Vasopressor Discontinuation Order in Septic Shock With Reduced Left Ventricular Function. (December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Taylor, Ashley; Jones, Timothy; Forehand, Christy Cecil; Smith, Susan E.; Dykes, Hannah; Newsome, Andrea Sikora
• Is Part Of: Journal of pharmacy practice. Volume 35:Number 6(2022)
• Page Start: 879
• Page End: 885
• Publication Date: 2022-12
• Subjects: septic shock -- norepinephrine -- vasopressin -- heart failure -- left ventricular dysfunction; Pharmacy -- Periodicals; Pharmacology -- Periodicals; 615.1
• DOI: 10.1177/08971900211015080
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0897-1900

Abstract

Background: The optimal vasopressor management for septic patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction has not been well established, and current evidence is conflicting regarding the optimal vasopressor discontinuation order. Objective: The objective was to evaluate the impact of LV dysfunction on the hemodynamic management of septic shock by assessing the incidence of clinically significant hypotension after vasopressor discontinuation. Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, adult patients were included if they met the Sepsis-3 definition of septic shock, had LV dysfunction (defined as an ejection fraction ≤40%), and received norepinephrine and vasopressin as the last vasopressors discontinued. The primary outcome was the incidence of clinically significant hypotension following discontinuation of vasopressin or norepinephrine. Clinically significant hypotension was defined as a MAP less than 60 mmHg and the need for either: 1) the reinstitution of the previously discontinued agent at any dosage, 2) the receipt of at least 500 mL of a crystalloid at a rate of at least 500 mL/hour, 3) or the receipt of at least 25 grams of albumin 5% at a rate of at least 25 gram/hour. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital lengths of stay, and ICU and hospital mortality. Results: A total of 78 patients met inclusion criteria, with 37 patients having vasopressin discontinued first and 41 having norepinephrine discontinued first. Clinically significant hypotension occurred in 28 patients (76%) following the discontinuation of vasopressin, compared to 28 patients (81%) following the discontinuation of norepinephrine (p = 0.61). ICU length of stay was 9 days in the vasopressin discontinued first cohort, compared to 15 days in the norepinephrine discontinued first cohort (p = 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in mortality observed. Conclusion: The discontinuation order of norepinephrine and vasopressin did not impact the incidence of clinically significant hypotension in patients with septic shock and LV dysfunction, but may influence ICU length of stay, although other factors may have impacted this finding.