Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2014 Feb;21(2):154-62. doi: 10.1111/acem.12314.
Microcirculatory dysfunction plays an important role in sepsis pathophysiology. Previous studies using sidestream dark-field (SDF) imaging have demonstrated microcirculatory flow abnormalities in patients with septic shock; however, the microcirculation is relatively unstudied in lower-acuity sepsis patients. The hypothesis was that patients with sepsis, but without hypotension, will demonstrate signs of flow abnormalities compared to noninfected control patients.
This was a prospective, observational study in a convenience sample of patients with sepsis and noninfected controls, conducted in three urban, tertiary care emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. Sepsis was defined as suspected infection plus two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria; those with hypotension were excluded. Noninfected controls were ED patients without infection and without SIRS criteria. SDF imaging was obtained in all study patients during ED evaluation. Recommended microcirculatory flow parameters were measured, and the difference in these measures between sepsis patients and noninfected controls were calculated. The authors also correlated microcirculatory flow parameters with patient variables, including serum lactate.
A total of 106 patients were enrolled: 63 with sepsis and 43 noninfected controls. There were no differences in microcirculatory flow scores between sepsis patients and noninfected controls. Median microvascular flow index (MFI; with interquartile range [IQR] was 3.00 (IQR = 2.73 to 3.00) in sepsis patients versus 2.93 (IQR = 2.73 to 3.00) in control patients (p = 0.33), and mean proportion of perfused small vessels (PPV) was 91.5% (95% CI = 89.7% to 93.3%) versus 91.8% (95% CI = 89.7% to 93.9%), with a mean difference of 0.3% (95% CI = -2.5% to 3.1%; p = 0.84). Similarly, there were no significant differences in total vessel density, perfused vessel density, or heterogeneity index (HI). In the subset of infected patients for whom serum lactates were obtained (n % 37), MFI and PPV were negatively correlated with elevated serum lactate values: r = -0.32, p = 0.04; and r = -0.44, p < 0.01, respectively.
Measureable microcirculatory flow abnormalities were not observed in patients with early sepsis in the absence of hypotension. However, microcirculatory abnormalities were correlated with elevated serum lactate in normotensive sepsis patients, supporting the notion that impaired microcirculatory flow is coupled with cellular distress.
微循环功能障碍在脓毒症发病机制中起着重要作用。先前使用侧流暗场(SDF)成像的研究已经表明,脓毒性休克患者存在微循环血流异常;然而,较低危脓毒症患者的微循环尚未得到充分研究。假设与非感染性对照患者相比,患有败血症但无低血压的患者将表现出血流异常的迹象。
这是一项在美国三个城市三级急救中心(ED)进行的方便取样的脓毒症和非感染性对照患者的前瞻性观察性研究。脓毒症的定义为疑似感染加两个或多个全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)标准;排除低血压患者。非感染性对照患者为 ED 中无感染且无 SIRS 标准的患者。所有研究患者在 ED 评估期间均接受 SDF 成像。测量推荐的微循环血流参数,并计算这些参数在脓毒症患者和非感染性对照组之间的差异。作者还将微循环血流参数与患者变量(包括血清乳酸)相关联。
共纳入 106 名患者:63 名患有败血症,43 名非感染性对照组。败血症患者和非感染性对照组之间的微循环血流评分无差异。微血管血流指数(MFI;中位数[四分位距(IQR)]在败血症患者中为 3.00(IQR=2.73 至 3.00),在对照组患者中为 2.93(IQR=2.73 至 3.00)(p=0.33),平均灌注小血管比例(PPV)为 91.5%(95%可信区间=89.7%至 93.3%)与 91.8%(95%可信区间=89.7%至 93.9%),平均差异为 0.3%(95%可信区间=-2.5%至 3.1%;p=0.84)。同样,总血管密度、灌注血管密度或异质性指数(HI)也没有显著差异。在获得血清乳酸的感染患者亚组(n%37)中,MFI 和 PPV 与升高的血清乳酸值呈负相关:r=-0.32,p=0.04;r=-0.44,p<0.01。
在无低血压的早期脓毒症患者中未观察到可测量的微循环血流异常。然而,在正常血压的脓毒症患者中,微循环异常与升高的血清乳酸相关,这支持了微循环血流受损与细胞应激相关的观点。