Hayes M A, Timmins A C, Yau E H, Palazzo M, Watson D, Hinds C J
Department of Anaesthesia, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
Crit Care Med. 1997 Jun;25(6):926-36. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199706000-00007.
To investigate the relationship between oxygen transport patterns and outcome in patients with sepsis syndrome or septic shock managed according to two different treatment regimens.
Retrospective study of a subgroup of patients with sepsis syndrome or septic shock taken from a randomized, prospective, controlled trial.
General intensive care units in a teaching and a district general hospital.
Seventy-eight patients classified according to predetermined criteria as having sepsis syndrome or septic shock were drawn retrospectively from a larger study group of 109 consecutive patients considered to be at risk for developing multiple organ failure.
All patients received volume expansion to an optimal pulmonary artery occlusion pressure. If the therapeutic goals (cardiac index of > 4.5 L/min/m2, oxygen delivery [DO2] of > 600 mL/min/m2, and oxygen consumption [VO2] of > 170 mL/min/m2) were not achieved with fluids alone, patients were randomized to either a control group or a treatment group. In the treatment group, dobutamine (5 to 200 micrograms/kg/min) was administered to increase cardiac index and DO2 until all three goals were simultaneously achieved. In the control group, dobutamine was administered only if the cardiac index was < 2.8 L/min/m2. In both groups, norepinephrine was infused to maintain mean arterial pressure at 80 mm Hg.
Hemodynamic, oxygen transport, and lactate measurements were made at the time of admission to the study, at the time of optimal volume administration, at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 hrs, then every 6 hrs for the next 24 hrs, and at least every 8 hrs thereafter. The time at which all therapeutic goals were first achieved simultaneously or the time of maximal DO2 was identified and termed "tmax." Survivors from both the control and treatment groups significantly (p < .001) increased cardiac index and DO2 in response to maximal resuscitation, and despite an associated decrease in oxygen extraction (p < .01), there was a significant (p < .01) increase in VO2. In nonsurvivors from both groups, despite significant increases in cardiac index (p < .05) and DO2 (p < .01) at tmax, oxygen extraction decreased (p < .01) and VO2 remained unchanged. DO2 and VO2 were significantly lower (p < .05) at tmax in nonsurvivors than in survivors from both groups. Persistently high lactate concentrations were characteristic of nonsurvivors.
Survivors of sepsis syndrome or septic shock are characterized by an ability to increase both DO2 and VO2. In contrast, nonsurvivors typically have reduced cardiac reserve, they fail to increase VO2 following resuscitation, and when delivery is enhanced with aggressive inotropic support, oxygen extraction falls. These patterns of response were similar in both treatment and control groups, although the magnitude of the changes was exaggerated in the treatment group. These observations may help to explain the findings by some investigators that treatment aimed at achieving survivor values of cardiac index, DO2, and VO2 fails to improve outcome when instituted following admission to intensive care.
探讨根据两种不同治疗方案管理的脓毒症综合征或脓毒性休克患者的氧输送模式与预后之间的关系。
对取自一项随机、前瞻性、对照试验的脓毒症综合征或脓毒性休克患者亚组进行回顾性研究。
一所教学医院和一所地区综合医院的普通重症监护病房。
根据预定标准分类为患有脓毒症综合征或脓毒性休克的78例患者,是从一个由109例连续患者组成的更大研究组中回顾性抽取的,这些患者被认为有发生多器官功能衰竭的风险。
所有患者均接受容量扩充,以使肺动脉闭塞压达到最佳值。如果仅通过补液未达到治疗目标(心脏指数>4.5L/(min·m²)、氧输送量[DO₂]>600mL/(min·m²)和氧耗量[VO₂]>170mL/(min·m²)),则将患者随机分为对照组或治疗组。治疗组给予多巴酚丁胺(5至200μg/(kg·min))以增加心脏指数和DO₂,直至同时达到所有三个目标。对照组仅在心脏指数<2.8L/(min·m²)时给予多巴酚丁胺。两组均输注去甲肾上腺素以维持平均动脉压在80mmHg。
在研究入组时、最佳容量给药时、1、2、4、8、12、16、20和24小时时进行血流动力学、氧输送和乳酸测量,然后在接下来的24小时内每6小时测量一次,此后至少每8小时测量一次。确定首次同时达到所有治疗目标的时间或最大DO₂的时间,并将其称为“tmax”。对照组和治疗组的幸存者在最大复苏后心脏指数和DO₂均显著(p<0.001)增加,尽管氧摄取相关下降(p<0.01),但VO₂仍显著(p<0.01)增加。两组非幸存者在tmax时尽管心脏指数(p<0.05)和DO₂(p<0.01)显著增加,但氧摄取下降(p<0.01)且VO₂保持不变。非幸存者在tmax时的DO₂和VO₂显著低于(p<0.05)两组的幸存者。持续高乳酸浓度是非幸存者的特征。
脓毒症综合征或脓毒性休克的幸存者的特征是能够增加DO₂和VO₂。相比之下,非幸存者通常心脏储备降低,复苏后VO₂未能增加,并且当通过积极的强心支持提高输送量时,氧摄取下降。治疗组和对照组的这些反应模式相似,尽管变化幅度在治疗组中更大。这些观察结果可能有助于解释一些研究人员的发现,即旨在达到幸存者心脏指数、DO₂和VO₂值的治疗在重症监护病房入院后实施时并不能改善预后。