Publication Date
10-3-2022
Journal
JAMA Network Open
DOI
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.35331
PMID
36205995
PMCID
PMC9547322
PubMedCentral® Posted Date
10-7-2022
PubMedCentral® Full Text Version
Post-print
Published Open-Access
yes
Keywords
Aged, Cohort Studies, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Sepsis, Shock, Septic, Stroke Volume
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Intravenous fluid administration is recommended to improve outcomes for patients with septic shock. However, there are few data on fluid administration for patients with preexisting heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between preexisting HFrEF, guideline-recommended intravenous fluid resuscitation, and mortality among patients with community-acquired sepsis and septic shock.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cohort study was conducted of adult patients hospitalized in an integrated health care system from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015, with community-acquired sepsis and preexisting assessment of cardiac function. Follow-up occurred through July 1, 2016. Data analyses were performed from November 1, 2020, to August 8, 2022.
EXPOSURES: Preexisting heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (≤40%) measured by transthoracic echocardiogram within 1 year prior to hospitalization for sepsis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Multivariable models were adjusted for patient factors and sepsis severity and clustered at the hospital level to generate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs. The primary outcome was the administration of 30 mL/kg of intravenous fluid within 6 hours of sepsis onset. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit admission, rate of invasive mechanical ventilation, and administration of vasoactive medications.
RESULTS: Of 5278 patients with sepsis (2673 men [51%]; median age, 70 years [IQR, 60-81 years]; 4349 White patients [82%]; median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, 4 [IQR, 3-5]), 884 (17%) had preexisting HFrEF, and 2291 (43%) met criteria for septic shock. Patients with septic shock and HFrEF were less likely to receive guideline-recommended intravenous fluid than those with septic shock without HFrEF (96 of 380 [25%] vs 699 of 1911 [37%]; P < .001), but in-hospital mortality was similar (47 of 380 [12%] vs 244 of 1911 [13%]; P = .83). In multivariable models, HFrEF was associated with a decreased risk-adjusted odds of receiving 30 mL/kg of intravenous fluid within the first 6 hours of sepsis onset (aOR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85; P = .002). The risk-adjusted mortality was not significantly different among patients with HFrEF (aOR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.69-1.24; P = .59) compared with those without, and there was no interaction with intravenous fluid volume (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.03; P = .72).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this cohort study of patients with community-acquired septic shock suggest that preexisting HFrEF was common and was associated with reduced odds of receiving guideline-recommended intravenous fluids.
Comments
Associated Data