Ram Ganesh Kumar, Shekhar Saurav, Singh Raj Bahadur, Anand Ravi, De Ranjeet Rana, Kumar Nitin
Department of Trauma and Emergency (Anaesthesiology), Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, Bihar, India.
Anesth Essays Res. 2022 Jul-Sep;16(3):321-325. doi: 10.4103/aer.aer_115_22. Epub 2022 Dec 9.
Hydrocortisone showed an important role in reversal of shock when added to standard therapy in managing septic shock. Hyperglycemia is one of the most common side effects associated with corticosteroid treatment.
This study aimed to evaluate the risk of hyperglycemia of intermittent hydrocortisone boluses versus continuous infusion in septic shock patients.
This was a prospective randomized controlled study conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital.
One hundred and forty patients with septic shock and who received noradrenaline were enrolled in this randomized study. Group 1 was intermittent bolus hydrocortisone group ( = 70) and Group 2 was continuous infusion group ( = 70). All patients who were admitted with septic shock and who received noradrenaline and hydrocortisone were included in the study. Those patients who had exceeded 200 mg per day of hydrocortisone were excluded from the study. The primary outcome of the study was mean blood glucose.
Qualitative variables were compared between the two groups with the Chi-square of the Fisher's exact test and continuous variables were compared using the Student's -test or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
Out of 112 patients, 54 patients received hydrocortisone as intermittent boluses (48.2%), and 58 patients (51.8%) received continuous infusion. For the primary outcome, no statistically or clinically significant difference was found in the blood glucose estimated marginal mean: 154.44 mg.dL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 144.18-166.88) in the bolus group and 160.2 mg.dL (95% CI: 143.82-176.76) in the infusion group with a mean difference of 05.76 mg.dL (95% CI: -13.86-25.38). For the secondary outcomes of the study, no difference was found between the two groups in hyperglycemic or hypoglycemic events, mortality, length of stay in intensive care unit, and reversal of shock.
The risk of hyperglycemia is almost equal in both intermittent and continuous infusions of hydrocortisone in septic shock patients.
在脓毒性休克的标准治疗中加用氢化可的松时,其在逆转休克方面发挥了重要作用。高血糖是与皮质类固醇治疗相关的最常见副作用之一。
本研究旨在评估脓毒性休克患者中,间歇性大剂量注射氢化可的松与持续输注相比导致高血糖的风险。
这是一项在三级护理教学医院进行的前瞻性随机对照研究。
140例脓毒性休克且接受去甲肾上腺素治疗的患者纳入本随机研究。第1组为间歇性大剂量注射氢化可的松组(n = 70),第2组为持续输注组(n = 70)。所有因脓毒性休克入院且接受去甲肾上腺素和氢化可的松治疗的患者均纳入研究。氢化可的松每日用量超过200mg的患者被排除在研究之外。研究的主要结局指标是平均血糖。
定性变量采用卡方检验或Fisher精确检验在两组间进行比较,连续变量采用Student's t检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验进行比较。
112例患者中,54例患者接受间歇性大剂量注射氢化可的松治疗(48.2%),58例患者(51.8%)接受持续输注治疗。对于主要结局指标,在估计的边缘均值血糖方面未发现统计学或临床显著差异:大剂量注射组为154.44mg/dL(95%置信区间[CI]:144.18 - 166.88),输注组为160.2mg/dL(95%CI:143.82 - 176.76),平均差异为 - 5.76mg/dL(95%CI: - 13.86 - 25.38)。对于该研究的次要结局指标,两组在高血糖或低血糖事件、死亡率、重症监护病房住院时间以及休克逆转方面均未发现差异。
在脓毒性休克患者中,间歇性和持续输注氢化可的松导致高血糖的风险几乎相等。