Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Hydrocortisone use in dogs with septic shock and suspected CIRCI
By Summers, April M et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)·2021·Cornell University Hospital for Animals, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Retrospective evaluation of the use of hydrocortisone for treatment of suspected critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) in dogs with septic shock (2010-2017): 47 cases.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 47 dogs with septic shock were treated at a veterinary ICU, with 21 of them receiving hydrocortisone due to suspected critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI). While all dogs initially responded to treatment for low blood pressure, those given hydrocortisone took longer to stabilize compared to those who did not receive it. In the end, only 3 of the hydrocortisone-treated dogs survived to go home, compared to 9 dogs that did not receive the medication. The study suggests that hydrocortisone may not significantly improve survival in these cases, and more research is needed.
People also search for: dog septic shock treatment · hydrocortisone for dogs · dog low blood pressure symptoms
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate characteristics of septic shock patients treated with hydrocortisone (HC) due to suspicion of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) as compared to septic shock patients without suspicion of CIRCI. DESIGN: Retrospective study between February 2010 and October 2017. SETTING: University teaching hospital ICU. ANIMALS: Data were collected for 47 dogs with septic shock. Twenty-one dogs were treated with HC (HC-treated) due to suspicion of CIRCI. Twenty-six dogs did not receive HC (non-HC-treated). INTERVENTIONS: HC was administered either as an intermittent IV bolus or as a constant rate infusion (CRI) to those patients with suspected CIRCI. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Significantly higher baseline APPLEscores and predicted mortality were detected in the HC-treated patients compared to non-HC-treated patients (0.87 vs 0.44 for predicted mortality, P = 0.039). Patients in the HC-treated group were on more vasopressors and cardiotonics than those in the non-HC-treated group (2.5 vs 1.5, P <0 .001). All patients initially responded to vasopressor administration, with average time to resolution of hypotension being 90 minutes for the HC-treated group compared to 60 minutes for the non-HC-treated group (P = 0.640). However, HC-treated patients took significantly longer to have a sustained resolution (a systolic blood pressure > 90 mm Hg or a mean blood pressure > 65 mm Hg for at least 4 h) of their hypotension after starting vasopressors, as compared to their non-HC-treated counterparts (8.5 vs 4 h, P = 0.001). Three (14.3%) HC-treated patients survived to discharge compared to 9 (34.6%) non-HC-treated patients, but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: HC-treated patients had a higher baseline risk of mortality than non-HC-treated patients. There was no significant difference in survival between the HC-treated and non-HC-treated septic shock patients. Further studies are needed to evaluate the use of HC in patients with suspected CIRCI.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33599090/