Does Point-of-Care Ultrasound Affect Fluid Resuscitation Volume in Patients with Septic Shock: A Retrospective Review

Author:

Ablordeppey Enyo A.12ORCID,Zhao Amy3,Ruggeri Jeffery2,Hassan Ahmad3,Wallace Laura2,Agarwal Mansi4,Stickles Sean P.2,Holthaus Christopher2,Theodoro Daniel2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anaesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

3. Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

4. Division of Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

Abstract

Background. Fixed, large volume resuscitation with intravenous fluids (IVFs) in septic shock can cause inadvertent hypervolemia, increased medical interventions, and death when unguided by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). The primary study objective was to evaluate whether total IVF volume differs for emergency department (ED) septic shock patients receiving POCUS versus no POCUS. Methods. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study from 7/1/2018 to 8/31/2021 of atraumatic adult ED patients with septic shock. We agreed upon a priori variables and defined septic shock as lactate ≥4 and hypotension (SBP <90 or MAP <65). A sample size of 300 patients would provide 85% power to detect an IVF difference of 500 milliliters between POCUS and non-POCUS cohorts. Data are reported as frequencies, median (IQR), and associations from bivariate logistic models. Results. 304 patients met criteria and 26% (78/304) underwent POCUS. Cardiac POCUS demonstrated reduced ejection fraction in 15.4% of patients. Lung ultrasound showed normal findings in 53% of patients. The POCUS vs. non-POCUS cohorts had statistically significant differences for the following variables: higher median lactate (6.7 [IQR 5.2–8.7] vs. 5.6], p=0.003), lower systolic blood pressure (77.5 [IQR 61–86] vs. 85.0, p<0.001), more vasopressor use (51% vs. 34%, p=0.006), and more positive pressure ventilation (38% vs. 24%, p=0.017). However, there were no statistically significant differences between POCUS and non-POCUS cohorts in total IVF volume ml/kg (33.02 vs. 32.1, p=0.47), new oxygen requirement (68% vs. 59%, p=0.16), ED death (3% vs. 4%, p=0.15), or hospital death (31% vs. 27%, p=0.48). There were similar distributions of lactate, total fluids, and vasopressors in patients with CHF and severe renal failure. Conclusions. Among ED patients with septic shock, POCUS was more likely to be used in sicker patients. Patients who had POCUS were given similar volume of crystalloids although these patients were more critically ill. There were no differences in new oxygen requirement or mortality in the POCUS group compared to the non-POCUS group.

Funder

Washington University in St. Louis

Publisher

Hindawi Limited

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3