首页> 外文期刊>The annals of pharmacotherapy >Narrative Review of Controversies Involving Vasopressin Use in Septic Shock and Practical Considerations
【24h】

Narrative Review of Controversies Involving Vasopressin Use in Septic Shock and Practical Considerations

机译:涉及脓毒症休克和实践考虑患者的争论争论叙事综述

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objective: To summarize literature evaluating vasopressin use, focusing on clinical controversies regarding initiation, dosing, and discontinuation and interaction of vasopressin with other therapies in septic shock patients. Data Sources: A PubMed English-language literature search (January 2008 to December 2019) was performed using these terms: arginine vasopressin, septic, shock, and sepsis. Citations, including controlled trials, observational studies, review articles, guidelines, and consensus statements, were reviewed. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant clinical data focusing on specific controversial questions regarding the utility of vasopressin in patients with septic shock were narratively summarized. Data Synthesis: Current literature does not strongly support the use of vasopressin as a first-line initial therapy for septic shock. Additionally, there are conflicting data for weight-based dosing of vasopressin in overweight patients. Evidence for vasopressin renal protection and interaction with corticosteroids is minimal. However, vasopressin has the ability to reduce catecholamine requirements in septic shock patients and may provide a mortality benefit in specific subgroups. Discontinuation of vasopressin last, not second to last, in resolving septic shock may reduce hypotension development. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review addresses specific clinical controversies that drive vasopressin use in septic shock patients in real-world practice. Conclusion: Vasopressin should remain second-line adjunct to norepinephrine to augment mean arterial pressures. Dosing should be initiated at 0.03 U/min, and higher doses offer minimal benefit. There are conflicting data on the impact of weight on vasopressin response. Studies have failed to show renal benefit with vasopressin use or an interaction with corticosteroid therapy.
机译:目的:总结文献评估血管加压素使用,专注于脓毒症休克患者其他疗法的启动,给药和中断和血管加压素的临床争论和血管加压素的相互作用。数据来源:使用这些术语进行了PubMed英语文献搜索(2008年1月至2019年12月):精氨酸血管加压素,脓毒症,休克和败血症。综述了引文,包括对照试验,观察研究,审查条款,准则和协商委员会。学习选择和数据提取:关注关于脓毒症休克患者患者患者的患者的特定争议问题的相关临床资料。数据合成:当前文献不强烈支持使用血管加压素作为脓毒症休克的一线初始疗法。另外,在超重患者中存在基于体重的加压素的矛盾的互相存在冲突数据。患者肾脏保护和与皮质类固醇相互作用的证据是最小的。然而,VasoPressin能够减少脓毒症休克患者中的儿茶酚胺要求,并可在特定亚组中提供死亡效益。停止血管加压素最后,而不是第二个,在解决脓毒症休克时可能减少低血压发展。与患者护理和临床实践的相关性:本综述涉及特定的临床竞争,这些临床争议使脓毒症休克患者在现实世界实践中推动血管加压素。结论:血管加压素应保持第二线辅助去甲肾上腺素,以增强平均动脉压力。给药应以0.03 U / min启动,更高的剂量提供最小的益处。关于重量对血管加压素响应的影响有冲突的数据。研究未能表现出肾增压素使用或与皮质类固醇治疗的相互作用表现出肾脏益处。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号