Cargando…

Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question

Constantly evolving treatment guidelines based on a growing body of randomized controlled trials are helping us to improve outcomes in sepsis. However, it must be borne in mind that proven benefit from individual sepsis treatments does not guarantee synergistic beneficial effects when new treatments...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weber-Carstens, Steffen, Keh, Didier
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2151867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17316466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc5669
_version_ 1782144777060352000
author Weber-Carstens, Steffen
Keh, Didier
author_facet Weber-Carstens, Steffen
Keh, Didier
author_sort Weber-Carstens, Steffen
collection PubMed
description Constantly evolving treatment guidelines based on a growing body of randomized controlled trials are helping us to improve outcomes in sepsis. However, it must be borne in mind that proven benefit from individual sepsis treatments does not guarantee synergistic beneficial effects when new treatments are added to sepsis management. Indeed, unexpected harmful interactions are also possible. A good example of this is the conflict between intensive insulin therapy and 'low dose' hydrocortisone in septic shock. The goal of tight glycaemic control is made more complicated by steroid-induced hyperglycaemia. In their recent study, Loisa and coworkers demonstrate a measure that reduces the risk for this interaction. They found continuous infusion of hydrocortisone to be associated with fewer hyperglycaemic episodes and reduced staff workload compared with bolus application.
format Text
id pubmed-2151867
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-21518672007-12-25 Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question Weber-Carstens, Steffen Keh, Didier Crit Care Commentary Constantly evolving treatment guidelines based on a growing body of randomized controlled trials are helping us to improve outcomes in sepsis. However, it must be borne in mind that proven benefit from individual sepsis treatments does not guarantee synergistic beneficial effects when new treatments are added to sepsis management. Indeed, unexpected harmful interactions are also possible. A good example of this is the conflict between intensive insulin therapy and 'low dose' hydrocortisone in septic shock. The goal of tight glycaemic control is made more complicated by steroid-induced hyperglycaemia. In their recent study, Loisa and coworkers demonstrate a measure that reduces the risk for this interaction. They found continuous infusion of hydrocortisone to be associated with fewer hyperglycaemic episodes and reduced staff workload compared with bolus application. BioMed Central 2007 2007-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC2151867/ /pubmed/17316466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc5669 Text en Copyright © 2007 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Weber-Carstens, Steffen
Keh, Didier
Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
title Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
title_full Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
title_fullStr Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
title_full_unstemmed Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
title_short Bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
title_sort bolus or continuous hydrocortisone – that is the question
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2151867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17316466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc5669
work_keys_str_mv AT webercarstenssteffen bolusorcontinuoushydrocortisonethatisthequestion
AT kehdidier bolusorcontinuoushydrocortisonethatisthequestion