BACKGROUND & AIMS: The choice of vasopressor for treating cirrhosis with septic shock is unclear. While noradrenaline in general is the preferred vasopressor, terlipressin improves microcirculation in addition to vasopressor action in non-cirrhotics. We compared the efficacy and safety of noradrenaline and terlipressin in cirrhotics with septic shock. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cirrhotics with septic shock underwent open label randomization to receive either terlipressin (n=42) or noradrenaline (n=42) infusion at a titrated dose. The primary outcome was mean arterial pressure (MAP) >65 mm Hg at 48 h. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the terlipressin and noradrenaline groups.SBP and pneumonia were major sources of sepsis. A higher proportion of patients on terlipressin were able to achieve MAP >65 mm of Hg (92.9% vs 69.1% P=.005) at 48 h. Subsequent discontinuation of vasopressor after hemodynamic stability was better with terlipressin (33.3% vs 11.9%, P<.05). Terlipressin compared to noradrenaline prevented variceal bleed (0% vs 9.5%, P=.01) and improved survival at 48 h (95.2% vs 71.4%, P=.003). Percentage lactate clearance (LC) is an independent predictor of survival [P=.0001, HR=3.9 (95% CI: 1.85-8.22)] after achieving the target MAP.Therapy related adverse effect were comparable in both the arms (40.5% vs 21.4%, P=.06), mostly minor (GradeII-88%) and reversible. CONCLUSIONS:Terlipressin is as effective as noradrenaline as a vasopressor in cirrhotics with septic shock and can serve as a useful drug. Terlipressin additionally provides early survival benefit and reduces the risk of variceal bleed. Lactate clearance is a better predictor of outcome even after achieving target MAP, suggesting the role of microcirculation in septic shock.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The choice of vasopressor for treating cirrhosis with septic shock is unclear. While noradrenaline in general is the preferred vasopressor, terlipressin improves microcirculation in addition to vasopressor action in non-cirrhotics. We compared the efficacy and safety of noradrenaline and terlipressin in cirrhotics with septic shock. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cirrhotics with septic shock underwent open label randomization to receive either terlipressin (n=42) or noradrenaline (n=42) infusion at a titrated dose. The primary outcome was mean arterial pressure (MAP) >65 mm Hg at 48 h. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the terlipressin and noradrenaline groups.SBP and pneumonia were major sources of sepsis. A higher proportion of patients on terlipressin were able to achieve MAP >65 mm of Hg (92.9% vs 69.1% P=.005) at 48 h. Subsequent discontinuation of vasopressor after hemodynamic stability was better with terlipressin (33.3% vs 11.9%, P<.05). Terlipressin compared to noradrenaline prevented variceal bleed (0% vs 9.5%, P=.01) and improved survival at 48 h (95.2% vs 71.4%, P=.003). Percentage lactate clearance (LC) is an independent predictor of survival [P=.0001, HR=3.9 (95% CI: 1.85-8.22)] after achieving the target MAP.Therapy related adverse effect were comparable in both the arms (40.5% vs 21.4%, P=.06), mostly minor (GradeII-88%) and reversible. CONCLUSIONS: Terlipressin is as effective as noradrenaline as a vasopressor in cirrhotics with septic shock and can serve as a useful drug. Terlipressin additionally provides early survival benefit and reduces the risk of variceal bleed. Lactate clearance is a better predictor of outcome even after achieving target MAP, suggesting the role of microcirculation in septic shock.
Authors: Victor Dong; Maxime Gosselin; Nishita Jagarlamudi; Beverley Kok; Mark G Swain; Jasmohan S Bajaj; Juan G Abraldes; Vladimir Marquez; R Todd Stravitz; Aldo J Montano-Loza; Manuela Merli; Phil Wong; Amanda Brisebois; Puneeta Tandon; Julia Wendon; Scott L Nyberg; François M Carrier; Michael R Lucey; Florence Wong; Jordan J Feld; Constantine J Karvellas; Christopher F Rose; Julien Bissonnette Journal: Can Liver J Date: 2019-12-10
Authors: William F McIntyre; Kevin J Um; Waleed Alhazzani; Alexandra P Lengyel; Ludhmila Hajjar; Anthony C Gordon; François Lamontagne; Jeff S Healey; Richard P Whitlock; Emilie P Belley-Côté Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thomas Reiberger; Andreas Püspök; Maria Schoder; Franziska Baumann-Durchschein; Theresa Bucsics; Christian Datz; Werner Dolak; Arnulf Ferlitsch; Armin Finkenstedt; Ivo Graziadei; Stephanie Hametner; Franz Karnel; Elisabeth Krones; Andreas Maieron; Mattias Mandorfer; Markus Peck-Radosavljevic; Florian Rainer; Philipp Schwabl; Vanessa Stadlbauer; Rudolf Stauber; Herbert Tilg; Michael Trauner; Heinz Zoller; Rainer Schöfl; Peter Fickert Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2017-10-23 Impact factor: 1.704