The Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines suggest adding arginine vasopressin (AVP) when norepinephrine (NE) doses reach 0.25-0.50 µg/kg/min in septic shock patients. However, relying solely on a NE threshold has limitations, as other factors may be valuable in guiding AVP therapy during septic shock. Therefore, we aimed to identify additional patient characteristics associated with AVP hemodynamic responsiveness.

A multicenter, prospective, observational study was conducted among adult ICU patients who met the predefined criteria for septic shock (not reaching the individual target mean arterial pressure despite adequate fluid resuscitation and NE base dose > 0.25 µg/kg/min) and received AVP therapy. AVP hemodynamic responsiveness was the primary study outcome, defined as stabilization or decrease of NE infusion rate two hours after initiating AVP. Secondary outcomes included shock duration and rebound hypotension following termination of AVP infusion. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed to detect associations between characteristics and outcomes.

Between May 2020 and October 2023, 200 septic shock patients originating from 11 different ICUs were included. Of these, 153 (79%) met the definition for AVP hemodynamic responsiveness. Obesity and hyperlactatemia was negatively associated with AVP-response (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.30, 95%CI 0.14-0.65 and aOR 0.86, 95%CI 0.75-0.99, respectively), while a NE infusion rate ≥ 0.30 µg/kg/min showed positive odds of AVP response (aOR 2.33, 95%CI 1.06-5.14). Incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation was lower in AVP responders than non-responders (4% vs. 14%, p = 0.013). Higher body mass index (BMI) , NE infusion rate and duration prior to AVP initiation was associated with longer shock duration (aOR 1.06, 95%CI 1.02-1.11, aOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.01-1.25, and 1.01 95% CI 1.00-1.03, respectively), while higher pH associated with lower likelihood of prolonged shock (aOR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64-0.99). Rebound hypotension occurred in 9% when AVP was terminated, and AVP duration > 24 h was negatively associated with rebound hypotension (OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.05-0.85).

Arterial lactate, pH, BMI, and NE duration and dose were associated with AVP responsiveness and shock duration during septic shock, and rebound hypotension occurred in 9% during recovery. Our findings suggest that beyond NE thresholds, specific factors could be considered to optimize adjunctive AVP therapy in septic shock patients.

Methylene blue exerts its vasopressor properties by inhibiting nitric oxide-mediated vasodilation. Recent studies have advocated the use of methylene blue as a rescue therapy for patients with septic shock. The primary aim was to investigate the effect of methylene blue on the mean arterial pressure among adult patients with septic shock.

Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from their inception date until October 2023. Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT) comparing methylene blue and placebo in adults with septic shock were included.

Our systematic review included 5 studies (n = 257) for data analysis. As compared to the placebo, our pooled analysis showed that methylene blue significantly increased mean arterial pressure (MD: 1.34 mmHg, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.53, p = 0.03, level of evidence: very low). Patients who were given methylene blue were associated with statistically lower mortality rate (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.88, p = 0.02, level of evidence: low), reduced serum lactate levels (MD: -0.76 mmoL.L-1, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.31, p = 0.0009, level of evidence: low), reduced length of hospital stay (MD: -1.94 days, 95% CI -3.79 to -0.08, p = 0.04, level of evidence: low), and increased PaO2/FiO2 (MD: 34.78, 95% CI 8.94 to 60.61, p = 0.008, level of evidence: low).

This meta-analysis demonstrated that methylene blue administration was associated with an increased in mean arterial pressure and PaO2/FiO2 ratio, along with a reduction in mortality rates, serum lactate levels, and length of hospital stay. However, substantial degree of heterogeneity and inadequate number of studies with low level of evidence warrant future adequately powered RCTs to affirm our results.

The most used vasopressors in critically ill patients are exogenous catecholamines, mainly norepinephrine. Their use can be associated with serious adverse events and even increased mortality, especially if administered at high doses. In recent years, the addition of vasopressin has been proposed to counteract the deleterious effects of high doses of catecholamines (decatecholaminization) with the intention of improving the prognosis of these patients. Currently, vasopressin has two main indications: septic shock and vasoplegic shock in the postoperative period of cardiac surgery. In septic shock, current evidence favors its early initiation before reaching high doses of norepinephrine. In the postoperative period of cardiac surgery, the different benefits of the use of vasopressin have been studied, especially in patients with atrial fibrillation and pulmonary hypertension. When used properly, vasopressin is a safe an effective drug for the indications described above.

Analyzing associated factors with vasoplegic shock in the postoperative period of Cardiac Surgery. Analyzing the influence of vasopressin as rescue therapy to first-line treatment with norepinephrine.

Cohort, prospective and observational study.

Main hospital Postoperative Cardiac ICU.

Patients undergoing cardiac surgery with subsequent ICU admission from January 2021 to December 2022.

Record of presurgical, perioperative and ICU discharge clinical variables.

chronic treatment, presence of vasoplegic shock, need for vasopressin, cardiopulmonary bypass time, mortality.

