| Literature DB >> 32647714 |
Eduardo Kattan1, Ricardo Castro1, Magdalena Vera1, Glenn Hernández1.
Abstract
Septic shock presents a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Through therapeutic strategies, such as fluid administration and vasoactive agents, clinicians intend to rapidly restore tissue perfusion. Nonetheless, these interventions have narrow therapeutic margins. Adequate perfusion monitoring is paramount to avoid progressive hypoperfusion or detrimental over-resuscitation. During early stages of septic shock, macrohemodynamic derangements, such as hypovolemia and decreased cardiac output (CO) tend to predominate. However, during late septic shock, endothelial and coagulation dysfunction induce severe alterations of the microcirculation, making it more difficult to achieve tissue reperfusion. Multiple perfusion variables have been described in the literature, from bedside clinical examination to complex laboratory tests. Moreover, all of them present inherent flaws and limitations. After the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial, there is evidence that capillary refill time (CRT) is an interesting resuscitation target, due to its rapid kinetics and correlation with deep hypoperfusion markers. New concepts such as hemodynamic coherence and flow responsiveness may be used at the bedside to select the best treatment strategies at any time-point. A multimodal perfusion monitoring and an integrated analysis with macrohemodynamic parameters is mandatory to optimize the resuscitation of septic shock patients. 2020 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Septic shock; capillary refill time (CRT); fluid therapy; lactate; microcirculation; resuscitation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32647714 PMCID: PMC7333135 DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-1120
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Classic and novel definitions regarding septic shock resuscitation
| Concept | Definition |
|---|---|
| Fluid responsiveness | Position of the patient in the cardiac function curve (Frank Starling’s curve) assessed with different bedside techniques. Fluid-responsive patients will increase stroke volume >10–15% after receiving a fluid bolus since they are in the ascending part of the curve. Fluid-unresponsive are in the flat part of the curve were fluids will only lead to congestion without increasing stroke volume |
| Fluid loading | Rapid fluid administration of fluids without necessarily monitoring the response, when confronting severe life-threatening hypotension and hypoperfusion |
| Fluid challenge | Rapid fluid bolus in fluid responsive patients, leading to a raise in mean systemic filling pressure, increase venous return and cardiac output, and eventually improving flow and tissue perfusion |
| Fluid overload | Corresponds to an increase in patient’s baseline body weight >10% or at least 5 kg PLUS evidences of organ/system function deterioration (e.g., pleural effusion at least moderate, or IAP >15 mmHg) |
| Hemodynamic coherence | Condition in which resuscitation of systemic macrohemodynamic variables results in concurrent improvement in regional and microcirculatory flow, and correction of tissue hypoperfusion |
| Flow responder | Dynamic test assessing the coupling of the macrohemodynamic (i.e., increase in CO) and microcirculation (i.e., CRT) during a fluid challenge |
| Flow sensitive parameter | Perfusion parameter which responds fast enough to resuscitation interventions, allowing to track changes in almost real time during the resuscitation process. Examples are central venous oxygen saturation or CRT |
| Resuscitation trigger | Clinical or laboratory signals that induce clinicians to start fluid resuscitation, such as hypotension, abnormal peripheral perfusion, oliguria |
| Resuscitation target | Flow-sensitive perfusion parameters that is used as an endpoint during septic shock resuscitation. Resuscitative interventions are focused on improving these parameters which serve as goals, and are stopped when achieved |
| Deep hypoperfusion | Evidence of impairment of regional, microcirculatory flow and/or onset of tissue hypoxia. Usually measured in experimental settings, but difficult to assess in the daily clinical practice |
CO, cardiac output; IAP, intra-abdominal pressure; CRT, capillary refill time.
Figure 1Relationship between fluid responsiveness, hemodynamic coherence, and flow responsiveness. This conceptual illustration indicates the link between fluid responsiveness and hemodynamic coherence as markers of macrocirculation and microcirculation, and flow responsiveness as a dynamic link between both territories.
Figure 2Addition of a hemodynamic coherence or flow responsiveness test to a fluid management algorithm for patients with septic shock. CRT, capillary refill time; ScvO2, central venous oxygen saturation; pCO2 gap, central venous-arterial pCO2 gradients.
Figure 3Algorithm for rational fluid administration during septic shock resuscitation. In this algorithm, fluid administration is initiated after a trigger alerts the clinician of a hypoperfusion signal. If the patient is deemed as fluid responder, fluid challenge is performed, aiming at a predefined target (i.e., CRT normalization). The loop closes with the assessment of safety limits for fluid administration and new assessment of fluid responsiveness, until the target is met. DO2/VO2, oxygen delivery/consumption balance; CRT, capillary refill time.
Figure 4Proposed multimodal assessment of patients’ perfusion status, resuscitation strategy and resuscitation target during septic shock. CRT, capillary refill time; ScvO2, central venous oxygen saturation; pCO2 gap, central venous-arterial pCO2 gradients; DO2/VO2, oxygen delivery/consumption balance.