Can we please stop referring to lactate as a perfusion marker? It’s no more so and no better than blood pressure. #emimcc #cccsky
One point that isn't mentioned here but too often forgotten when noradrenaline seemingly isn't working: Are you actually using a representative blood pressure? Not so rare that a better (more central or better line) fixes the problem. Look at the whole patient, not just a number! #emimcc #cccsky

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:vmwckmxogx3lipqxlmn76mbe/post/3mh67jqfw3z2h
Can't wrap my head around how this is even possible! TAVI in mechanical valves. #cardiosky #cccsky academic.oup.com/eurheartj/ad...

Transcatheter aortic valve-in-...
What is worse, digital ischemia or atrial fibrillation? #emimcc #cccsky link.springer.com/article/10.1...

Vasopressin in septic shock: a...
Vasopressin in septic shock: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials - Intensive Care Medicine

Purpose We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the possible benefits and harms of vasopressin therapy in adults with septic shock both overall and in pre-defined subgroups. Methods Our pre-specified study protocol is published on PROSPERO, CRD42017071698. We identified randomised clinical trials up to January 2019 investigating vasopressin therapy versus any other vasoactive comparator in adults with septic shock. Individual patient data from each trial were compiled. Conventional two-stage meta-analyses were performed as well as one-stage regression models with single treatment covariate interactions for subgroup analyses. Results Four trials were included with a total of 1453 patients. For the primary outcomes, there was no effect of vasopressin on 28-day mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.86–1.12] or serious adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82–1.26). Vasopressin led to more digital ischaemia [absolute risk difference (ARD) 1.7%, 95% CI 0.3%–3.2%] but fewer arrhythmias (ARD − 2.8%, 95% CI − 0.2% to − 5.3%). Mesenteric ischaemia and acute coronary syndrome events were similar between groups. Vasopressin reduced the requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT) (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74–0.99), but this finding was not robust to sensitivity analyses. There were no statistically significant interactions in the pre-defined subgroups (baseline kidney injury severity, baseline lactate, baseline norepinephrine requirement and time to study inclusion). Conclusions Vasopressin therapy in septic shock had no effect on 28-day mortality although the confidence intervals are wide. It appears safe but with a different side effect profile from norepinephrine. The finding on reduced RRT should be interpreted cautiously. Future trials should focus on long-term outcomes in select patient groups as well as incorporating cost effectiveness analyses regarding possible reduced RRT use.

SpringerLink
To write a "state-of-the-art review" of diastolic dysfunction in acute and critical illness with an emphasis on SGLT2-inhibition and not mention the DEFENDER trial is quite something. #cardisky #emimcc #cccsky www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/...

Diastolic Dysfunction in Acute...
Does anyone have a good paper on pearls and pitfalls of CVP measurements? #emimcc #cccsky
Levosimendan is quite often seen as a "safe" inodilator with respect to ventricular arrhythmias. I don't think it is, and this trial in my view supports that. Also, drugs with very long half lives are generally not a good idea in the critically ill #cardiosky #emimcc #cccsky

Levosimendan to Facilitate Wea...