Literature DB >> 30318584

Indications for fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock: Post-hoc analyses of the CLASSIC trial.

Mads Rye Bjerregaard1, Peter Buhl Hjortrup1, Anders Perner1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fluid resuscitation is recommended in septic shock, but the specific indications for fluids have not been established. Our aim was to investigate the indications currently used for fluid resuscitation and the effect of fluid on these indications in patients with septic shock admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).
METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of the CLASSIC trial, where patients with septic shock were randomized to fluid restriction or standard care. We recorded indications for and effect of each fluid bolus during the first 24 hours.
RESULTS: In total, 256 fluid boluses were administered on 515 indications to the 76 patients in the standard care group. The most frequent indications were low blood pressure/increase in noradrenalin dose (199 boluses, 78%), high lactate (94, 37%), and low urinary output (68, 27%). While the analyses of all 418 fluid boluses given in all 151 patients failed to show any effect of fluid on these variables, the data did suggest that time from randomization altered the effect; fluid may have increased urinary output when given early and increased noradrenalin dose when given later. For 56% of the fluid boluses given on the most frequent indications, a second fluid bolus was given on the same indication.
CONCLUSIONS: In ICU patients with septic shock, low blood pressure, high lactate, and low urinary output were the most frequent indications for fluid. The effects of fluids when given on these indications were less clear, but may dependent on the time course of sepsis resuscitation.
© 2018 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30318584     DOI: 10.1111/aas.13269

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand        ISSN: 0001-5172            Impact factor:   2.105


  3 in total

1.  Liberal versus restrictive fluid therapy in critically ill patients.

Authors:  Jonathan A Silversides; Anders Perner; Manu L N G Malbrain
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-08-09       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Fluid Overload Phenotypes in Critical Illness-A Machine Learning Approach.

Authors:  Anna S Messmer; Michel Moser; Patrick Zuercher; Joerg C Schefold; Martin Müller; Carmen A Pfortmueller
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 3.  Conservative vs. liberal fluid therapy in septic shock - Protocol for secondary Bayesian analyses of the CLASSIC trial.

Authors:  Praleene Sivapalan; Tine S Meyhoff; Peter B Hjortrup; Theis Lange; Morten Hylander Møller; Anders Perner; Anders Granholm
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2022-04-06       Impact factor: 2.274

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.