The mantra of the Broome Docs site is “bringing great care, out there.” And today’s topic goes right to the heart of that theme. It is one of my pet topics – so apologies in advance if the rant is too long or detailed.
This is a discussion about the early management of septic patients. I live and work in an area where this is a common and deadly problem. Care is far from the idealised ICU practice. However in recent times the playing field has been levelled by new data that suggests that maybe a simpler approach can deliver good outcomes. So this is my attempt to deal with a wicked problem – remote resuscitation of the shocked septic patient.
Although I am talking about how I think we can do it well in remote areas, I imagine some of this discussion is just as relevant in a big city ED. Specifically this is an attempt to make a case for the early and liberal use of vasopressors [particularly noradrenaline] in patients with septic shock.
There has been a huge amount of evidence published and paradigms shifted in the last 12 months when it comes to the early management of sepsis. EDGT is out. What is in? Well – solid, careful and timely delivery of the basics of:
- early appropriate antibiotics with
- aggressive source identification and control.
It has been famously stated that in the post-EGDT era: it doesn’t matter what “shit” you give, as long as you “give a shit”. The substantial improvements in patient outcomes over the last 12 years have come about probably as the result of clinicians being more aware of the urgency of care and being proactive in their management. We have also likely reduced the rate of iatrogenesis in that time period.
So this discussion focuses on the first part of that triad of early care for the septic patient: RESUSCITATION. In most small hospitals the resuscitation basically includes IV fluids and after that has failed some sort of vasopressor. Here in rural Australia there are really only 2 commonly used ‘pressors’ – metaraminol [darling of the bush anaesthetist] and noradrenaline [norepi for my N. American readers!]. Now I know that some will argue that Norad is not just a vasopressor, and that is true. However, at the doses it is commonly used its main effect is on the venous circulation. So humour me!
OK – so here we go. I am going to try and convince you that we ought to be using:
- through a peripheral cannula (initially)
- early in the Resus phase
- in a concomitant or synergistic manner with judicious fluids
Now I realise that there are several controversial / new ideas in that list. So have a listen to the podcast as I try to make a case for using this newish, some may say aggressive, strategy in the early management of septic patients. I am specifically referring to patients whom are being cared for in low-resource centres – places without 24 hour cover, no Crit Care facility or ICU trained Docs. That maybe in the middle of the Kimberley – or it could be in your local hospital between the hours of midnight and six AM!
Have a listen.HERE
Dr John Myburgh’s excellent discussion of “FLUIDS: 2015” on the ICN Podcast is here
Dr Paul Marik’s recent dissection of : “the demise of EGDT” [from Acta Anaesthesilogica Scandinavia ]
the NEJMs trilogy of the:
Dr Bai et al Early versus delayed administration of norepinephrine in patients with septic shock. From Critical Care Oct 2014
Loubani & Green systematic review of peripheral vs. central vasopressors Journ of Crit Care June 2015.