• Yuji Oba and Nazir A Lone.
• University of Missouri, School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Environmental Medicine, Columbia, MO, USA. Electronic address: obay@health.missouri.edu.
• J Crit Care. 2014 Oct 1;29(5):706-10.

ObjectiveThe choice of vasopressor in septic shock has been a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to systematically review overall evidence of vasopressor and inotropic agents in septic shock using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.MethodsDatabases, including Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that reported mortality rates on the use of vasopressors and inotropes in patients with septic shock. We chose to use 28-day mortality as the outcome assessment criterion.ResultsFourteen studies with a total of 2811 patients were included in the analysis. Norepinephrine (NE) and NE + low-dose vasopressin but not epinephrine (EPI) were associated with significantly reduced mortality compared with dopamine. (Odds ratio, 0.80 [95% credibility interval, 0.65-0.99], 0.69 [0.48-0.98], and 0.56 [0.26-1.18], respectively). The addition of an inotropic agent such as dobutamine or dopexamine did not reduce mortality compared with EPI or NE alone.ConclusionsOur results support the use of NE with or without low-dose vasopressin as the first-line vasopressor therapy in septic shock. No concrete evidence exists to support the use of EPI over dopamine as the second-line agent or the addition of an inotropic agent.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

26 keywords...

hide…