Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized double-blind trial demonstrates that hydrocortisone restores hemodynamic stability in septic shock, indicating anti-inflammatory modulation rather than immunosuppression.
Within the last few years, increasing evidence of relative adrenal insufficiency in septic shock evoked a reassessment of hydrocortisone therapy. To evaluate the effects of hydrocortisone on the balance between proinflammatory and antiinflammation, 40 patients with septic shock were randomized in a double-blind crossover study to receive either the first 100 mg of hydrocortisone as a loading dose and 10 mg per hour until Day 3 (n = 20) or placebo (n = 20), followed by the opposite medication until Day 6. Hydrocortisone infusion induced an increase of mean arterial pressure, systemic vascular resistance, and a decline of heart rate, cardiac index, and norepinephrine requirement. A reduction of plasma nitrite/nitrate indicated inhibition of nitric oxide formation and correlated with a reduction of vasopressor support. The inflammatory response (interleukin-6 and interleukin-8), endothelial (soluble E-selectin) and neutrophil activation (expression of CD11b, CD64), and antiinflammatory response (soluble tumor necrosis factor receptors I and II and interleukin-10) were attenuated. In peripheral blood monocytes, human leukocyte antigen-DR expression was only slightly depressed, whereas in vitro phagocytosis and the monocyte-activating cytokine interleukin-12 increased. Hydrocortisone withdrawal induced hemodynamic and immunologic rebound effects. In conclusion, hydrocortisone therapy restored hemodynamic stability and differentially modulated the immunologic response to stress in a way of antiinflammation rather than immunosuppression.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Keh et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: