Back to Journals » Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management » Volume 11

Vasopressors in septic shock: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Authors Zhou FH, Mao Z, Zeng XT, Kang HJ, Liu H, Pan L, Hou PC

Received 30 December 2014

Accepted for publication 23 March 2015

Published 14 July 2015 Volume 2015:11 Pages 1047—1059

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S80060

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 5

Editor who approved publication: Professor Deyun Wang

Feihu Zhou,1,* Zhi Mao,1,* Xiantao Zeng,2,* Hongjun Kang,1 Hui Liu,1 Liang Pan,1 Peter C Hou3

1
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, 2Center for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

*These authors contributed equally to the paper

Objective: Vasopressor agents are often prescribed in septic shock. However, their effects remain controversial. We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare the effects among different types of vasopressor agents.
Data sources: We searched for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from database inception until December 2014.
Study selection: Randomized controlled trials in adults with septic shock that evaluated different vasopressor agents were selected.
Data extraction: Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data on study characteristics, methods, and outcomes.
Data synthesis: Twenty-one trials (n=3,819) met inclusion criteria, which compared eleven vasopressor agents or vasopressor combinations (norepinephrine [NE], dopamine [DA], vasopressin [VP], epinephrine [EN], terlipressin [TP], phenylephrine [PE], TP+NE, TP + dobutamine [DB], NE+DB, NE+EN, and NE + dopexamine [DX]). Except for the superiority of NE over DA, the mortality of patients treated with any vasopressor agent or vasopressor combination was not significantly different. Compared to DA, NE was found to be associated with decreased cardiac adverse events, heart rate (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.95, -0.25; P=0.03), and cardiac index (SMD: -0.73; 95% CI: -1.14, -0.03; P=0.004) and increased systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI) (SMD: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.61, 1.45; P<0.0001). This Bayesian meta-analysis revealed a possible rank of probability of mortality among the eleven vasopressor agents or vasopressor combinations; from lowest to highest, they are NE+DB, EN, TP, NE+EN, TP+NE, VP, TP+DB, NE, PE, NE+DX, and DA.
Conclusion: In terms of survival, NE may be superior to DA. Otherwise, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that any other vasopressor agent or vasopressor combination is superior to another. When compared to DA, NE is associated with decreased heart rate, cardiac index, and cardiovascular adverse events, as well as increased SVRI. The effects of vasopressor agents or vasopressor combinations on mortality in patients with septic shock require further investigation.

Keywords:
norepinephrine, dopamine, vasopressors, sepsis, shock, network meta-analysis

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Other articles by this author:

Acute kidney injury and inflammatory response of sepsis following cecal ligation and puncture in D-galactose-induced aging rats

Liu C, Hu J, Mao Z, Kang H, Liu H, Fu W, Lv Y, Zhou F

Clinical Interventions in Aging 2017, 12:593-602

Published Date: 29 March 2017

Efficacy and safety of daptomycin for skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review with trial sequential analysis

Liu C, Mao Z, Yang MM, Kang HJ, Liu H, Pan L, Hu J, Luo J, Zhou FH

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2016, 12:1455-1466

Published Date: 22 September 2016

Ethyl pyruvate protects against sepsis by regulating energy metabolism

Kang H, Mao Z, Zhao Y, Yin T, Song Q, Pan L, Hu X, Hu J, Zhou F

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2016, 12:287-294

Published Date: 23 February 2016

Readers of this article also read:

Perioperative management of hemophilia patients receiving total hip and knee arthroplasty: a complication report of two cases

Tateiwa T, Takahashi Y, Ishida T, Kubo K, Masaoka T, Shishido T, Sano K, Yamamoto K

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2015, 11:1383-1389

Published Date: 15 September 2015

Quetiapine for acute bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Suttajit S, Srisurapanont M, Maneeton N, Maneeton B

Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2014, 8:827-838

Published Date: 25 June 2014

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010