1887
2 - Qatar Critical Care Conference Proceedings
  • ISSN: 0253-8253
  •  E-ISSN:  Will be obtained soon 2227-0426

Abstract

Catecholamines are an integral component of the host stress response and usually increase appropriately at times of need. Unfortunately, in severe and prolonged critical illness, they can contribute to significant harm with unwanted biological effects on cardiac function, inflammatory, immune, metabolic, and coagulation pathways1. A good example is Takotsubo (‘stress’) cardiomyopathy where heart failure ensues after an emotional stress resulting in extremely high levels of circulating catecholamines, considerably above that seen in a significant myocardial infarction2.

Unwittingly, we are likely contributing to catecholamine toxicity in our management of the critically ill septic patient through use of exogenous catecholamine therapies which carry the same detrimental effects as endogenous catecholamines1,3. Catecholamines are currently recommended first-line agents for septic shock, and are used in an attempt to overcome the vascular hyporeactivity and myocardial depression associated with sepsis. Use of higher doses of catecholamines is however associated with worse outcomes4. This is usually ascribed to the patient's underlying illness severity and an iatrogenic contribution is not considered – but perhaps should be.

Beta-blockers have multiple actions, on cardiac function and beyond. They reduce cardiac work through negative inotropic and chronotropic effects. Importantly, through slowing an excessive heart rate, both systolic and diastolic ventricular function are improved. They also act on adrenergic receptor responsiveness, enhancing the activity of catecholamines and allowing reductions in dose to achieve the same haemodynamic effect. Outside the heart, they improve vascular tone, enhance metabolic efficiency, and have anti-inflammatory effects and anti-thrombotic activity.

The first use of beta-blockade in sepsis goes back nearly 50 years with successful use in some patients in refractory shock. In the last decade an increasing number of observational studies and a few single-centre randomised controlled trials have shown both safety and improved outcomes5. These reflect findings in animal models of sepsis where various mechanisms were demonstrated including protective effects on the heart, anti-inflammatory actions and preservation of the gut barrier5.

Clearly, the patient needs to be adequately fluid-resuscitated and stabilised before commencing beta-blockers. Ideally, the use of a short-acting agent such as esmolol or landiolol allows easy titration, or cessation, of the infusion should hypotension or excess bradycardia occur with the unwanted effects wearing off within minutes. The largest study to date by Morelli et al., randomised 154 septic shock patients to receive either placebo or esmolol to reduce heart rate to 80-95 bpm. This was successfully achieved with no increase in complication rates compared to placebo. Importantly, there were also benefits in terms of earlier recovery of renal function, cessation of norepinephrine infusion, lower troponin levels (indicative of less cardiac damage), and improved survival rates. These encouraging findings need to be repeated in multicentre settings and two studies (one UK-based “STRESS-L”, one in 4 European countries) are currently ongoing.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.42
2019-11-05
2020-06-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/qmj/2019/2/qmj.2019.qccc.42.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.42&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Andreis DT, Singer M. Catecholamines for inflammatory shock: a Jekyll-and-Hyde conundrum. Intensive Care Med. 2016; 42:9:13871397.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Wittstein IS, Thiemann DR, Lima JA, Baughman KL, Schulman SP, Gertstenblith G, et al.  Neurohumoral features of myocardial stunning due to sudden emotional stress. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352::539548.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Singer M. Catecholamine treatment for shock-equally good or bad? Lancet. 2007; 370:9588:636637.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Benbenishty J, Weissman C, Sprung CL, Brodsky-Israeli M, Weiss Y. Characteristics of patients receiving vasopressors. Heart Lung. 2011; 40::247252.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. van Loon LM, van der Hoeven JG, Lemson J. Hemodynamic response to β-blockers in severe sepsis and septic shock: A review of current literature. J Crit Care. 2019; 50::138143.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.42
Loading
  • Article Type: Conference Abstract
Keyword(s): beta-blockers and sepsis
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error