+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of emergency intubation on central venous oxygen saturation in critically ill patients: a multicenter observational study

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO 2) has emerged as an important resuscitation goal for critically ill patients. Nevertheless, growing concerns about its limitations as a perfusion parameter have been expressed recently, including the uncommon finding of low ScvO 2 values in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Emergency intubation may induce strong and eventually divergent effects on the physiologic determinants of oxygen transport (DO 2) and oxygen consumption (VO 2) and, thus, on ScvO 2. Therefore, we conducted a study to determine the impact of emergency intubation on ScvO 2.


          In this prospective multicenter observational study, we included 103 septic and non-septic patients with a central venous catheter in place and in whom emergency intubation was required. A common intubation protocol was used and we evaluated several parameters including ScvO 2 before and 15 minutes after emergency intubation. Statistical analysis included chi-square test and t test.


          ScvO 2 increased from 61.8 ± 12.6% to 68.9 ± 12.2%, with no difference between septic and non-septic patients. ScvO 2 increased in 84 patients (81.6%) without correlation to changes in arterial oxygen saturation (SaO 2). Seventy eight (75.7%) patients were intubated with ScvO 2 less than 70% and 21 (26.9%) normalized the parameter after the intervention. Only patients with pre-intubation ScvO 2 more than 70% failed to increase the parameter after intubation.


          ScvO 2 increases significantly in response to emergency intubation in the majority of septic and non-septic patients. When interpreting ScvO 2 during early resuscitation, it is crucial to consider whether the patient has been recently intubated or is spontaneously breathing.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

          Objective To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, “Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock,” published in 2004. Design Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. Methods We used the GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation [1] indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost), or clearly do not. Weak recommendations [2] indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. Results Key recommendations, listed by category, include: early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures prior to antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7–10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for post-operative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7–9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B) targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization ( 2C ); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper GI bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). Conclusion There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A trial of goal-oriented hemodynamic therapy in critically ill patients. SvO2 Collaborative Group.

             L Brazzi,  R Latini,  P Pelosi (1995)
            Hemodynamic therapy to raise the cardiac index and oxygen delivery to supranormal may improve outcomes in critically ill patients. We studied whether increasing the cardiac index to a supranormal level (cardiac-index group) or increasing mixed venous oxygen saturation to a normal level (oxygen-saturation group) would decrease morbidity and mortality among critically ill patients, as compared with a control group in which the target was a normal cardiac index. A total of 10,726 patients in 56 intensive care units were screened, among whom 762 patients belonging to predefined diagnostic categories with acute physiology scores of 11 or higher were randomly assigned to the three groups (252 to the control group, 253 to the cardiac-index group, and 257 to the oxygen-saturation group). The hemodynamic targets were reached by 94.3 percent of the control group, 44.9 percent of the cardiac-index group, and 66.7 percent of the oxygen-saturation group (P < 0.001). Mortality was 48.4, 48.6, and 52.1 percent, respectively (P = 0.638), up to the time of discharge from the intensive care unit and 62.3, 61.7, and 63.8 percent (P = 0.875) at six months. Among patients who survived, the number of dysfunctional organs and the length of the stay in the intensive care unit were similar in the three groups. No differences in mortality among the three groups were found for any diagnostic category. A subgroup analysis of the patients in whom hemodynamic targets were reached revealed similar mortality rates: 44.8, 40.4, and 39.0 percent, respectively (P = 0.478). Hemodynamic therapy aimed at achieving supranormal values for the cardiac index or normal values for mixed venous oxygen saturation does not reduce morbidity or mortality among critically ill patients.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              High-volume hemofiltration as salvage therapy in severe hyperdynamic septic shock.

              To evaluate the effect of short-term (12-h) high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) in reversing progressive refractory hypotension and hypoperfusion in patients with severe hyperdynamic septic shock. To evaluate feasibility and tolerance and to compare observed vs. expected hospital mortality. Prospective, interventional, nonrandomized study in the surgical-medical intensive care unit of an academic tertiary center. Twenty patients with severe septic shock, previously unresponsive to a multi-intervention approach within a goal-directed, norepinephrine-based algorithm, with increasing norepinephrine (NE) requirements (>0.3 microg kg(-1) min(-1)) and lactic acidosis. Single session of 12-h HVHF. We measured changes in NE requirements and perfusion parameters every 4h during HVHF and 6h thereafter. Eleven patients showed decreased NE requirements and lactate levels (responders). Nine patients did not fulfill these criteria (nonresponders). The NE dose, lactate levels, and heart rates decreased and arterial pH increased significantly in responders. Hospital mortality (40%) was significantly lower than predicted (60%): 67% (6/9) in nonresponders vs. 18% (2/11) in responders. Of 12 survivors 7 required only a single 12-h HVHF session. On logistic regression analysis the only statistically significant predictor of survival was theresponse to HVHF (odds ratio 9). A single session of HVHF as salvage therapy in the setting of a goal-directed hemodynamic management algorithm may be beneficial in severe refractory hyperdynamic septic-shock patients. This approach may improve hemodynamics and perfusion parameters, acid-base status, and ultimately hospital survival. Moreover, it is feasible, and safe.

                Author and article information

                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central
                4 May 2009
                : 13
                : 3
                : R63
                [1 ]Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Departamento de Medicina Intensiva, Marcoleta 367, Santiago, Chile
                [2 ]Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez, UTI de Cardio-Neumología, Juan Badiano No. 1 C.P. 14080, Ciudad de México, México
                [3 ]Hospital Clínico Universidad de Chile, Unidad de Pacientes Críticos, Santos Dumont 999, Santiago, Chile
                Copyright © 2009 Hernandez et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


                Emergency medicine & Trauma


                Comment on this article