IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulb/ulbeco/2013-284941.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Current use of vasopressors in septic shock

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Wl L T.W. Scheeren
  • Jan Bakker
  • Daniel De Backer
  • Djillali Annane
  • Pierre Asfar
  • Evert Christiaan Boerma
  • Maurizio Cecconi
  • Arnaldo Dubin
  • Martin Dunser
  • Jacques Duranteau
  • Anthony A.C. Gordon
  • Olfa Hamzaoui
  • Glenn Hernandez
  • Marc Leone
  • Bruno Levy
  • Claude Martin
  • Alexandre Mebazaa
  • Xavier Monnet
  • Andrea Morelli
  • Didier Payen
  • Rupert M Pearse
  • Michaël Pinsky
  • Peter Radermacher
  • Daniel Arnulf Reuter
  • Bernd Saugel
  • Yasser Sakr
  • Mervyn Singer
  • Pierre Squara
  • Antoine Vieillard-Baron
  • Philippe Vignon
  • Simon Tilma Vistisen
  • Iwan I.C.C. van der Horst
  • Jean Louis Vincent
  • Jean Louis Teboul

Abstract

Background: Vasopressors are commonly applied to restore and maintain blood pressure in patients with sepsis. We aimed to evaluate the current practice and therapeutic goals regarding vasopressor use in septic shock as a basis for future studies and to provide some recommendations on their use. Methods: From November 2016 to April 2017, an anonymous web-based survey on the use of vasoactive drugs was accessible to members of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). A total of 17 questions focused on the profile of respondents, triggering factors, first choice agent, dosing, timing, targets, additional treatments, and effects of vasopressors. We investigated whether the answers complied with current guidelines. In addition, a group of 34 international ESICM experts was asked to formulate recommendations for the use of vasopressors based on 6 questions with sub-questions (total 14). Results: A total of 839 physicians from 82 countries (65% main specialty/activity intensive care) responded. The main trigger for vasopressor use was an insufficient mean arterial pressure (MAP) response to initial fluid resuscitation (83%). The first-line vasopressor was norepinephrine (97%), targeting predominantly a MAP > 60–65 mmHg (70%), with higher targets in patients with chronic arterial hypertension (79%). The experts agreed on 10 recommendations, 9 of which were based on unanimous or strong (≥ 80%) agreement. They recommended not to delay vasopressor treatment until fluid resuscitation is completed but rather to start with norepinephrine early to achieve a target MAP of ≥ 65 mmHg. Conclusion: Reported vasopressor use in septic shock is compliant with contemporary guidelines. Future studies should focus on individualized treatment targets including earlier use of vasopressors.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Wl L T.W. Scheeren & Jan Bakker & Daniel De Backer & Djillali Annane & Pierre Asfar & Evert Christiaan Boerma & Maurizio Cecconi & Arnaldo Dubin & Martin Dunser & Jacques Duranteau & Anthony A., 2019. "Current use of vasopressors in septic shock," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/284941, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  • Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/284941
    Note: SCOPUS: ar.j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/284941/1/doi_268568.pdf
    File Function: Full text for the whole work, or for a work part
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gupta, Ankit & Davis, Matthew & Kumar, Amit, 2021. "An integrated assessment framework for the decarbonization of the electricity generation sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Arterial blood pressure; Norepinephrine; Resuscitation; Sepsis; Septic shock; Shock; Vasoactive agonists; Vasopressor;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/284941. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsulbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.