Use of extracorporeal blood purification therapies in sepsis: the current paradigm, available evidence, and future perspectives

IF 8.8 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-12-25 DOI:10.1186/s13054-024-05220-7
Gabriella Bottari, Vito Marco Ranieri, Can Ince, Antonio Pesenti, Filippo Aucella, Anna Maria Scandroglio, Claudio Ronco, Jean-Louis Vincent
{"title":"Use of extracorporeal blood purification therapies in sepsis: the current paradigm, available evidence, and future perspectives","authors":"Gabriella Bottari, Vito Marco Ranieri, Can Ince, Antonio Pesenti, Filippo Aucella, Anna Maria Scandroglio, Claudio Ronco, Jean-Louis Vincent","doi":"10.1186/s13054-024-05220-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sepsis is the result of a dysregulated immune response to infection and is associated with acute organ dysfunction. The syndrome’s complexity is contingent upon the underlying pathology and individual patient characteristics, including their immune response. The involvement of multiple organs and physiological functions adds complexity, with “organ cross-talk” emerging as a pivotal pathophysiological and clinical aspect. This narrative review to evaluate the rationale and available clinical evidence supporting the use of extracorporeal blood purification therapies as adjunctive therapy in patients with sepsis and septic shock. A search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus databases for relevant literature from August 2002 to May 2024 has been conducted. The search was performed using the terms: 1) “blood purification” or “hemadsorption” or “plasma exchange” AND 2) “sepsis” or “septic shock”. Therefore the authors have focused our discussion on several key areas such as conducting well-designed trials, developing more personalized protocols, ensuring optimal management and monitoring. Given the heterogeneity of patients with sepsis, conducting traditional randomized clinical trials in this domain can be a daunting task. However, statistical techniques such as Bayesian methods, propensity score analysis, and emulated clinical trials using clinical databases hold promise for enhancing comparability between the study groups. Indeed, to comprehend the clinical efficacy of extracorporeal blood purification techniques in patients with sepsis, it is imperative to assemble homogeneous groups of patients receiving uniform treatments. Clinical strategies should be individualized, signaling the end of the “one size fits all” approach in sepsis therapy and the need for personalized treatments. Current suggested best practice for use of cytokine hemadsorption in sepsis. ","PeriodicalId":10811,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05220-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sepsis is the result of a dysregulated immune response to infection and is associated with acute organ dysfunction. The syndrome’s complexity is contingent upon the underlying pathology and individual patient characteristics, including their immune response. The involvement of multiple organs and physiological functions adds complexity, with “organ cross-talk” emerging as a pivotal pathophysiological and clinical aspect. This narrative review to evaluate the rationale and available clinical evidence supporting the use of extracorporeal blood purification therapies as adjunctive therapy in patients with sepsis and septic shock. A search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus databases for relevant literature from August 2002 to May 2024 has been conducted. The search was performed using the terms: 1) “blood purification” or “hemadsorption” or “plasma exchange” AND 2) “sepsis” or “septic shock”. Therefore the authors have focused our discussion on several key areas such as conducting well-designed trials, developing more personalized protocols, ensuring optimal management and monitoring. Given the heterogeneity of patients with sepsis, conducting traditional randomized clinical trials in this domain can be a daunting task. However, statistical techniques such as Bayesian methods, propensity score analysis, and emulated clinical trials using clinical databases hold promise for enhancing comparability between the study groups. Indeed, to comprehend the clinical efficacy of extracorporeal blood purification techniques in patients with sepsis, it is imperative to assemble homogeneous groups of patients receiving uniform treatments. Clinical strategies should be individualized, signaling the end of the “one size fits all” approach in sepsis therapy and the need for personalized treatments. Current suggested best practice for use of cytokine hemadsorption in sepsis.
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
使用体外血液净化治疗败血症:目前的范例,现有的证据,和未来的前景
脓毒症是对感染的免疫反应失调的结果,与急性器官功能障碍有关。该综合征的复杂性取决于潜在的病理和个体患者的特征,包括他们的免疫反应。多器官和生理功能的参与增加了复杂性,“器官串扰”成为关键的病理生理和临床方面。本文综述了支持体外血液净化疗法作为脓毒症和感染性休克患者辅助治疗的基本原理和现有临床证据。检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Scopus数据库,检索2002年8月至2024年5月的相关文献。搜索使用的术语是:1)“血液净化”或“血液吸附”或“血浆交换”和2)“败血症”或“感染性休克”。因此,作者将我们的讨论集中在几个关键领域,如进行精心设计的试验,开发更个性化的方案,确保最佳的管理和监测。鉴于脓毒症患者的异质性,在这一领域进行传统的随机临床试验可能是一项艰巨的任务。然而,统计技术,如贝叶斯方法、倾向评分分析和使用临床数据库的模拟临床试验,有望提高研究组之间的可比性。事实上,为了了解体外血液净化技术在脓毒症患者中的临床疗效,有必要收集接受统一治疗的同质患者组。临床策略应该个性化,标志着败血症治疗中“一刀切”方法的结束和个性化治疗的需要。目前建议的最佳实践使用细胞因子血吸附在败血症。
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
Critical Care
Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
20.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
348
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care is an esteemed international medical journal that undergoes a rigorous peer-review process to maintain its high quality standards. Its primary objective is to enhance the healthcare services offered to critically ill patients. To achieve this, the journal focuses on gathering, exchanging, disseminating, and endorsing evidence-based information that is highly relevant to intensivists. By doing so, Critical Care seeks to provide a thorough and inclusive examination of the intensive care field.
期刊最新文献
Effect of an intensive care unit virtual reality intervention on relatives´ mental health distress: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial Enhancing depression risk assessment in critical care nurses: a call for quantitative modeling Clinical subtypes in critically ill patients with sepsis: validation and parsimonious classifier model development Relationship between skin microvascular blood flow and capillary refill time in critically ill patients Trendelenburg position is a reasonable alternative to passive leg raising for predicting volume responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU
×
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