Suppr超能文献

氢化可的松与血管加压素治疗去甲肾上腺素抵抗性脓毒性休克成年患者的比较:一项多中心回顾性研究。

Hydrocortisone versus vasopressin for the management of adult patients with septic shock refractory to norepinephrine: A multicenter retrospective study.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Ascension St. John Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.

Department of Pharmacy, Ascension St Vincent's Riverside Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.

出版信息

Pharmacotherapy. 2023 Aug;43(8):787-794. doi: 10.1002/phar.2811. Epub 2023 May 19.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Significant practice variation exists when selecting between hydrocortisone and vasopressin as second line agents in patients with septic shock in need of escalating doses of norepinephrine. The goal of this study was to assess differences in clinical outcomes between these two agents.

DESIGN

Multicenter, retrospective, observational study.

SETTING

Ten Ascension Health hospitals.

PATIENTS

Adult patients with presumed septic shock receiving norepinephrine prior to study drug initiation between December 2015 and August 2021.

INTERVENTION

Vasopressin (0.03-0.04 units/min) or hydrocortisone (200-300 mg/day).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 768 patients were included with a median (interquartile range) SOFA score of 10 (8-13), norepinephrine dose of 0.3 mcg/kg/min (0.1-0.5 mcg/kg/min), and lactate of 3.8 mmol/L (2.4-7.0 mmol/L) at initiation of the study drug. A significant difference in 28-day mortality was noted favoring hydrocortisone as an adjunct to norepinephrine after controlling for potential confounding factors (OR 0.46 [95% CI, 0.32-0.66]); similar results were seen following propensity score matching. Compared to vasopressin, hydrocortisone initiation was also associated with a higher rate of hemodynamic responsiveness (91.9% vs. 68.2%, p < 0.01), improved resolution of shock (68.8% vs. 31.5%, p < 0.01), and reduced recurrence of shock within 72 h (8.7% vs. 20.7%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of hydrocortisone to norepinephrine was associated with a lower 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock, compared to the addition of vasopressin.

摘要

研究目的

在需要逐渐增加去甲肾上腺素剂量的脓毒性休克患者中,选择氢化可的松和血管加压素作为二线药物时,存在显著的实践差异。本研究的目的是评估这两种药物之间临床结局的差异。

设计

多中心、回顾性、观察性研究。

地点

十个 Ascension Health 医院。

患者

2015 年 12 月至 2021 年 8 月期间接受去甲肾上腺素治疗前开始使用研究药物的疑似脓毒性休克的成年患者。

干预措施

血管加压素(0.03-0.04 单位/分钟)或氢化可的松(200-300mg/天)。

测量和主要结果

共纳入 768 例患者,中位(四分位距)SOFA 评分为 10 分(8-13 分),去甲肾上腺素剂量为 0.3μg/kg/min(0.1-0.5μg/kg/min),研究药物起始时乳酸水平为 3.8mmol/L(2.4-7.0mmol/L)。在控制潜在混杂因素后,与去甲肾上腺素联合使用氢化可的松治疗 28 天死亡率有显著差异(优势比 0.46[95%可信区间,0.32-0.66]);在倾向评分匹配后也得到了类似的结果。与血管加压素相比,氢化可的松起始治疗还与更高的血流动力学反应率(91.9%比 68.2%,p<0.01)、休克缓解率提高(68.8%比 31.5%,p<0.01)以及 72 小时内休克再发率降低(8.7%比 20.7%,p<0.01)相关。

结论

与血管加压素相比,在脓毒性休克患者中,去甲肾上腺素联合氢化可的松治疗与 28 天死亡率降低相关。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验