Ultra-early versus early adjunctive vasopressin initiation after norepinephrine escalation in septic shock: a target trial emulation.

IF 22 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Intensive Care Medicine Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-11 DOI:10.1007/s00134-026-08575-3
Takaya Nakashima, Taiga Ichinomiya, Mikio Nakajima, Tomohiro Shinozaki, Junichiro Shibata, Tadahiro Goto, Shuntaro Sato, Tetsuya Hara
{"title":"Ultra-early versus early adjunctive vasopressin initiation after norepinephrine escalation in septic shock: a target trial emulation.","authors":"Takaya Nakashima, Taiga Ichinomiya, Mikio Nakajima, Tomohiro Shinozaki, Junichiro Shibata, Tadahiro Goto, Shuntaro Sato, Tetsuya Hara","doi":"10.1007/s00134-026-08575-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The optimal timing of adjunctive vasopressin after norepinephrine escalation in septic shock remains uncertain. We emulated a target trial comparing ultra-early vasopressin initiation within 0-3 h with early initiation within > 3-6 h after the norepinephrine infusion rate reached 0.25 μg/kg/min or higher.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We emulated a target trial using electronic health record databases (MIMIC-IV 2008-2022 and eICU-CRD 2014-2015). Adults with septic shock who reached the norepinephrine threshold before vasopressin use were eligible. We used the clone-censor-weight method to estimate cumulative incidence curves under the ultra-early and early initiation strategies and compared them via the weighted Cox model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 3810 eligible patients, after cloning, 744 clones adhered to the ultra-early strategy and 293 clones adhered to the early strategy. The weighted 28-day mortality risk was 48.1% under the ultra-early strategy and 53.0% under the early strategy (risk difference, - 5.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 6.8 to - 3.2), with a restricted mean survival time difference of 1.58 days (95% CI 1.21-1.92) and a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.85). Ultra-early initiation was associated with lower renal replacement therapy (HR, 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74), continuous renal replacement therapy (HR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.55-0.68), and medically treated arrhythmia (HR, 0.91; 95% CI 0.83-0.99), but not with lower acute kidney injury.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among adults with septic shock whose norepinephrine infusion reached 0.25 μg/kg/min or higher before vasopressin use, vasopressin initiation within 0-3 h was associated with lower 28-day mortality than initiation within > 3-6 h.</p>","PeriodicalId":13665,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2085-2095"},"PeriodicalIF":22.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-026-08575-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The optimal timing of adjunctive vasopressin after norepinephrine escalation in septic shock remains uncertain. We emulated a target trial comparing ultra-early vasopressin initiation within 0-3 h with early initiation within > 3-6 h after the norepinephrine infusion rate reached 0.25 μg/kg/min or higher.

Methods: We emulated a target trial using electronic health record databases (MIMIC-IV 2008-2022 and eICU-CRD 2014-2015). Adults with septic shock who reached the norepinephrine threshold before vasopressin use were eligible. We used the clone-censor-weight method to estimate cumulative incidence curves under the ultra-early and early initiation strategies and compared them via the weighted Cox model.

Results: Among 3810 eligible patients, after cloning, 744 clones adhered to the ultra-early strategy and 293 clones adhered to the early strategy. The weighted 28-day mortality risk was 48.1% under the ultra-early strategy and 53.0% under the early strategy (risk difference, - 5.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 6.8 to - 3.2), with a restricted mean survival time difference of 1.58 days (95% CI 1.21-1.92) and a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.85). Ultra-early initiation was associated with lower renal replacement therapy (HR, 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74), continuous renal replacement therapy (HR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.55-0.68), and medically treated arrhythmia (HR, 0.91; 95% CI 0.83-0.99), but not with lower acute kidney injury.

Conclusions: Among adults with septic shock whose norepinephrine infusion reached 0.25 μg/kg/min or higher before vasopressin use, vasopressin initiation within 0-3 h was associated with lower 28-day mortality than initiation within > 3-6 h.

感染性休克患者去甲肾上腺素升高后超早期与早期辅助抗利尿激素启动:一项目标试验模拟。
目的:脓毒性休克患者去甲肾上腺素升高后辅助抗利尿激素的最佳时机仍不确定。我们模拟了一项靶标试验,比较了去甲肾上腺素输注速率达到或高于0.25 μg/kg/min后,超早期抗利尿激素在0-3 h内启动与在3-6 h内早期启动。方法:我们使用电子健康记录数据库(MIMIC-IV 2008-2022和eICU-CRD 2014-2015)模拟了一项目标试验。在使用抗利尿激素前达到去甲肾上腺素阈值的脓毒性休克成人符合条件。采用克隆-筛选-权重方法估计了超早和早期启动策略下的累积发生率曲线,并通过加权Cox模型进行了比较。结果:3810例符合条件的患者中,克隆后坚持超早期策略的克隆有744个,坚持早期策略的克隆有293个。超早期策略下加权28天死亡风险为48.1%,早期策略下为53.0%(风险差异为- 5.0个百分点;95%可信区间[CI] - 6.8至- 3.2),限制平均生存时间差异为1.58天(95% CI 1.21-1.92),风险比(HR)为0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.85)。超早期开始与较低的肾脏替代治疗(HR, 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74)、持续的肾脏替代治疗(HR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.55-0.68)和药物治疗的心律失常(HR, 0.91; 95% CI 0.83-0.99)相关,但与较低的急性肾损伤无关。结论:在使用抗利尿激素前去甲肾上腺素输注量达到或高于0.25 μg/kg/min的感染性休克成人中,0-3 h内开始使用抗利尿激素比3-6 h内开始使用抗利尿激素的28天死亡率低。
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
Intensive Care Medicine
Intensive Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
51.50
自引率
2.80%
发文量
326
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Intensive Care Medicine is the premier publication platform fostering the communication and exchange of cutting-edge research and ideas within the field of intensive care medicine on a comprehensive scale. Catering to professionals involved in intensive medical care, including intensivists, medical specialists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals, ICM stands as the official journal of The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. ICM is dedicated to advancing the understanding and practice of intensive care medicine among professionals in Europe and beyond. The journal provides a robust platform for disseminating current research findings and innovative ideas in intensive care medicine. Content published in Intensive Care Medicine encompasses a wide range, including review articles, original research papers, letters, reviews, debates, and more.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书