Pro/con clinical debate: Are steroids useful in the management of patients with septic shock?

AUTOR(ES)

Ritacca, Frank V

FONTE

BioMed Central

RESUMO

Decision-making in the intensive care unit is often very difficult. Although we are encouraged to make evidence-based decisions, this may be difficult for a number of reasons. To begin with, evidence may not exist to answer the clinical question. Second, when there is evidence it may not be applicable to the patient in question or the clinician may be reluctant to apply it to the patient based on a number of secondary issues such as costs, premorbid condition or possible complications. Finally, emotions are often highly charged when caring for patients that have a significant chance of death, and care-givers as well as families are frequently prepared to take chances on a therapy whose benefit is not entirely clear. Steroid use in septic shock is an example of a therapy that makes some sense but has conflicting support in the literature. In this issue of Critical Care Forum, the two sides of this often heated debate are brought to the forefront in an interesting format.

Documentos Relacionados

• Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock?
• Pro/con clinical debate: Hydroxyethylstarches should be avoided in septic patients
• Pro/con clinical debate: Steroids are a key component in the treatment of SARS
• Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-frequency oscillatory ventilation useful in the management of adult patients with respiratory failure?
• Pro/con clinical debate: Antibiotics are important in the management of patients with pancreatitis with evidence of pancreatic necrosis