Evaluation of therapeutic plasma exchange combined with continuous renal replacement therapy in patients with early septic shock
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0282.2022.11.005
- VernacularTitle:血浆置换联合血液滤过在脓毒性休克患者中的疗效观察
- Author:
Ling GU
1
;
Yundi SHI
;
Xiaocui SU
;
Fengming HUANG
;
Xin WAN
;
Rijin HUANG
;
Huogen LIU
Author Information
1. 福建医科大学附属闽东医院重症医学科，福安 355000
- Keywords:
Septic shock;
Plasma exchange;
Continuous renal replacement therapy;
Prognosis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Emergency Medicine
2022;31(11):1463-1469
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the efficacy of therapeutic plasma exchange with continuous renal replacement therapy in patients with early septic shock.Methods:A total of 55 patients with septic shock admitted to ICU of Mindong Hospital Affiliated to Fujian Medical University from December 2017 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into the therapeutic plasma exchange group ( n=29) and standard-therapy group ( n=26) according to whether plasma exchange combined with hemofiltration was used. Patients in both groups were treated according to the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. No hemofiltration or/and plasma exchange therapy was performed in the standard-therapy group. In the therapeutic plasma exchange group, hemofiltration was performed immediately after plasma exchange within 24 h. The inflammatory indexes, hemodynamic indexes, organ function scores and 28-day mortality were monitored before and 24 h after treatment. χ2 test was used for counting data, t-test was used for measurement data, and Kaplan-Meier curve was used to evaluate 28-day survival status. Results:(1) There were no differences in sex, age, underlying diseases, acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ (APACHEⅡ) score and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score before treatment between the two groups. (2) There were no significant differences in PCT, CRP and IL-6 between the two groups at enrollment. After treatment, PCT, CRP and IL-6 in the therapeutic plasma exchange group were significantly lower than those in the standard-therapy group [PCT (ng/mL): (50.07±14.54) vs. (57.93±13.42), P=0.043; CRP (mg/L): (85.71±46.05) vs. (115.10±44.42), P=0.042; IL-6 (pg/mL): (5 957.45±2 344.48) vs. (7 522.94±3 218.94), P=0.043], but there was no significant difference in WBC between the two groups. (3) There were no significant differences in norepinephrine dose, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI), extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) and Lactate level between the two groups. After treatment, the norepinephrine dose, lactate level and EVLWI in the therapeutic plasma exchange group decreased significantly, while SVRI increased significantly {norepinephrine dose [μg/(kg·min): (0.76±0.39) vs. (0.54±0.39), P=0.044; lactate (μmmol/ L): (7.74±4.22) vs. (4.51±1.62), P<0.001; EVLWI (mL/kg): (10.04±2.77) vs. (8.23±2.23), P=0.008; SVRI (dyn·s/cm 2): (1 103.14±364.94) vs. (1 403.31±264.46), P=0.001}. Compared with the standard-therapy, the 24-h intravenous infusion volume was significantly decreased [(3 852.07±686.43) mL vs. (4 474.81±572.71) mL, P=0.001]. (4) There were no significant differences in APACHEⅡscore and SOFA score between the two groups at enrollment. After treatment, the APACHEⅡscore and SOFA score of the therapeutic plasma exchange group were significantly lower than those of the standard-therapy group [APACHEⅡscore: (14.07±4.30) vs. (19.23±5.44), P<0.001; SOFA score: (9.93±1.16) vs. (11.69±1.81), P<0.001)]. There were no significant differences in ICU mortality and 28-day mortality between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:Therapeutic plasma exchange with continuous renal replacement therapy can reduce the inflammatory response and improve hemodynamics in patients with septic shock. However, 24 h treatment did not improve the mortality of patients.
