Critical care : the official journal of the Critical Care Forum
-
Editorial Comment
The good and the bad of diabetes mellitus in the critically ill.
Diabetes mellitus is increasingly prevalent and associated with significant end organ damage that one may presume to impact upon critical illness. However, Siegelaar and colleagues present data that suggest, excepting those patients admitted to a cardiac intensive care unit, the presence of diabetes mellitus is not associated with increased mortality in critically ill patients. ⋯ Nevertheless, the results are consistent with many risk-adjustment models used in the critically ill, and clinical practice that tolerates mild hyperglycaemia. Is it even possible that diabetes mellitus is protective?
-
Increases in blood lactate reflect decreases in systemic blood flows associated with low blood flow states characteristic of circulatory shock. Accordingly, the report by Vermeulen and colleagues documents the use of the blood lactate measurement as a prognostic indicator in settings of ST elevation myocardial infarction. That lactate value therefore identified high-risk patients as a complication, often with clinical signs of cardiogenic shock of corresponding severities.
-
In the previous issue of Critical Care, Takala and colleagues presented the results of a multicenter study to investigate whether the early presence of less invasive hemodynamic monitoring improves outcome in patients admitted with hemodynamic instability to the intensive care unit. The authors' results suggest that it makes no difference. We discuss these findings and compare them to the literature on early goal-directed therapy in which monitors are used early but with a protocol.
-
The study by Yang and colleagues examined 81 patients with septic shock due to pneumonia, along with 20 patients with pneumonia without organ dysfunction. Their major findings were that circulating levels of soluble vascular endothelial cell growth factor receptor-1 (sVEGFR-1) and urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) were associated with organ dysfunction and mortality, whereas vascular endothelial cell growth factor (VEGF) levels had no such predictive power. Yang and colleagues are to be complimented for a well-conducted study of a reasonably (and helpfully!) homogeneous population of patients with sepsis that carefully and comprehensively analyzed the relationship between sVEGFR-1, uPA, VEGF and clinical outcome. The study serves not only to provide evidence in support of new diagnostic biomarker targets in sepsis, but also to augment the growing evidence of an important role of the endothelium in sepsis in general, and the VEGF signaling axis in particular.
-
Comment
Appropriate antibiotic dosing in severe sepsis and acute renal failure: factors to consider.
Severe sepsis and septic shock cause considerable morbidity and mortality. Early appropriate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics and advanced resuscitation therapy are the cornerstones of treatment for these conditions. In prescribing an antibiotic regimen in septic patients with acute renal failure treated with continuous renal replacement therapy, several factors should be considered: pharmacokinetics, weight, residual renal function, hepatic function, mode of renal replacement therapy (membrane and surface area, sieving coefficient, effluent and dialysate rate, and blood flow rate), severity of illness, microorganism, minimum inhibitory concentration, and others. Studies that determine the serum antibiotic concentrations are very useful in establishing the correct dosage in critical patients.