Early aggressive hemodynamic resuscitation using elevated plasma lactate as a marker is an essential component of managing critically ill patients. Therefore, measurement of blood lactate is recommended to stratify patients based on the need for fluid resuscitation and the risks of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and death. Hyperlactatemia is common among critically ill patients, and lactate levels and their trend may be reliable markers of illness severity and mortality. Although hyperlactatemia has been widely recognized as a marker of tissue hypoxia/hypoperfusion, it can also result from increased or accelerated aerobic glycolysis during the stress response. Additionally, lactate may represent an important energy source for patients in critical condition. Despite its inherent complexity, the current simplified view of hyperlactatemia is that it reflects the presence of global tissue hypoxia/hypoperfusion with anaerobic glycolysis. This review of hyperlactatemia in critically ill patients focuses on its pathophysiological aspects and recent clinical approaches. Hyperlactatemia in critically ill patients must be considered to be related to tissue hypoxia/hypoperfusion. Therefore, appropriate hemodynamic resuscitation is required to correct the pathological condition immediately. However, hyperlactatemia can also result from aerobic glycolysis, unrelated to tissue dysoxia, which is unlikely to respond to increases in systemic oxygen delivery. Because hyperlactatemia may be simultaneously related to, and unrelated to, tissue hypoxia, physicians should recognize that resuscitation to normalize plasma lactate levels could be over-resuscitation and may worsen the physiological status. Lactate is a reliable indicator of sepsis severity and a marker of resuscitation; however, it is an unreliable marker of tissue hypoxia/hypoperfusion.

Paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity (PSH) is a distinct syndrome of episodic sympathetic hyperactivities following severe acquired brain injury, characterized by paroxysmal transient fever, tachycardia, hypertension, tachypnea, excessive diaphoresis and specific posturing. PSH remains to be an underrecognized condition with a diagnostic pitfall especially in the intensive care unit (ICU) settings due to the high prevalence of concomitant diseases that mimic PSH. A consensus set of diagnostic criteria named PSH-Assessment Measure (PSH-AM) has been developed recently, which is consisted of two components: a diagnosis likelihood tool derived from clinical characteristics of PSH, and a clinical feature scale assigned to the severity of each sympathetic hyperactivity. We herein present a case series of patients with PSH who were diagnosed and followed by using PSH-AM in our tertiary institutional medical and surgical ICU between April 2015 and March 2017 in order to evaluate the clinical efficacy of PSH-AM. Among 394 survivors of 521 patients admitted with acquired brain injury defined as acute brain injury at all levels of severity regardless of the presence of altered consciousness, including traumatic brain injury, stroke, infectious disease, and encephalopathy, 6 patients (1.5%) were diagnosed as PSH by using PSH-AM. PSH-AM served as a useful scoring system for early objective diagnosis, assessment of severity, and serial evaluation of treatment efficacy in the management of PSH in the ICU settings. In conclusion, critical care clinicians should consider the possibility of PSH and can use PSH-AM as a useful diagnostic and guiding tool in the management of PSH.

Body temperature abnormalities, which occur because of several infectious and non-infectious etiologies, are among the most commonly noted symptoms of critically ill patients. These abnormalities frequently trigger changes in patient management. The purpose of this article was to review the contemporary literature investigating the definition and occurrence of body temperature abnormalities in addition to their impact on illness severity and mortality in critically ill non-neurological patients, particularly in patients with severe sepsis. Reports on the influence of fever on outcomes are inconclusive, and the presence of fever per se may not contribute to increased mortality in critically ill patients. In patients with severe sepsis, the impacts of elevated body temperature and hypothermia on mortality and the severity of physiologic decline are different. Hypothermia is significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality. In contrast, elevated body temperature may not be associated with increased disease severity or risk of mortality. In patients with severe sepsis, the effect of fever and fever control on outcomes requires further research.

No abstract

No abstract