Skip to main content

Septic shock, noradrenaline requirements and alpha-2 agonists: Fishing in the right pond?

Bellomo et al. [1] confirm the clinical [2,3,4] data showing a reduction in noradrenaline (NA) requirements in the setting of septic shock following administration of an alpha-2 agonist, dexmedetomidine.

The intensivist is unaware that the retrospective analysis has thoroughly changed the design of the study from “sedation vs. outcome” to “sympathetic de-activation vs. circulation” (i.e., upregulation of alpha-1 receptors vs. NA requirements). Furthermore, the design is not optimal. SPICE III [5] compared early dexmedetomidine (“dex”) versus usual sedation (− 2 < RASS < + 1) [5]. Bellomo achieved RASS ~ − 4, in both groups (results [1]): The dex group received also propofol (95% of the patients), midazolam (43%) and higher doses of opioids (Table S1 [1]). Thus, any effect of dex is drowned as a consequence of adding usual sedation to dex. Nevertheless, in the dex group, (a) the overall NA requirement (“NA equivalent”) is lowered by 25%, nonsignificantly, but of daily clinical relevance for the intensivist; (b) the NA requirement necessary to achieve a target pressure is lowered, as a function of dose (i.e., compatible with a dose-dependent sympathetic de-activation). NA requirements should be readdressed in the dexmedetomidine-only patients versus the usual sedation-only patients, throughout the whole SPICE III [5] database.

Authors’ response

We thank Dargent and colleagues for the comments about our study on the hemodynamic changes seen in patients with septic shock treated with dexmedetomidine as primary sedating agent versus usual care [1]. We agree that the retrospective nature of the study creates problems because the original study was a sedation trial with mortality as the outcome, while the retrospective investigation of the hemodynamic effects of dexmedetomidine was a post hoc physiological assessment in patients who were mostly deeply sedated at the time of investigation (median RASS of − 3) and receiving propofol in most cases, fentanyl in the majority and midazolam in close to half of cases. In such a setting, the effect of dexmedetomidine is markedly attenuated by the impact of these drugs. Thus, we agree that it is all the more remarkable that, in the dexmedetomidine group, the overall norepinephrine (noradrenaline) requirements were lower and that the dose required to achieve target mean arterial pressure was also decreased. Finally, we agree that comparing patients on dexmedetomidine only versus patients receiving usual care would be ideal. Unfortunately, we were unable to identify such a cohort of patients. Nonetheless, within the limitations of the design and the population studied, we think that our findings are consistent with a substantial body of experimental data supporting the view that, in the septic, vasodilated state, dexmedetomidine (and central alpha-2 agonists) infusion does not exacerbate hypotension or increase vasopressor requirements but, in fact, appears to do the opposite [6,7,8,9].

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

APACHE:

Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation

NA:

Noradrenaline

RASS:

Richmond agitation-sedation scale

References

  1. 1.

    Cioccari L, Luethi N, Bailey M, Shehabi Y, Howe B, Messmer AS, et al. The effect of dexmedetomidine on vasopressor requirements in patients with septic shock: a subgroup analysis of the Sedation Practice in Intensive Care Evaluation [SPICE III] Trial. Crit Care. 2020;24:441. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03115-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Pichot C, Mathern P, Khettab F, Ghignone M, Geloen A, Quintin L. Increased pressor response to noradrenaline during septic shock following clonidine? Anaesth Intensive Care. 2010;38:784–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Leroy S, Aladin L, Laplace C, Jalem S, Rosenthal J, Abrial A, et al. Introduction of a centrally anti-hypertensive, clonidine, reduces noradrenaline requirements in septic shock caused by necrotizing enterocolitis. Am J Emerg Med. 2017;35:e3-377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Morelli A, Sanfilippo F, Arnemann P, Hessler M, Kampmeier TG, D’Egidio A, et al. The effect of propofol and dexmedetomidine sedation on norepinephrine requirements in septic shock patients: a crossover trial. Crit Care Med. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000003520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Shehabi Y, Howe BD, Bellomo R, Arabi YM, Bailey M, Bass FE, et al. Early sedation with dexmedetomidine in critically Ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1904710.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lankadeva YR, Ma S, Iguchi N, et al. Dexmedetomidine reduces norepinephrine requirements and preserves renal oxygenation and function in ovine septic acute kidney injury. Kidney Int. 2019;96:1150–61.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Lankadeva YR, Booth LC, Kosaka J, et al. Clonidine restores pressor responsiveness to phenylephrine and angiotensin II in ovine sepsis. Crit Care Med. 2015;43:e221–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Morelli A, Sanfilippo F, Arnemann P, et al. The effect of propofol and dexmedetomidine sedation on norepinephrine requirements in septic shock patients: a cross over trial. Crit Care Med. 2019;47:e89-95.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Pichot C, Mathern P, Khettab F, et al. Increased pressor response to noradrenaline during septic shock following clonidine. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2010;38:784–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AD, LQ, and JPQ, contributed to the writing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luc Quintin.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

LQ received honoraria and unrestricted research grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim, France, UCB Pharma, Belgium, and Abbott International, Il, USA [1986–1996], and holds US patent 8 846 606 B2, September 30, 2014 (method and drug composition for treating septic shock hypotension).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dargent, A., Quintin, L. & Quenot, JP. Septic shock, noradrenaline requirements and alpha-2 agonists: Fishing in the right pond?. Crit Care 25, 56 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03377-5

Download citation