• Maria K Abril, Ashish K Khanna, Stew Kroll, Connor McNamara, Damian Handisides, and Laurence W Busse.
• Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
• J Crit Care. 2019 Apr 1; 50: 188-194.

IntroductionDespite international guidelines, regional differences in treatment of vasodilatory shock remain. We characterized these differences using data from Angiotensin II in High Output Shock (ATHOS-3) trial.MethodsThe 321 patients treated in the ATHOS-3 trial were included. Baseline and hour-48 data were analyzed for differences in demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns, and grouped into four geographical areas: United States, Canada, Europe, and Australasia. Differences were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous, and chi-square tests for categorical data. Temporal analysis compared changes in the treatment of shock during the treatment period.ResultsDifferences in baseline characteristics across geographic areas were noted in BMI, albumin, CVP, MELD score, APACHE II score, and total SOFA score. Baseline norepinephrine and norepinephrine equivalent doses (NED) were higher (p < .0001 and p = .0494, respectively), and vasopressin use was lower (p < .0001) in Europe. Baseline steroids were utilized more in the US and Canada (p = .0011).ConclusionsManagement of vasodilatory shock differs globally with respect to utilization of steroids and vasopressors. This practice heterogeneity may influence shock trials interpretation and patient outcomes, though more definitive evidence would require larger prospective intervention data.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

37 keywords...

hide…