What's New in Shock, July 2020?

The 2020 July edition of SHOCK includes 11 clinical reports (1–11) and seven basic science studies (12–18) covering topics ranging from microcirculation, trauma, sepsis, and shock to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Some of this edition’s authors were able to identify promising new targets that contribute to a better understanding of certain diseases and thus enable new therapeutic options. Others established methods of improved patient assessment to predict severity and outcome of pathologies more precisely. This edition starts with a retrospective trauma registry analysis by Deane et al. (1), assessing damage control strategies for penetrating thoracic trauma. The aim of the study was to identify physiologic factors, which determine the need for damage control thoracic surgery and its outcome. Sixty-six patients undergoing thoracic damage control had significantly higher Injury Severity Score, chest Abbreviated Injury Scale, lactate and base deficit, lower pH and temperature as compared with the non-damage control group. There were no significant differences in admission systolic blood pressure or shock index between the groups. Mortality for thoracic damage (15.2%) was significantly higher than in the non-damage control group (4.3%), but lower than previously reported. The majority of deaths occurred prior to chest closure and survival following chest closure was 95%. Early recognition of shock by evaluating base deficit, pH, and lactate is more accurate than focussing on blood pressure and shock index to identify patients, in whom thoracic damage control is beneficial. Bol et al. (2) investigated the quantitative assessment of microcirculation via sublingual side-stream dark field using GlycoCheck, an automated image analysis software. The authors focused on assessing the reproducibility of the measurements, which enable the noninvasive bedside evaluation of microcirculation in critically ill patients. As the measurements of glycocalyx thickness, red blood cell filling percentage, and vessel density are utilized to guide resuscitation, reliable and reproducible results are essential. A total of 60 patients were studied by one or two observers to assess intraand interobserver variability and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). As single measurements obtained poor ICCs for glycocalyx thickness, the authors recommend three consecutive measurements and averaging of the results.

[1]  Dao-xin Wang,et al.  Circulating Exosomes From Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Ards Mice Trigger Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress in Lung Tissue. , 2020, Shock.

[2]  K. Huber,et al.  Toll like receptor 2 and 9 expression on circulating neutrophils is associated with increased mortality in critically ill patients. , 2020, Shock.

[3]  P. Harbut,et al.  Pulmonary Vasodilation by Intravenous Infusion of Organic Mononitrites of 1,2-Propanediol in Acute Pulmonary Hypertension Induced by Aortic Cross Clamping and Reperfusion: A Comparison with Nitroglycerin in Anesthetised Pigs. , 2020, Shock.

[4]  T. Standiford,et al.  Persistent Neuroinflammation and Brain Specific Immune Priming in A Novel Survival Model of Murine Pneumosepsis. , 2020, Shock.

[5]  C. McCall,et al.  SIRT1 Mediates Septic Cardiomyopathy in a Murine Model of Polymicrobial Sepsis. , 2020, Shock.

[6]  T. Goto,et al.  Necrosis Rather Than Apoptosis is The Dominant form of Alveolar Epithelial Cell Death In Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Experimental Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Model. , 2020, Shock.

[7]  M. Boros,et al.  Endothelin A and B Receptors: Potential Targets for Microcirculatory-Mitochondrial Therapy in Experimental Sepsis. , 2020, Shock.

[8]  G. McGwin,et al.  Impact of Glycemic Control on Risk of Mortality and Complications in Trauma Patients. , 2019, Shock.

[9]  Weifeng Yu,et al.  Impaired B-Cell Maturation Contributes to Reduced B Cell Numbers and Poor Prognosis in Sepsis. , 2019, Shock.

[10]  T. van der Poll,et al.  Tenascin C Plasma Levels in Critically Ill Patients with or Without Sepsis: A Multicentre Observational Study. , 2019, Shock.

[11]  M. McCurdy,et al.  The Reproducibility of the Point of care Microcirculation (Poem) Score when used to Assess Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study. , 2019, Shock.

[12]  Md. Monirul Islam,et al.  Removal of Circulating Neutrophil Extracellular Trap Components With An Immobilized Polymyxin B Filter: A Preliminary Study. , 2019, Shock.

[13]  Fumihiko Katagiri,et al.  Therapeutic and Adverse Effects of Thrombomodulin Alfa to Treat Sepsis-Induced Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation. , 2019, Shock.

[14]  I. Chaudry,et al.  The Prognostic Value of Presepsin For Sepsis in Abdominal Surgery: A Prospective Study. , 2019, Shock.

[15]  T. Delhaas,et al.  Variability of Microcirculatory Measurements in Critically ill Patients. , 2019, Shock.

[16]  Samuel M. Galvagno,et al.  Shock, not Blood Pressure or Shock, Determines the need for Thoracic Damage Control Following Penetrating Trauma. , 2019, Shock.

[17]  Xiao-cheng Liu,et al.  Association Between Perfusate Oxygenation and Acute Lung Injury in Tetralogy of Fallot Surgery. , 2019, Shock.

[18]  Zhifeng Liu,et al.  4-Phenylbutyrate Prevents Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress-Mediated Apoptosis Induced by Heatstroke in the Intestines of Mice , 2019, Shock.