Sunday, February 2, 2020

Can We Use Something Other Than Lactate To Guide Resuscitation?

Nurses: you see those orders. q1, q2, q4h lactates to help guide resuscitation in septic shock. You have to drop what you're doing and draw labs. Hopefully, if the patient is sick enough to need the labs, they have a central line. Hold off of titrating drips, hold off on the ever important charting you are required to do, let's trend lactates which I have previously discussed the utility of (or lack of utility). Along the way we contribute to iatrogenic anemia, spend a bunch of lab money, etc.

What if there was another option? Well, the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial proves that you can intelligently resuscitate patients without checking lactate levels. What they did was randomize >400pts to either have their resuscitation guided by lactate or this nifty little trick called Capillary Refill Time.

One of my favorite parts of the trial wasn't even the CRT vs. lactate component but their algorithm to determine fluid responsiveness which is a major interest of mine. I am not a fan of arbitrarily giving a pt liter after liter of fluid to "clear lactate" or improve the blood pressure. That just does not work and my body of work has data to prove that. I digress. Sometimes you need to read the supplementary materials in these articles as their algorithm was hidden in there.

Standard of care by CMS (the body that pays the hospitals and therefore us in the US) has mandated checking lactates despite no good evidence that trending it does much. This study shows that checking CRT is AT LEAST as good as checking lactate levels. The mortality was not statistically significant (p=0.06) but I wonder what would've happened if they would've had an additional 200pts in the trial. The CRT group had 34.9% mortality vs 43.4% in the lactate group. The CRT group also had fewer organ failures (p=0.045). Other fun facts include the fact that the lactate group received more fluids in the first 8h (p=0.01) but not overall. I don't know what to make of this.

All in all, even with its limitations, I feel this is a solid study. I really like it. I do not use CRT in my practice but I may be asking for a microscope slide to keep in my pocket in the upcoming weeks.

A hat tip to the authors

Hernandez G, Ospina‐Tascon GA, Damiani LP, Estenssoro E, Dubin A, Hurtado J, et al. Effect of a resuscitation strategy targeting peripheral perfusion status vs serum lactate levels on 28‐day mortality among patients with septic shock: the ANDROMEDA‐SHOCK randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321(7):654–64.


- EJ




Link to FULL FREE ARTICLE

Although great care has been taken to ensure that the information in this post is accurate, eddyjoemd, LLC shall not be held responsible or in any way liable for the continued accuracy of the information, or for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies, or for any consequences arising therefrom.

The primary source of compensation I receive for this page and Instagram work is via Amazon Affiliates. All this free education you receive is much out of the kindness of my heart but I also enjoy receiving a check every month from Affiliate Marketing. The best part is that it's of no cost to you. Here's how it works:

Say you click on the following link for Will Owens' awesome ventilator book here: https://amzn.to/2myFxYm. A window will appear with the book on it but if you buy anything else on Amazon, say, complete a purchase with everything in your shopping cart, I will received a 1-5% commission for your purchase at no cost to you.

As an example, for every copy of the Ventilator book people have bought off of my affiliate links, for example, I have earned $0.85. I know it's not big money but it helps motivate me to keep on plugging along doing this heavy lifting in Critical Care. Thank you for supporting my work!
- My Amazon Store

No comments:

Post a Comment