The Effect of Albumin Replacement on Vasopressor Duration in Septic Shock in Patients With Hypoalbuminemia.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-14 DOI:10.1177/10600280241236507
Jacob P Counts, Joshua Arnold, Sara Atyia, Stella Ogake, Rachel M Smith, Bruce Doepker
{"title":"The Effect of Albumin Replacement on Vasopressor Duration in Septic Shock in Patients With Hypoalbuminemia.","authors":"Jacob P Counts, Joshua Arnold, Sara Atyia, Stella Ogake, Rachel M Smith, Bruce Doepker","doi":"10.1177/10600280241236507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of albumin resuscitation in septic shock is only recommended in patients who have received large volumes of crystalloid resuscitation regardless of serum albumin concentration. The role of albumin is still largely debated and evidence to support its use still lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to evaluate whether albumin replacement increases the number of vasopressor-free days in patients with septic shock and hypoalbuminemia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess the effect of albumin replacement in septic shock. Hypoalbuminemic patients with septic shock who received albumin were retrospectively compared with a cohort who did not. The primary outcome was number of vasopressor-free days at day 14 from shock presentation, which was analyzed using an adjusted linear regression model to adjust for confounders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no difference in vasopressor-free days at day 14 in patients who received albumin versus those who did not, after adjusting for confounders of exposure (0.50, 95% CI = -0.97 to 1.97; <i>P</i> = 0.502). There also was no difference in secondary outcomes except for need for invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), which was significantly lower in patients who received albumin (61 [54.4%] vs 88 [67.7%]; <i>P</i> = 0.035).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>We observed no difference in vasopressor-free days at day 14 in patients with hypoalbuminemia who received albumin compared with those who did not. However, patients who received albumin required significantly less MV although further studies are warranted to assess this effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10600280241236507","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of albumin resuscitation in septic shock is only recommended in patients who have received large volumes of crystalloid resuscitation regardless of serum albumin concentration. The role of albumin is still largely debated and evidence to support its use still lacking.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether albumin replacement increases the number of vasopressor-free days in patients with septic shock and hypoalbuminemia.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess the effect of albumin replacement in septic shock. Hypoalbuminemic patients with septic shock who received albumin were retrospectively compared with a cohort who did not. The primary outcome was number of vasopressor-free days at day 14 from shock presentation, which was analyzed using an adjusted linear regression model to adjust for confounders.

Results: There was no difference in vasopressor-free days at day 14 in patients who received albumin versus those who did not, after adjusting for confounders of exposure (0.50, 95% CI = -0.97 to 1.97; P = 0.502). There also was no difference in secondary outcomes except for need for invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), which was significantly lower in patients who received albumin (61 [54.4%] vs 88 [67.7%]; P = 0.035).

Conclusions and relevance: We observed no difference in vasopressor-free days at day 14 in patients with hypoalbuminemia who received albumin compared with those who did not. However, patients who received albumin required significantly less MV although further studies are warranted to assess this effect.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
低白蛋白血症患者脓毒性休克时补充白蛋白对血管加压时间的影响
背景:脓毒性休克患者只有在接受过大量晶体液复苏的情况下才推荐使用白蛋白复苏,而与血清白蛋白浓度无关。白蛋白的作用在很大程度上仍存在争议,支持使用白蛋白的证据仍然缺乏:本研究旨在评估白蛋白替代是否会增加脓毒性休克和低白蛋白血症患者无需使用血管加压剂的天数:我们进行了一项回顾性分析,以评估白蛋白替代对脓毒性休克的影响。将接受白蛋白治疗的低白蛋白血症脓毒症休克患者与未接受白蛋白治疗的患者进行回顾性比较。主要结果是自休克发生第 14 天起无血管加压的天数,使用调整后的线性回归模型进行分析,以调整混杂因素:结果:在调整了暴露的混杂因素后,接受白蛋白治疗的患者与未接受白蛋白治疗的患者在第14天无血管加压的天数上没有差异(0.50,95% CI = -0.97 至 1.97;P = 0.502)。除了需要有创机械通气(MV)外,接受白蛋白治疗的患者在次要结果上也没有差异(61 [54.4%] vs 88 [67.7%];P = 0.035):我们观察到,接受白蛋白治疗的低白蛋白血症患者与未接受白蛋白治疗的患者在第 14 天无需使用血管加压器的天数上没有差异。但是,接受白蛋白治疗的患者所需的 MV 明显减少,尽管还需要进一步研究来评估这种影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1