Vasopressin in vasoplegic shock:A systematic review

• 作者: Andrew J Webb Mohamed O Seisa Nathan J Smischney Patrick M Wieruszewski Scott D Nei Tarek Nayfeh
• 来源期刊: 世界重症医学杂志
• 学科: 医学
• 关键词: VASOPRESSINS Shock Vasoactive agents Treatment outcome Vasoplegia Arginine vasopressin
• 年，卷（期）: sjzzyxzz_2020,（5）
• 页码范围: 88-98
• 页数: 11页
• 分类号: R54

摘要

BACKGROUNDVasoplegic shock is a challenging complication of cardiac surgery and is oftenresistant to conventional therapies for shock. Norepinephrine and epinephrine arestandards of care for vasoplegic shock, but vasopressin has increasingly been usedas a primary pressor in vasoplegic shock because of its unique pharmacology andlack of inotropic activity. It remains unclear whether vasopressin has distinctbenefits over standard of care for patients with vasoplegic shock.AIMTo summarize the available literature evaluating vasopressin vs non-vasopressinalternatives on the clinical and patient-centered outcomes of vasoplegic shock inadult intensive care unit (ICU) patients.METHODSThis was a systematic review of vasopressin in adults (≥ 18 years) with vasoplegicshock after cardiac surgery. Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohorts,and retrospective cohorts comparing vasopressin to norepinephrine, epinephrine,methylene blue, hydroxocobalamin, or other pressors were included. The primaryoutcomes of interest were 30-d mortality, atrial/ventricular arrhythmias, stroke,ICU length of stay, duration of vasopressor therapy, incidence of acute kidneyinjury stage II-III, and mechanical ventilation for greater than 48 h.RESULTSA total of 1161 studies were screened for inclusion with 3 meeting inclusioncriteria with a total of 708 patients. Two studies were randomized controlled trials and one was a retrospective cohort study. Primary outcomes of 30-d mortality,stroke, ventricular arrhythmias, and duration of mechanical ventilation weresimilar between groups. Conflicting results were observed for acute kidney injurystage II-III, atrial arrhythmias, duration of vasopressors, and ICU length of staywith higher certainty of evidence in favor of vasopressin serving a protective rolefor these outcomes.CONCLUSIONVasopressin was not found to be superior to alternative pressor therapy for any ofthe included outcomes. Results are limited by mixed methodologies, small overallsample size, and heterogenous populations.