Fluid boluses and infusions in the early phase of resuscitation from septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension: a retrospective report and outcome analysis from a tertiary hospital.

IF 5.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Antonio Messina, Marco Albini, Nicolò Samuelli, Andrea Brunati, Elena Costantini, Giulia Lionetti, Marta Lubian, Massimiliano Greco, Guia Margherita Matronola, Fabio Piccirillo, Daniel De Backer, Jean Louis Teboul, Maurizio Cecconi
{"title":"Fluid boluses and infusions in the early phase of resuscitation from septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension: a retrospective report and outcome analysis from a tertiary hospital.","authors":"Antonio Messina, Marco Albini, Nicolò Samuelli, Andrea Brunati, Elena Costantini, Giulia Lionetti, Marta Lubian, Massimiliano Greco, Guia Margherita Matronola, Fabio Piccirillo, Daniel De Backer, Jean Louis Teboul, Maurizio Cecconi","doi":"10.1186/s13613-024-01347-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fluid administration is the first line treatment in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis and septic shock. While fluid boluses administration can be titrated by predicting preload dependency, the amount of other forms of fluids may be more complex to be evaluated. We conducted a retrospective analysis in a tertiary hospital, to assess the ratio between fluids given as boluses and total administered fluid intake during early phases of ICU stay, and to evaluate the impact of fluid strategy on ICU mortality. Data related to fluid administration during the first four days of ICU stay were exported from an electronic health records system (ICCA®, Philips Healthcare). Demographic data, severity score, norepinephrine dose at ICU admission, overall fluid balance and the percentage of different fluid components of the overall volume administered were included in a multivariable logistic regression model, evaluating the association with ICU survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 220 patients admitted with septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension from 1st July 2021 to 31st December 2023. Fluid boluses and maintenance represented 49.3% ± 22.8 of the overall fluid intake, being balanced solution the most represented (40.4% ± 22.0). The fluid volume for drug infusion represented 34.0% ± 2.9 of the total fluid intake, while oral or via nasogastric tube fluid intake represented 18.0% ± 15.7 of the total fluid intake. Fluid volume given as boluses represented 8.6% of the total fluid intake over the four days, with a reduction from 25.1% ± 24.0 on Day 1 to 4.8% ± 8.7 on Day 4. A positive fluid balance [OR 1.167 (1.029-1.341); p = 0.021] was the most important factor associated with ICU mortality. Non-survivors (n = 66; 30%) received a higher amount of overall inputs than survivors only on Day 1 [2493 mL vs. 1855 mL; p = 0.022].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This retrospective analysis of fluids given over the early phases of septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension showed that the overall volume given by boluses ranges from about 25% on Day 1 to about 5% on Day 4 from ICU admission. Our data confirms that a positive fluid balance over the first 4 days of ICU is associated with mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":7966,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Intensive Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11327232/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-024-01347-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Fluid administration is the first line treatment in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis and septic shock. While fluid boluses administration can be titrated by predicting preload dependency, the amount of other forms of fluids may be more complex to be evaluated. We conducted a retrospective analysis in a tertiary hospital, to assess the ratio between fluids given as boluses and total administered fluid intake during early phases of ICU stay, and to evaluate the impact of fluid strategy on ICU mortality. Data related to fluid administration during the first four days of ICU stay were exported from an electronic health records system (ICCA®, Philips Healthcare). Demographic data, severity score, norepinephrine dose at ICU admission, overall fluid balance and the percentage of different fluid components of the overall volume administered were included in a multivariable logistic regression model, evaluating the association with ICU survival.

Results: We analyzed 220 patients admitted with septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension from 1st July 2021 to 31st December 2023. Fluid boluses and maintenance represented 49.3% ± 22.8 of the overall fluid intake, being balanced solution the most represented (40.4% ± 22.0). The fluid volume for drug infusion represented 34.0% ± 2.9 of the total fluid intake, while oral or via nasogastric tube fluid intake represented 18.0% ± 15.7 of the total fluid intake. Fluid volume given as boluses represented 8.6% of the total fluid intake over the four days, with a reduction from 25.1% ± 24.0 on Day 1 to 4.8% ± 8.7 on Day 4. A positive fluid balance [OR 1.167 (1.029-1.341); p = 0.021] was the most important factor associated with ICU mortality. Non-survivors (n = 66; 30%) received a higher amount of overall inputs than survivors only on Day 1 [2493 mL vs. 1855 mL; p = 0.022].

Conclusions: This retrospective analysis of fluids given over the early phases of septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension showed that the overall volume given by boluses ranges from about 25% on Day 1 to about 5% on Day 4 from ICU admission. Our data confirms that a positive fluid balance over the first 4 days of ICU is associated with mortality.

Abstract Image

脓毒性休克和脓毒症引起的低血压复苏早期的栓注和输液:一家三级医院的回顾性报告和结果分析。
背景:输液是重症监护病房(ICU)脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者的一线治疗方法。虽然可以通过预测前负荷依赖性来滴定给药量,但对其他形式的输液量进行评估可能更为复杂。我们在一家三级甲等医院进行了一项回顾性分析,以评估在重症监护病房住院初期以栓剂形式给予的液体与总液体摄入量之间的比例,并评估液体策略对重症监护病房死亡率的影响。从电子病历系统(ICCA®,飞利浦医疗保健公司)中导出了重症监护病房住院头四天的输液相关数据。人口统计学数据、严重程度评分、入院时去甲肾上腺素剂量、总体液体平衡以及不同液体成分占总输液量的百分比被纳入多变量逻辑回归模型,以评估与 ICU 存活率的关系:我们分析了 2021 年 7 月 1 日至 2023 年 12 月 31 日期间收治的 220 例脓毒性休克和脓毒症诱发低血压患者。补充和维持液体占总液体摄入量的 49.3% ± 22.8,其中以平衡溶液最多(40.4% ± 22.0)。输液量占总液体摄入量的 34.0% ± 2.9,而口服或通过鼻胃管输液量占总液体摄入量的 18.0% ± 15.7。四天中,以栓剂形式输入的液体量占总液体摄入量的 8.6%,从第 1 天的 25.1% ± 24.0 降至第 4 天的 4.8% ± 8.7。正的液体平衡[OR 1.167 (1.029-1.341); p = 0.021]是与重症监护室死亡率相关的最重要因素。非幸存者(n = 66;30%)仅在第 1 天获得的总输入量高于幸存者[2493 毫升 vs. 1855 毫升;p = 0.022]:这项对脓毒性休克和脓毒症诱发低血压早期阶段输液情况的回顾性分析表明,从进入重症监护室开始,栓剂输注的总容量从第 1 天的约 25% 到第 4 天的约 5% 不等。我们的数据证实,重症监护室最初 4 天的液体平衡为正值与死亡率有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Intensive Care
Annals of Intensive Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
107
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Intensive Care is an online peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality review articles and original research papers in the field of intensive care medicine. It targets critical care providers including attending physicians, fellows, residents, nurses, and physiotherapists, who aim to enhance their knowledge and provide optimal care for their patients. The journal's articles are included in various prestigious databases such as CAS, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, OCLC, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded, SCOPUS, and Summon by Serial Solutions.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信