Literature DB >> 28672146

Stroke volume guided resuscitation in severe sepsis and septic shock improves outcomes.

Heath E Latham1, Charles D Bengtson2, Lewis Satterwhite3, Mindy Stites4, Dipti P Subramaniam5, G John Chen6, Steven Q Simpson7.   

Abstract

To determine whether stroke volume (SV) guided fluid resuscitation in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock alters Intensive Care Unit (ICU) fluid balance and secondary outcomes, this retrospective cohort study evaluated consecutive patients admitted to an ICU with the primary diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. Cohorts were based on fluid resuscitation guided by changes in SV or by usual care (UC). The SV group comprised 100 patients, with 91 patients in the UC group. Net fluid balance for the ICU stay was lower in the SV group (1.77L) than in the UC group (5.36L) (p=0.022). ICU length of stay was 2.89days shorter (p=0.03) and duration of vasopressors was 32.8h less (p=0.001) in the SV group. SV group required less mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.51; p=0.0001). The SV group was less likely to require acute hemodialysis (6.25%) compared with the UC group (19.5%) (RR, 0.32; p=0.01). In multivariable analysis, SV was an independent predictor of lower fluid balance, LOS, time on vasopressors, and not needing mechanical ventilation. This study demonstrated that SV guided fluid resuscitation in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock was associated with reduced fluid balance and improved secondary outcomes.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bioreactance; Resuscitation; Sepsis; Septic shock; Severe sepsis; Stroke volume

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28672146     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.06.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Crit Care        ISSN: 0883-9441            Impact factor:   3.425


  6 in total

1.  Effect of goal-directed fluid therapy on renal function in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cong-Cong Zhao; Yan Ye; Zhi-Qiang Li; Xin-Hui Wu; Chai Zhao; Zhen-Jie Hu
Journal:  Ren Fail       Date:  2022-12       Impact factor: 3.222

2.  Prognostic value of hemodynamic indices in patients with sepsis after fluid resuscitation.

Authors:  He-Ping Xu; Xiao-An Zhuo; Jin-Jian Yao; Duo-Yi Wu; Xiang Wang; Ping He; Yan-Hong Ouyang
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 1.337

3.  Non-invasive Cardiac Output Monitoring and Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness in Children With Shock in the Emergency Department.

Authors:  Pranali Awadhare; Radha Patel; Tracy McCallin; Kiran Mainali; Kelly Jackson; Hannah Starke; Utpal Bhalala
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 3.569

Review 4.  Should we overcome the resistance to bioelectrical impedance in heart failure?

Authors:  Stephen J Hankinson; Charles H Williams; Van-Khue Ton; Stephen S Gottlieb; Charles C Hong
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 3.166

Review 5.  Current concepts of perioperative monitoring in high-risk surgical patients: a review.

Authors:  Paolo Aseni; Stefano Orsenigo; Enrico Storti; Marco Pulici; Sergio Arlati
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2019-10-23

6.  Fluid Response Evaluation in Sepsis Hypotension and Shock: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Ivor S Douglas; Philip M Alapat; Keith A Corl; Matthew C Exline; Lui G Forni; Andre L Holder; David A Kaufman; Akram Khan; Mitchell M Levy; Gregory S Martin; Jennifer A Sahatjian; Eric Seeley; Wesley H Self; Jeremy A Weingarten; Mark Williams; Douglas M Hansell
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 10.262

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.