773 patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 67.3, with predominance of males (65.7%). Post-CPB vasoplegia was documented in 94 patients (12.2%). In multivariate analysis, vasoplegia was associated with age, female sex, presurgical creatinine levels, cardiopulmonary bypass time, lactate level upon admission to the ICU, and need for prothrombin complex transfusion. Of the patients who developed vasoplegia, 18 (19%) required rescue vasopressin, associated with pre-surgical intake of ACEIs/ARBs, worse Euroscore score and longer cardiopulmonary bypass time. Refractory vasoplegia with vasopressin requirement was associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

Postcardiopulmonary bypass vasoplegia is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. Shortening cardiopulmonary bypass times and minimizing products blood transfusion could reduce its development. Removing ACEIs and ARBs prior to surgery could reduce the incidence of refractory vasoplegia requiring rescue with vasopressin. The first-line treatment is norepinephrine and rescue treatment with VSP is a good choice in refractory situations. The first-line treatment of this syndrome is norepinephrine, although rescue with vasopressin is a good complement in refractory situations.

Vasopressin is recommended as a second-line vasoactive agent for the management of septic shock; however, a paucity of data to guide its optimal use remains. The aim was to evaluate the effect of time-to vasopressin initiation and norepinephrine (NE) dose at vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients presenting with septic shock.

This was a multi-centered, retrospective, observational study conducted in patients with septic shock. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients initiated on vasopressin when NE-equivalent dose (NEE) < 0.25 mcg/kg/min or ≥ 0.25 mcg/kg/min. The primary outcome was time-to-vasopressor discontinuation (hours). Secondary outcomes included 28-day in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), fluid balance after 72 hours, and the change in NEE at 12 hours.

A total of 302 patients were included in this study. After propensity-score matching, 73 patients in each group were identified for analysis. There was no significant difference in the time-to-vasopressor discontinuation (hours) between the groups (88.8 [55-187.5] vs 86.7 [47-172]); p = 0.7815). Fluid balance (mL) at 72 hours was significantly lower when vasopressin was initiated at NEE < 0.25 mcg/kg/min (1769 [71-7287] vs 5762 [1463-8813]; p = 0.0077). A multivariable linear regression showed shorter time to shock resolution with earlier vasopressin initiation, defined as within 4 hours (p < 0.05).

In this propensity-score matched cohort, vasopressin initiation at NEE < 0.25 mcg/kg/min was not associated with shorter vasopressor duration. There was a lower fluid balance at 72 hours when vasopressin was initiated at lower NE doses.

Sepsis and septic shock are associated with high mortality, with diagnosis and treatment remaining a challenge for clinicians. Their management classically encompasses hemodynamic resuscitation, antibiotic treatment, life support, and focus control; however, there are aspects that have changed. This narrative review highlights current and avant-garde methods of handling patients experiencing septic shock based on the experience of its authors and the best available evidence in a context of uncertainty. Following the first recommendation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines, it is recommended that specific sepsis care performance improvement programs are implemented in hospitals, i.e., "Sepsis Code" programs, designed ad hoc, to achieve this goal. Regarding hemodynamics, the importance of perfusion and hemodynamic coherence stand out, which allow for the recognition of different phenotypes, determination of the ideal time for commencing vasopressor treatment, and the appropriate fluid therapy dosage. At present, this is not only important for the initial timing, but also for de-resuscitation, which involves the early weaning of support therapies, directed elimination of fluids, and fluid tolerance concept. Finally, regarding blood purification therapies, those aimed at eliminating endotoxins and cytokines are attractive in the early management of patients in septic shock.

Septic shock treatment remains a major challenge for intensive care units, despite the recent prominent advances in both management and outcomes. Vasopressors serve as a cornerstone of septic shock therapy, but there is still controversy over the timing of administration. Specifically, it remains unclear whether vasopressors should be used early in the course of treatment. Here, we provide a systematic review of the literature on the timing of vasopressor administration. Research was systematically identified through PubMed, Embase and Cochrane searching according to PRISMA guidelines. Fourteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The pathophysiological basis for early vasopressor use was classified, with the exploration on indications for the early administration of mono-vasopressors or their combination with vasopressin or angiotensinII. We found that mortality was 28.1%-47.7% in the early vasopressors group, and 33.6%-54.5% in the control group. We also investigated the issue of vasopressor responsiveness. Furthermore, we acknowledged the subsequent challenge of administration of high-dose norepinephrine via peripheral veins with early vasopressor use. Based on the literature review, we propose a possible protocol for the early initiation of vasopressors in septic shock resuscitation.

The association between the timing of administration of multiple vasopressors and patient outcomes has not been investigated.

This study used data from the MIMIC-IV database. Patients with sepsis who were administered two or more vasopressors were included. The principal exposure was the last norepinephrine dose when adding a second vasopressor. The cohort was divided into early (last norepinephrine dose < 0.25 μg/kg/min) and normal (last norepinephrine dose ≥ 0.25 μg/kg/min) groups. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Multivariable Cox analyses, propensity score matching, stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW), and restricted cubic spline (RCS) curves were used.

