Cargando…

Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?

Infusing arginine vasopressin (AVP) in advanced vasodilatory shock is usually accompanied by a decrease in cardiac index and systemic oxygen transport. Whether or not such a vasoconstriction impedes regional blood flow and thus visceral organ function, even when low AVP is used, is still a matter of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bracht, Hendrik, Asfar, Pierre, Radermacher, Peter, Calzia, Enrico
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2246204/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18177510
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc6171
_version_ 1782150739772047360
author Bracht, Hendrik
Asfar, Pierre
Radermacher, Peter
Calzia, Enrico
author_facet Bracht, Hendrik
Asfar, Pierre
Radermacher, Peter
Calzia, Enrico
author_sort Bracht, Hendrik
collection PubMed
description Infusing arginine vasopressin (AVP) in advanced vasodilatory shock is usually accompanied by a decrease in cardiac index and systemic oxygen transport. Whether or not such a vasoconstriction impedes regional blood flow and thus visceral organ function, even when low AVP is used, is still a matter of debate. Krejci and colleagues now report, in this issue of Critical Care, that infusing 'low-dose' AVP during early, short-term, normotensive and normodynamic fecal peritonitis-induced porcine septicemia markedly reduced both renal and portal blood flow, and consequently total hepatic blood flow, whereas hepatic arterial flow was not affected. This macrocirculatory response was concomitant with reduced kidney microcirculatory perfusion, whereas liver micro-circulation remained unchanged. From these findings the authors conclude that the use of AVP to treat hypotension should be cautioned against in patients with septic shock. Undoubtedly, given its powerful vasoconstrictor properties, which are not accompanied by positive inotropic qualities (in contrast with most of the equally potent standard care 'competitors', namely catecholamines), the safety of AVP is still a matter of concern. Nevertheless, the findings reported by Krejci and colleagues need to be discussed in the context of the model design, the timing and dosing of AVP as well as the complex interaction between visceral organ perfusion and function.
format Text
id pubmed-2246204
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-22462042008-02-20 Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney? Bracht, Hendrik Asfar, Pierre Radermacher, Peter Calzia, Enrico Crit Care Commentary Infusing arginine vasopressin (AVP) in advanced vasodilatory shock is usually accompanied by a decrease in cardiac index and systemic oxygen transport. Whether or not such a vasoconstriction impedes regional blood flow and thus visceral organ function, even when low AVP is used, is still a matter of debate. Krejci and colleagues now report, in this issue of Critical Care, that infusing 'low-dose' AVP during early, short-term, normotensive and normodynamic fecal peritonitis-induced porcine septicemia markedly reduced both renal and portal blood flow, and consequently total hepatic blood flow, whereas hepatic arterial flow was not affected. This macrocirculatory response was concomitant with reduced kidney microcirculatory perfusion, whereas liver micro-circulation remained unchanged. From these findings the authors conclude that the use of AVP to treat hypotension should be cautioned against in patients with septic shock. Undoubtedly, given its powerful vasoconstrictor properties, which are not accompanied by positive inotropic qualities (in contrast with most of the equally potent standard care 'competitors', namely catecholamines), the safety of AVP is still a matter of concern. Nevertheless, the findings reported by Krejci and colleagues need to be discussed in the context of the model design, the timing and dosing of AVP as well as the complex interaction between visceral organ perfusion and function. BioMed Central 2007 2007-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC2246204/ /pubmed/18177510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc6171 Text en Copyright © 2007 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Bracht, Hendrik
Asfar, Pierre
Radermacher, Peter
Calzia, Enrico
Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
title Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
title_full Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
title_fullStr Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
title_full_unstemmed Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
title_short Vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
title_sort vasopressin in vasodilatory shock: hemodynamic stabilization at the cost of the liver and the kidney?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2246204/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18177510
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc6171
work_keys_str_mv AT brachthendrik vasopressininvasodilatoryshockhemodynamicstabilizationatthecostoftheliverandthekidney
AT asfarpierre vasopressininvasodilatoryshockhemodynamicstabilizationatthecostoftheliverandthekidney
AT radermacherpeter vasopressininvasodilatoryshockhemodynamicstabilizationatthecostoftheliverandthekidney
AT calziaenrico vasopressininvasodilatoryshockhemodynamicstabilizationatthecostoftheliverandthekidney