Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Younger patient age and relatively good prognosis have been described as factors that may increase caregiver motivation in treating patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Objectives: To examine whether clinical teams tended to achieve unnecessarily higher map arterial pressure (MAP) values in younger patients.

Methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of patients presenting with septic shock who were treated with noradrenaline and hospitalized in a general ICU between 2006 and 2018. The patients were classified into four age groups: 18-45 (n=129), 46-60 (n=96), 61-75 (n=157), and older than 75 years (n=173). Adjusted linear mixed models and locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) curves were used to assess associations and potential non-linear relationships, respectively, of age group with MAP and noradrenaline dosage.

Results: The cohort included 555 patients. An inverse relation was observed between average MAP value and age. Among patients aged 18–45 years, the average MAP was 4.7 mmHg higher (95% confidence interval 3.4–5.9) than among patients aged > 75 years (P-value <0.001) after adjustment for sex, death in the intensive care unit, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores.

Conclusions: Among patients with septic shock, the titration of noradrenaline by staff led to a higher average MAP for younger patients. Although the MAP target is equal for all age groups, staff may administer noradrenaline treatment according to a higher target of MAP due to attitudes toward patients of different ages, despite any evidence that such practice is beneficial.

Background: Methylene blue (MB), an inhibitor of nitric oxide synthesis and its effects is a potentially effective treatment against distributive shock states such as septic shock and vasoplegic syndrome. MB has been shown to alleviate vasoplegia and promote an increase in blood pressure. It may reduce mortality. However, in the pediatric population, there are few case reports and only one controlled study on administration of MB use for vasoplegia, sepsis, or shock in general.

Objectives: To summarize the experience of administering MB for vasoplegic shock in a tertiary care pediatric intensive care unit.

Methods: A retrospective chart review of seven pediatric cases treated with MB for vasoplegic shock was conducted. MB was administered as a bolus followed by continuous infusion. The authors measured blood pressure, vasopressor, and inotropic support. Patient outcome was monitored.

Results: The authors observed a favorable hemodynamic response with an increase in blood pressure and a reduction in vasopressor and inotropic support needed following MB administration in six patients. No side effects were observed. Three patients eventually died one to two days later, secondary to their underlying disease.

Conclusions: This case series adds to the small body of evidence in the pediatric population supporting the use of MB for distributive shock states and emphasizes the need for larger, randomized trials evaluating its role in vasoplegic shock treatment.

Objective: To report our experience with terlipressin treatment for facilitation of transport to distant facilities for diagnostic or therapeutic procedures in septic patients treated with norepinephrine.

Methods:  We conducted a retrospective analysis of the records of our ICU[1], identifying the patients with septic shock who required norepinephrine for hemodynamic support.

Results: Terlipressin was given to 30 septic shock patients (15 females and 15 males) who were on high dose norepinephrine (10 μg/min or more) in order to facilitate their transport outside the ICU. The dose of terlipressin ranged from 1 to 4 mg, with a mean of 2.13 ± 0.68 mg. The dose of norepinephrine needed to maintain systolic blood pressure above 100 mmHg decreased following terlipressin administration, from 21.9 ± 10.4 μg/min (range 5–52 μg/min) to 1.0 ± 1.95 (range 0–10) (P < 0.001). No patients required norepinephrine dose adjustment during transport. No serious complications or overshoot in blood pressure values were observed following terlipressin administration. Acrocyanosis occurred only in eight patients receiving more than 1 mg of the drug. The overall mortality rate was 50%.

Conclusions: Our data suggest that terlipressin is effective in septic shock. Because it is long-acting and necessitates less titration it might be indicated for patient transportation.

Sepsis is an inflammatory syndrome caused by infection. Consequently, anti-inflammatory therapies in sepsis have been a subject of extensive research and corticosteroids have been used for years in the therapy of severe infections. However, studies conducted in the 1980s failed to demonstrate any beneficial effects of high dose, short-term steroid therapy in sepsis and this therapy was therefore abandoned during the last decade. Recently, a new concept has emerged with more promising results - low dose, long-term hydrocortisone therapy – and this approach is now being evaluated in the treatment of septic shock. It is supported by the observation that many sepsis patients have relative adrenal insufficiency. Moreover, the anti-inflammatory effects of steroids and their ability to improve reactivity to catecholamines further contribute to their effects in sepsis. Large randomized clinical trials will be required to determine the exact role of corticosteroids in septic shock.