta S, Vincent JL. Microcirculatory alterations in patients with severe sepsis: impact of time of assessment and relationship with outcome. Crit Care Med 2013; 41 (3):791–799.
De Backer D, Durand A. Monitoring the microcirculation in critically ill patients. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2014; 28 (4):441–451.
Tachon G, Harrois A, Tanaka S, Kato H, Huet O, Pottecher J, Vicaut E, Duranteau J. Microcirculatory alterations in traumatic hemorrhagic shock. Crit Care Med 2014; 42 (6):1433–1441.
Hutchings SD, Naumann DN, Watts S, Wilson C, Burton C, Wendon J, Kirkman E. Microcirculatory perfusion shows wide inter-individual variation and is important in determining shock reversal during resuscitation in a porcine experimental model of complex traumatic hemorrhagic shock. Intensive Care Med Exp 2016; 4 (1):17.
Harrois A, Dupic L, Duranteau J. Targeting the microcirculation in resuscitation of acutely unwell patients. Curr Opin Crit Care 2011; 17 (3):303–307.
Ince C. Hemodynamic coherence and the rationale for monitoring the microcirculation. Crit Care 2015; 19: (suppl 3): S8.
Kanoore Edul VS, Ince C, Dubin A. What is microcirculatory shock? Curr Opin Crit Care 2015; 21 (3):245–252.
Arnold RC, Dellinger RP, Parrillo JE, Chansky ME, Lotano VE, McCoy JV, Jones AE, Shapiro NI, Hollenberg SM, Trzeciak S. Discordance between microcirculatory alterations and arterial pressure in patients with hemodynamic instability. J Crit Care 2012; 27 (5):531.e1–531.e7.
De Backer D, Ortiz JA, Salgado D. Coupling microcirculation to systemic hemodynamics. Curr Opin Crit Care 2010; 16 (3):250–254.
Jin X, Weil MH, Sun S, Tang W, Bisera J, Mason EJ. Decreases in organ blood flows associated with increases in sublingual PCO2 during hemorrhagic shock. J Appl Physiol 1998; 85 (6):2360–2364.
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 1985; 13 (10):818–829.
Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, Willatts S, De Mendonca A, Bruining H, Reinhart CK, Suter PM, Thijs LG. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med 1996; 22 (7):707–710.
De Backer D, Hollenberg S, Boerma C, Goedhart P, Buchele G, Ospina-Tascon G, Dobb I, Ince C. How to evaluate the microcirculation: report of a round table conference. Crit Care 2007; 11 (5):R101.
Trzeciak S, Dellinger RP, Parrillo JE, Guglielmi M, Bajaj J, Abate NL, Arnold RC, Colilla S, Zanotti S, Hollenberg SM. Early microcirculatory perfusion derangements in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: relationship to hemodynamics, oxygen transport, and survival. Ann Emerg Med 2007; 49 (1):88–98. 98.e1–2.
Trzeciak S, Rivers EP. Clinical manifestations of disordered microcirculatory perfusion in severe sepsis. Crit Care 2005; 9: (suppl 4): S20–S26.
Naumann DN, Hazeldine J, Midwinter MJ, Hutchings SD, Harrison P. Poor microcirculatory flow dynamics are associated with endothelial cell damage and glycocalyx shedding after traumatic hemorrhagic shock. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2018; 84 (1):81–88.
Depret F, Sitbon A, Soussi S, De Tymowski C, Blet A, Fratani A, Legrand M. Intravenous iloprost to recruit the microcirculation in septic shock patients? Intensive Care Med 2018; 44 (1):121–122.
Spronk PE, Ince C, Gardien MJ, Mathura KR, Oudemans-van Straaten HM, Zandstra DF. Nitroglycerin in septic shock after intravascular volume resuscitation. Lancet 2002; 360 (9343):1395–1396.
Legrand M, Ait-Oufella H, Ince C. Could resuscitation be based on microcirculation data? Yes. Intensive Care Med 2018; 44 (6):944–946.
Carsetti A, Aya HD, Pierantozzi S, Bazurro S, Donati A, Rhodes A, Cecconi M. Ability and efficiency of an automatic analysis software to measure microvascular parameters. J Clin Monit Comput 2017; 31 (4):669–676.
Sharawy N, Mukhtar A, Islam S, Mahrous R, Mohamed H, Ali M, Hakeem AA, Hossny O, Refaa A, Saka A, et al. Preliminary clinical evaluation of automated analysis of the sublingual microcirculation in the assessment of patients with septic shock: Comparison of automated versus semi-automated software. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2017; 67 (3–4):489–498.