Kampmeier Tim-Gerald, Hessler Michael, Arnemann Philip Helge, Westphal Martin, Seidel Laura Mareen, Morelli Andrea, Van Aken Hugo, Rehberg Sebastian, Ertmer Christian
Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Fresenius Kabi Deutschland, Else-Kröner-Straße 1, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Ann Transl Med. 2018 Oct;6(20):400. doi: 10.21037/atm.2018.09.32.
There is clear evidence that early causal therapy improves outcome in sepsis and septic shock, whereas recent studies on supportive hemodynamic therapy have produced very conflictive results. The objective of the present study was to determine whether a supportive hemodynamic therapy guided by clinically relevant invasive monitoring improves survival and organ function in a high-lethality model of septic shock in sheep as compared to sole causal therapy including surgical and antimicrobial treatment.
Twenty healthy ewes were anaesthetized and instrumented for hemodynamic surveillance. After laparotomy and fecal withdrawal from the caecum, animals were randomly assigned to one of four groups: sham, control, causal and combined therapy. In all groups but the sham group, feces were injected into the peritoneal cavity. Septic shock was defined as mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≤60 mmHg and arterial lactate concentration ≥1.8 mmol·L. Animals of the control group received no therapy, while the causal group received broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy and peritoneal lavage. The combined therapy group received causal therapy plus supportive hemodynamic therapy.
The sham animals showed no signs of systemic infection, while all other animals developed septic shock with arterial hypotension and lactic acidosis within 4.0 (4.0-6.8) hours. Induction of causal therapy did not impact on haemodynamics as compared to the control group. Notably, 50% of the control animals and none of the causal therapy animals survived the study. Combined therapy stabilized haemodynamics and improved organ function and survival as compared to control and causal therapy groups.
The present data suggest that sole causal sepsis therapy without hemodynamic support worsens outcome even more than natural evolution of sepsis and combined causal and supportive therapy. This underlines the importance of early hemodynamic stabilization in parallel with antibiotic and surgical treatment of the sepsis focus.
有明确证据表明,早期病因治疗可改善脓毒症和脓毒性休克的预后,而近期关于支持性血流动力学治疗的研究结果却非常矛盾。本研究的目的是确定,在绵羊脓毒性休克高致死率模型中,与包括手术和抗菌治疗在内的单纯病因治疗相比,由临床相关有创监测指导的支持性血流动力学治疗是否能提高生存率并改善器官功能。
对20只健康母羊进行麻醉并安装血流动力学监测仪器。剖腹并从盲肠取出粪便后,将动物随机分为四组:假手术组、对照组、病因治疗组和联合治疗组。除假手术组外,所有组均将粪便注入腹腔。脓毒性休克定义为平均动脉压(MAP)≤60 mmHg且动脉乳酸浓度≥1.8 mmol·L。对照组动物不接受治疗,而病因治疗组接受广谱抗生素治疗和腹腔灌洗。联合治疗组接受病因治疗加支持性血流动力学治疗。
假手术组动物未出现全身感染迹象,而所有其他动物在4.0(4.0 - 6.8)小时内均发生了伴有动脉低血压和乳酸酸中毒的脓毒性休克。与对照组相比,病因治疗的实施对血流动力学没有影响。值得注意的是,对照组50%的动物和病因治疗组的动物无一存活至研究结束。与对照组和病因治疗组相比,联合治疗稳定了血流动力学,改善了器官功能和生存率。
目前的数据表明,没有血流动力学支持的单纯病因性脓毒症治疗比脓毒症的自然发展更会恶化预后,而病因治疗与支持治疗相结合则效果更佳。这凸显了在对抗生素治疗和手术治疗脓毒症病灶的同时,早期血流动力学稳定的重要性。