tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Oct 15:107428. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2019.107428. [Epub ahead of print] [h=1]Use of glucocorticoids in the critical care setting: science and clinical evidence.[/h]
Chan ED[SUP]1[/SUP], Chan MM[SUP]2[/SUP], Chan MM[SUP]3[/SUP], Marik PE[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h] 1 Pulmonary Section, Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, CO, United States; Departments of Medicine and Academic Affairs, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, United States; Division of Pulmonary Sciences and Critical Care Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States. Electronic address: chane@njhealth.org. 2 Departments of Medicine and Academic Affairs, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, United States. 3 Department of Medicine, David Grant Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Fairfield, CA, United States. 4 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, United States.
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Glucocorticoids (GC) in all its various forms and formulations are likely one of the most commonly used pharmacologic agents in medicine. Their use can be profoundly therapeutic but are also associated with a myriad of acute and chronic side effects. It is fairly well-accepted in the medical community that GC can be life-saving when used in critically ill patients with severe exacerbations of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, HIV-associated pneumocystosis, and systemic vasculitides. However, the adjunctive role of GC is much more controversial in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), septic shock, community-acquired pneumonia, and several other serious medical conditions. Despite such controversies, GC should at least be considered for patients with fulminant manifestations of the following conditions as there is equipoise to indicate that GC may improve outcome with acceptable risks: (i) severe ARDS with refractory hypoxemia despite one to two weeks of state-of-the-art management, (ii) recalcitrant, vasopressor-dependent septic shock, (iii) non-influenza, severe community-acquired pneumonia, and (iv) severe alcoholic hepatitis. The bases for these controversies is likely due to both host factors (e.g., differences in GC resistance and susceptibility to adverse effects) and different phenotypes of any one disease state; e.g., different pathogenesis and pathogens under the rubric of "sepsis." Elucidation of better biomarkers to determine the underlying pathogenic phenotype will significantly advance our understanding and prediction of which critically ill patients will benefit from GC and who would experience a deleterious effect from its use.
Copyright ? 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] acute respiratory distress syndrome; corticosteroids; critical care; pneumonia; septic shock
PMID: 31626870 DOI: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2019.107428
Chan ED[SUP]1[/SUP], Chan MM[SUP]2[/SUP], Chan MM[SUP]3[/SUP], Marik PE[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h] 1 Pulmonary Section, Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, CO, United States; Departments of Medicine and Academic Affairs, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, United States; Division of Pulmonary Sciences and Critical Care Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States. Electronic address: chane@njhealth.org. 2 Departments of Medicine and Academic Affairs, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, United States. 3 Department of Medicine, David Grant Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Fairfield, CA, United States. 4 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, United States.
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Glucocorticoids (GC) in all its various forms and formulations are likely one of the most commonly used pharmacologic agents in medicine. Their use can be profoundly therapeutic but are also associated with a myriad of acute and chronic side effects. It is fairly well-accepted in the medical community that GC can be life-saving when used in critically ill patients with severe exacerbations of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, HIV-associated pneumocystosis, and systemic vasculitides. However, the adjunctive role of GC is much more controversial in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), septic shock, community-acquired pneumonia, and several other serious medical conditions. Despite such controversies, GC should at least be considered for patients with fulminant manifestations of the following conditions as there is equipoise to indicate that GC may improve outcome with acceptable risks: (i) severe ARDS with refractory hypoxemia despite one to two weeks of state-of-the-art management, (ii) recalcitrant, vasopressor-dependent septic shock, (iii) non-influenza, severe community-acquired pneumonia, and (iv) severe alcoholic hepatitis. The bases for these controversies is likely due to both host factors (e.g., differences in GC resistance and susceptibility to adverse effects) and different phenotypes of any one disease state; e.g., different pathogenesis and pathogens under the rubric of "sepsis." Elucidation of better biomarkers to determine the underlying pathogenic phenotype will significantly advance our understanding and prediction of which critically ill patients will benefit from GC and who would experience a deleterious effect from its use.
Copyright ? 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] acute respiratory distress syndrome; corticosteroids; critical care; pneumonia; septic shock
PMID: 31626870 DOI: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2019.107428