Overall, 1,437 patients who received multiple vasopressors were included. Patients in the early group had lower 28-day mortality (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.65-0.89; p < 0.001) than those in the single group, with similar results in the propensity score-matched (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.68-0.94; p = 0.006) and sIPTW (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.63-0.88; p < 0.001) cohorts. RCS curves showed that the risk of 28-day mortality increased as the last norepinephrine dose increased.

The timing of secondary vasopressor administration is strongly associated with the outcomes of patients with sepsis.

Septic shock is a leading cause of death in intensive care units (ICUs), with short-term mortality rates of 35-40%. Vasopressin (AVP) is a second-line vasoactive agent for septic shock, and recent studies suggest that early AVP use can be beneficial. However, differences between early initiation of AVP combined with norepinephrine (NE) and nonearly AVP with NE are unclear. A retrospective cohort research was designed to explore the effects of early AVP initiation versus nonearly AVP initiation.

This retrospective single-center cohort study included adult patients with septic shock from the MIMIC (Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care)-IV database. According to whether AVP was used early in the ICU (intensive care unit), patients were assigned to the early- (within 6 h of septic shock onset) and non-early-AVP (at least 6 h after septic shock onset) groups. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, the numbers of vasopressor-free and ventilation-free days at 28 days, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score on days 2 and 3, and renal replacement therapy (RRT) use on days 2 and 3. Univariate and multivariate cox proportional-hazards regression, propensity-score matching were used to analyze the differences between the groups.

The study included 531 patients with septic shock: 331 (62.5%) in the early-AVP group and 200 (37.5%) in the non-early-AVP group. For 1:1 matching, 158 patients in the early-AVP group were matched with the same number of patients with nonearly AVP. Regarding the primary outcome, there was no significant difference between the early- and non-early-AVP groups in 28-day mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68-1.24). For the secondary outcomes, there were no differences between the early- and non-early-AVP groups in ICU mortality (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.67-1.35), hospital mortality (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.69-1.31), the numbers of vasopressor-free and ventilation-free days at 28 days, ICU LOS, hospital LOS, SOFA score on days 2 and 3, and RRT use on days 2 and 3.

There was no difference in short-term mortality between early AVP combined with NE and nonearly AVP with NE in septic shock.

vasopressin is commonly used as a second-line vasopressor for patients with septic shock, but the optimal timing of initiation is uncertain. This study was designed to investigate when vasopressin initiation may be beneficial for 28-day mortality in septic shock patients.

This was a retrospective observational cohort study from the MIMIC-III v1.4 and MIMIC-IV v2.0 databases. All adults diagnosed with septic shock according to Sepsis-3 criteria were included. Patients were stratified into two groups based on norepinephrine (NE) dose at the time of vasopressin initiation, defined as the low doses of NE group (NE<0.25 µg/kg/min) and the high doses of NE group (NE ≥ 0.25 µg/kg/min). The primary end-point was 28-day mortality after diagnosis of septic shock. The analysis involved propensity score matching (PSM), multivariable logistic regression, doubly robust estimation, the gradient boosted model, and an inverse probability-weighting model.

A total of 1817 eligible patients were included in our original cohort (613 in the low doses of NE group and 1204 in the high doses of NE group). After 1:1 PSM, 535 patients from each group with no difference in disease severity were included in the analysis. The results showed that vasopressin initiation at low doses of NE was associated with reduced 28-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.660, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.518-0.840, p < 0.001). Compared with patients in the high doses of NE group, patients in the low doses of NE group received significantly shorter duration of NE, with less intravenous fluid volume on the first day after initiation of vasopressin, more urine on the second day, and longer mechanical ventilation-free days and CRRT-free days. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in hemodynamic response to vasopressin, duration of vasopressin, and ICU or hospital length of stay.

Among adults with septic shock, vasopressin initiation when low-dose NE was used was associated with an improvement in 28-day mortality.

Vasopressors and fluids are the cornerstones for the treatment of shock. The current international guidelines on shock recommend norepinephrine as the first-line vasopressor and vasopressin as the second-line vasopressor. In clinical practice, due to drug availability, local practice variations, special settings, and ongoing research, several alternative vasoconstrictors and adjuncts are used in the absence of precise equivalent doses. Norepinephrine equivalence (NEE) is frequently used in clinical trials to overcome this heterogeneity and describe vasopressor support in a standardized manner. NEE quantifies the total amount of vasopressors, considering the potency of each such agent, which typically includes catecholamines, derivatives, and vasopressin. Intensive care studies use NEE as an eligibility criterion and also an outcome measure. On the other hand, NEE has several pitfalls which clinicians should know, important the lack of conversion of novel vasopressors such as angiotensin II and also adjuncts such as methylene blue, including a lack of high-quality data to support the equation and validate its predictive performance in all types of critical care practice. This review describes the history of NEE and suggests an updated formula incorporating novel vasopressors and adjuncts.