-
Something wrong with this record ?
Mechanical Circulatory Support in Refractory Vasodilatory Septic Shock: a Randomized Controlled Porcine Study
J. Chvojka, V. Martinkova, J. Benes, L. Valesova, V. Danihel, L. Nalos, M. Matejovic
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Energy Metabolism physiology MeSH
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation * MeSH
- Swine MeSH
- Shock, Septic metabolism physiopathology MeSH
- Inflammation metabolism physiopathology MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
As controversy persists regarding the benefits of mechanical circulatory support in septic shock with a predominantly vasoplegic phenotype, preclinical studies may provide a useful alternative to fill the actual knowledge gap. Here, we investigated the physiologic responses to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (VA-ECMO) in a clinically relevant porcine peritonitis-induced model of refractory vasodilatory septic shock. In 12 anesthetized, mechanically ventilated, and instrumented domestic pigs, septic shock was induced by intraperitoneally inoculating autologous feces. After reaching the threshold for refractory vasodilatory shock (norepinephrine dose ≥1 μg/kg/min), the pigs were randomized into the conservative treatment group (control) or the VA-ECMO group (target flow 100 mL/kg/min). The time to develop refractory vasodilatory shock was similar in both groups (18.8 h in the ECMO group, 18.1 h in the control group). There was no difference between the groups in terms of time to death measured from the point of reaching the predefined vasopressor threshold (7.1 h for the ECMO group, 7.9 h for the control group). The initiation of ECMO resulted in a markedly increased fluid and vasopressor support. Although treatment with ECMO compromised neither renal nor carotid blood flow initially, both progressively decreased later during the experiment. The pattern of sepsis-induced multiorgan injury, alterations in energy metabolism, and the systemic inflammatory response were remarkably similar between both groups. In conclusion, the application of VA-ECMO in this model of peritonitis-induced refractory vasodilatory septic shock aggravated hemodynamic deterioration. Our findings contribute to increasing equipoise with respect to the clinical utility of VA-ECMO in refractory vasodilatory shock.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc21013005
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20240104084752.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 210420s2020 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001329 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)30807527
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Chvojka, Jiri $u First Medical Department, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Teaching Hospital Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic ; Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Mechanical Circulatory Support in Refractory Vasodilatory Septic Shock: a Randomized Controlled Porcine Study / $c J. Chvojka, V. Martinkova, J. Benes, L. Valesova, V. Danihel, L. Nalos, M. Matejovic
- 520 9_
- $a As controversy persists regarding the benefits of mechanical circulatory support in septic shock with a predominantly vasoplegic phenotype, preclinical studies may provide a useful alternative to fill the actual knowledge gap. Here, we investigated the physiologic responses to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (VA-ECMO) in a clinically relevant porcine peritonitis-induced model of refractory vasodilatory septic shock. In 12 anesthetized, mechanically ventilated, and instrumented domestic pigs, septic shock was induced by intraperitoneally inoculating autologous feces. After reaching the threshold for refractory vasodilatory shock (norepinephrine dose ≥1 μg/kg/min), the pigs were randomized into the conservative treatment group (control) or the VA-ECMO group (target flow 100 mL/kg/min). The time to develop refractory vasodilatory shock was similar in both groups (18.8 h in the ECMO group, 18.1 h in the control group). There was no difference between the groups in terms of time to death measured from the point of reaching the predefined vasopressor threshold (7.1 h for the ECMO group, 7.9 h for the control group). The initiation of ECMO resulted in a markedly increased fluid and vasopressor support. Although treatment with ECMO compromised neither renal nor carotid blood flow initially, both progressively decreased later during the experiment. The pattern of sepsis-induced multiorgan injury, alterations in energy metabolism, and the systemic inflammatory response were remarkably similar between both groups. In conclusion, the application of VA-ECMO in this model of peritonitis-induced refractory vasodilatory septic shock aggravated hemodynamic deterioration. Our findings contribute to increasing equipoise with respect to the clinical utility of VA-ECMO in refractory vasodilatory shock.
- 650 _2
- $a zvířata $7 D000818
- 650 _2
- $a energetický metabolismus $x fyziologie $7 D004734
- 650 12
- $a mimotělní membránová oxygenace $7 D015199
- 650 _2
- $a zánět $x metabolismus $x patofyziologie $7 D007249
- 650 _2
- $a septický šok $x metabolismus $x patofyziologie $7 D012772
- 650 _2
- $a prasata $7 D013552
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Martinkova, Vendula $u Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic ; Third Department of Surgery, Motol University Hospital and First Medical School, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Benes, Jan $u Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic ; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Teaching Hospital Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Valesova, Lenka $u First Medical Department, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Teaching Hospital Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic ; Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Danihel, Vojtěch $u First Medical Department, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Teaching Hospital Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic ; Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic $7 xx0312256
- 700 1_
- $a Nalos, Lukas $u Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Matejovic, Martin $u First Medical Department, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Teaching Hospital Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic ; Experimental Intensive Care Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00158650 $t Shock $x 1540-0514 $g Roč. 53, č. 1 (2020), s. 124-131
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30807527 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20210420 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20240104084746 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1651234 $s 1133384
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2020 $b 53 $c 1 $d 124-131 $e - $i 1540-0514 $m Shock $n Shock $x MED00158650
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20210420
