Castro Ricardo, Kattan Eduardo, Ferri Giorgio, Pairumani Ronald, Valenzuela Emilio Daniel, Alegría Leyla, Oviedo Vanessa, Pavez Nicolás, Soto Dagoberto, Vera Magdalena, Santis César, Astudillo Brusela, Cid María Alicia, Bravo Sebastian, Ospina-Tascón Gustavo, Bakker Jan, Hernández Glenn
Departamento de Medicina Intensiva, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Diagonal Paraguay 362, Santiago, Chile.
Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital Barros Luco-Trudeau, Santiago, Chile.
Ann Intensive Care. 2020 Nov 2;10(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s13613-020-00767-4.
Persistent hyperlactatemia has been considered as a signal of tissue hypoperfusion in septic shock patients, but multiple non-hypoperfusion-related pathogenic mechanisms could be involved. Therefore, pursuing lactate normalization may lead to the risk of fluid overload. Peripheral perfusion, assessed by the capillary refill time (CRT), could be an effective alternative resuscitation target as recently demonstrated by the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial. We designed the present randomized controlled trial to address the impact of a CRT-targeted (CRT-T) vs. a lactate-targeted (LAC-T) fluid resuscitation strategy on fluid balances within 24 h of septic shock diagnosis. In addition, we compared the effects of both strategies on organ dysfunction, regional and microcirculatory flow, and tissue hypoxia surrogates.
Forty-two fluid-responsive septic shock patients were randomized into CRT-T or LAC-T groups. Fluids were administered until target achievement during the 6 h intervention period, or until safety criteria were met. CRT-T was aimed at CRT normalization (≤ 3 s), whereas in LAC-T the goal was lactate normalization (≤ 2 mmol/L) or a 20% decrease every 2 h. Multimodal perfusion monitoring included sublingual microcirculatory assessment; plasma-disappearance rate of indocyanine green; muscle oxygen saturation; central venous-arterial pCO gradient/ arterial-venous O content difference ratio; and lactate/pyruvate ratio. There was no difference between CRT-T vs. LAC-T in 6 h-fluid boluses (875 [375-2625] vs. 1500 [1000-2000], p = 0.3), or balances (982[249-2833] vs. 15,800 [740-6587, p = 0.2]). CRT-T was associated with a higher achievement of the predefined perfusion target (62 vs. 24, p = 0.03). No significant differences in perfusion-related variables or hypoxia surrogates were observed.
CRT-targeted fluid resuscitation was not superior to a lactate-targeted one on fluid administration or balances. However, it was associated with comparable effects on regional and microcirculatory flow parameters and hypoxia surrogates, and a faster achievement of the predefined resuscitation target. Our data suggest that stopping fluids in patients with CRT ≤ 3 s appears as safe in terms of tissue perfusion. Clinical Trials: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03762005 (Retrospectively registered on December 3rd 2018).
持续性高乳酸血症一直被视为脓毒性休克患者组织灌注不足的信号,但可能涉及多种与灌注不足无关的致病机制。因此,追求乳酸水平正常化可能会导致液体超负荷的风险。如最近的ANDROMEDA-SHOCK试验所示,通过毛细血管再充盈时间(CRT)评估的外周灌注可能是一种有效的替代复苏目标。我们设计了本随机对照试验,以探讨以CRT为目标(CRT-T)与以乳酸为目标(LAC-T)的液体复苏策略对脓毒性休克诊断后24小时内液体平衡的影响。此外,我们比较了两种策略对器官功能障碍、区域和微循环血流以及组织缺氧替代指标的影响。
42例有液体反应性的脓毒性休克患者被随机分为CRT-T组或LAC-T组。在6小时的干预期内,持续给予液体直至达到目标,或直至符合安全标准。CRT-T的目标是使CRT正常化(≤3秒),而在LAC-T中,目标是使乳酸正常化(≤2 mmol/L)或每2小时降低20%。多模式灌注监测包括舌下微循环评估;吲哚菁绿的血浆消失率;肌肉氧饱和度;中心静脉-动脉pCO₂梯度/动静脉氧含量差比值;以及乳酸/丙酮酸比值。CRT-T组与LAC-T组在6小时液体推注量(875 [375-2625] 对1500 [1000-2000],p = 0.3)或液体平衡方面(982 [249-2833] 对15800 [740-6587],p = 0.2)没有差异。CRT-T与更高的预定义灌注目标达成率相关(62对24,p = 0.03)。在灌注相关变量或缺氧替代指标方面未观察到显著差异。
在液体输注或液体平衡方面,以CRT为目标的液体复苏并不优于以乳酸为目标的复苏。然而,它对区域和微循环血流参数以及缺氧替代指标的影响相当,并且能更快地达到预定义的复苏目标。我们的数据表明,对于组织灌注而言,在CRT≤3秒的患者中停止输液似乎是安全的。临床试验:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT03762005(于2018年12月3日追溯注册)。