Obeidalla Sarah N, Bernard Gordon R, Ware Lorraine B, Kerchberger V Eric
Department of Medicine (S. N. O., G. R. B., L. B. W., and V. E. K.), the Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology (L. B. W.), and the Department of Biomedical Informatics (V. E. K.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
CHEST Crit Care. 2025 Mar;3(1). doi: 10.1016/j.chstcc.2024.100118. Epub 2024 Dec 10.
The Ibuprofen in Sepsis Study (ISS) randomized trial found no difference in duration of shock, ARDS, or mortality with ibuprofen treatment for sepsis. However, higher use of acetaminophen, a known hemoprotein reductant with potentially beneficial effects in sepsis, as an antipyretic in the control arm may have masked the clinical benefits from either drug.
Does an association exist between administration of acetaminophen and clinical outcomes in adults with sepsis?
We performed a retrospective propensity-matched analysis of the previously reported ISS trial. We created a propensity score for receiving acetaminophen during the first 2 study days using sex, age, presence of shock at enrollment, trial study drug assignment (ibuprofen or placebo), febrile status at enrollment, need for mechanical ventilation, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score at enrollment, and then matched trial participants 1:1 into acetaminophen-exposed and acetaminophen-unexposed groups based on their propensity scores. We tested the association between receipt of acetaminophen with 30-day mortality as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included development of renal failure and ventilator-free days (VFDs).
Of 455 patients in the original trial, 276 patients (61%) were matched into acetaminophen-exposed and acetaminophen-unexposed groups. In the propensity-matched analysis, we found a lower mortality among acetaminophen-exposed patients compared with acetaminophen-unexposed patients (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84; = .004). Additionally, acetaminophen-exposed patients experienced more days alive and free of mechanical ventilation compared with the acetaminophen-unexposed patients (OR, 2.09 for having 19-28 VFDs vs 0 or 1-18 VFDs; 95% CI, 1.12-3.95; = .02). We observed no significant association between renal failure and receipt of acetaminophen.
In this propensity-matched retrospective analysis, adults with sepsis who received acetaminophen showed decreased mortality and more days alive and free of mechanical ventilation. This study highlights the potential of acetaminophen as a modulator of outcomes in sepsis and warrants further investigation.
布洛芬治疗脓毒症的研究(ISS)随机试验发现,使用布洛芬治疗脓毒症在休克持续时间、急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)或死亡率方面并无差异。然而,在对照组中,对乙酰氨基酚(一种已知的血红蛋白还原剂,在脓毒症中可能具有有益作用)作为退烧药的使用频率较高,这可能掩盖了两种药物的临床益处。
在成年脓毒症患者中,对乙酰氨基酚的使用与临床结局之间是否存在关联?
我们对先前报道的ISS试验进行了回顾性倾向匹配分析。我们使用性别、年龄、入组时是否存在休克、试验研究药物分配(布洛芬或安慰剂)、入组时的发热状态、机械通气需求以及入组时的急性生理与慢性健康状况评分II,为前两个研究日接受对乙酰氨基酚治疗创建了一个倾向评分,然后根据倾向评分将试验参与者1:1匹配到对乙酰氨基酚暴露组和非暴露组。我们以30天死亡率作为主要结局,测试了对乙酰氨基酚的使用与该结局之间的关联。次要结局包括肾衰竭的发生和无呼吸机天数(VFDs)。
在原始试验的455例患者中,276例患者(61%)被匹配到对乙酰氨基酚暴露组和非暴露组。在倾向匹配分析中,我们发现对乙酰氨基酚暴露组患者的死亡率低于非暴露组患者(风险比,0.58;95%置信区间,0.40 - 0.84;P = 0.004)。此外,与非暴露组患者相比,对乙酰氨基酚暴露组患者存活且无需机械通气的天数更多(对于有19 - 28个VFDs与0个或1 - 18个VFDs,优势比为2.09;95%置信区间,1.12 - 3.95;P = 0.02)。我们未观察到肾衰竭与对乙酰氨基酚的使用之间存在显著关联。
在这项倾向匹配的回顾性分析中,接受对乙酰氨基酚治疗的成年脓毒症患者死亡率降低,存活且无需机械通气的天数更多。本研究突出了对乙酰氨基酚作为脓毒症结局调节因子的潜力,值得进一步研究。