The efficacy and safety of dopamine versus norepinephrine in management of paediatric septic shock

Dharmendra Chaurasiya; Kawalpreet Chhabra; Anuj S. Sethi; Omshankar Chaurasiya

doi:10.18203/2349-3291.ijcp20242332

Authors

Dharmendra Chaurasiya Department of Paediatrics, Maharani Laxmibai Medical College, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India
Kawalpreet Chhabra Department of Paediatrics, Maharani Laxmibai Medical College, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India
Anuj S. Sethi Department of Paediatrics, Maharani Laxmibai Medical College, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India
Omshankar Chaurasiya Department of Paediatrics, Maharani Laxmibai Medical College, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-3291.ijcp20242332

Keywords:

Dopamine, Norepinephrine, Septic shock, Vasopressor therapy, Arrhythmia, Safety profile

Abstract

Background: Septic shock is one of most common cause of death in pediatric patients. The optimum septic shock vasopressor support strategy is currently debated. This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of norepinephrine (NE) and dopamine (DA) as the initial vasopressor in pediatric septic shock patients.

Methods: A prospective, randomized, clinical trial was carried out between January 2022 to January 2023 in a pediatric intensive care unit comparing DA with NE as the initial vasopressor in fluid-resuscitated 100 pediatric patients with septic shock. Normalization of blood pressure was taken as end point. If the maximum dose of the initial vasopressor was unable to attain the hemodynamic goal, then another vasopressor agent was added. Patients were monitored for response and side effect.

Results: DA had a mortality of 50% as compared to 40% in NE. Arrhythmias occurred in 27.5% cases in DA group and 8.33% cases in NE group. There was a significantly greater incidence of sinus tachycardia with DA (12.5%) than NE (5%).

Conclusions: NE showed better efficacy than DA in pediatric patients with septic shock with lesser event of arrhythmias.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Brierley J, Carcillo JA, Choong K, Cornell T, DeCaen A, Deymann A, et al. Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(2):666.

Rang HP, Dale MM and Ritter JM. Pharmacology. 4th edition. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone Harcourt Publishers Limited. 2001.

Gooneratne N, Manaker S. Use of vasopressors and inotropes. Uptodate. 2010. Available at: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/use-of-vasopres sors-and-inotropes. Accessed on 12 March 2024.

Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(7):1303-10.

Balk RA. Optimum treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock: evidence in support of the recommendations. Disease-a-Month. 2004;50(4):168-213.

Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H, Gerlach H, Calandra T, Cohen J, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Intens Care Med. 2004;30:536-55.

Wheeler AP. Recent developments in the diagnosis and management of severe sepsis. Chest. 2007;132(6):1967-76.

Russell JA. Management of sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(16):1699-713.

Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE, Sharma S, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(6):1589-96.

Chowday SS, Chandra TJ. A study on prevalence of shock among the paediatric age group in and around west Godavari district, Andhra Pradesh. Pediatr Rev. 2021;8(5):231-5.

El-Nawawy A, El-Kinany H, Hamdy El-Sayed M, Boshra N. Intravenous polyclonal immunoglobulin administration to sepsis syndrome patients: a prospective study in a pediatric intensive care unit. J Trop Pediatr. 2005;51(5):271-8.

Vekaria-Hirani V, Kumar R, Musoke RN, Wafula EM, Chipkophe IN. Prevalence and management of septic shock among children admitted at the Kenyatta National Hospital, longitudinal survey. Int J Pediatr. 2019;1502963.

Patel GP, Grahe JS, Sperry M, Singla S, Elpern E, Lateef O, Balk RA. Efficacy and safety of dopamine versus norepinephrine in the management of septic shock. Shock. 2010;33:4:375-80.

Sakr Y, Reinhart K, Vincent J-L, Sprung CL, Moreno R, Ranieri M, et al. Does dopamine administration in septic shock influence outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:3:589-97.

Bellomo R, Chapman M, Finfer S, Hickling K, Myburgh J. Low-dose Sdopamine in patients with early renal dysfunction: a placebo-controlled randomised trial. Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Clinical Trials Group. Lancet (London, England). 2000;356(9248):2139-43.

Levy B, Dusang B, Annane D, Gibot S, Bollaert PE. College Interregional des Reanimateurs du NE. Cardiovascular response to dopamine and early prediction of outcome in septic shock: a prospective multiple-center study. Crit Care Med. 2005;33(10):2172-7.

Annane D, Vignon P, Renault A, Bollaert PE, Charpentier C, Martin C, et al. Norepinephrine plus dobutamine versus epinephrine alone for management of septic shock: a randomised trial. The Lancet. 2007;370(9588):676-84.

Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, Gordon AC, Hébert PC, Cooper DJ, et al. Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(9):877-87.

Annane D, Sebille V, Duboc D, Le Heuzey JY, Sadoul N, Bouvier E, et al. Incidence and prognosis of sustained arrhythmias in critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;178:20-5.