López CF, Pérez RBGR, Tapia IEX, Paz CDC, Ochoa MX, Cano EAA, Sánchez CA, Montiel FHM

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 50
Paginas: 48-54
Archivo PDF: 205.43 Kb.

RESUMEN

En los últimos años, la definición, clasificación y tratamiento del estado de choque han estado sujetos a revisiones y cambios constantes. Identificar a estos pacientes es vital en una sala de urgencias, antes de que el daño se vuelva sostenido e irreversible. El choque se define como una situación de hipoperfusión tisular generalizada en la cual el aporte de oxígeno a nivel celular resulta inadecuado para satisfacer las demandas metabólicas. Esta revisión tiene como objetivo dar una definición, métodos diagnósticos y clasificación del choque hipovolémico para entender los cambios y controversias que existen sobre el tratamiento del choque. En la actualidad, los estudios del estado de choque se han basado en buscar métodos para detectar tempranamente esta condición, así como parámetros de laboratorio que permitan una clasificación objetiva y guíen la adecuada reanimación del mismo, aunque al ser un síndrome, no hay un parámetro que sirva como estándar de oro. La monitorización hemodinámica se ha utilizado para guiar la terapia hídrica del paciente y hoy en día se sabe que los métodos dinámicos como la compresibilidad de la vena cava inferior son los más útiles. La adecuada identificación, monitorización y tratamiento del paciente pueden evitar repercusiones sistémicas importantes y evitar consecuencias irreversibles a nivel celular que lleven al paciente a la muerte.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Vincent JL, De Backer D. Circulatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369 (18): 1726-1734.

2. Weil MH, Shubin H. Proposed reclassification of shock states with special reference to distributive defects. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1971; 23 (0): 13-23.

3. Vincent JL, Rhodes A, Perel A, Martin GS, Della Rocca G, Vallet B et al. Clinical review: Update on hemodynamic monitoring —a consensus of 16. Crit Care. 2011; 15 (4): 229.

4. Li YL, Chan CP, Sin KK, Chan SS, Lin PY, Chen XH et al. Validating a pragmatic definition of shock in adult patients presenting to the ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2014; 32 (11): 1345-1350.

5. Wang J, Liang T, Louis L, Nicolaou S, McLaughlin PD. Hypovolemic shock complex in the trauma setting: a pictorial review. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2013; 64 (2): 156-163.

6. Maurer C, Wagner JY, Schmid RM, Saugel B. Assessment of volume status and fluid responsiveness in the emergency department: a systematic approach. Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2017; 112 (4): 326-333.

7. Stern SA. Low-volume fluid resuscitation for presumed hemorrhagic shock: helpful or harmful? Curr Opin Crit Care. 2001; 7 (6): 422-430.

8. Mutschler M, Nienaber U, Brockamp T, Wafaisade A, Fabian T, Paffrath T et al. Renaissance of base deficit for the initial assessment of trauma patients: a base deficit-based classification for hypovolemic shock developed on data from 16,305 patients derived from the TraumaRegister DGU®. Crit Care. 2013; 17 (2): R42.

9. Montiel-Jarquín A, Lascarez-Lagunas I, Sánchez-Gasca L, García-Cano E, Gómez-Conde E, García-Carrasco M et al. Lactate clearance is a prognostic factor in patients on shock state. Eur J Gen Med. 2012; 9 (2): 98-103.

10. Vincent JL, Dufaye P, Berré J, Leeman M, Degaute JP, Kahn RJ. Serial lactate determinations during circulatory shock. Crit Care Med. 1983; 11 (6): 449-451.

11. Laverde-Sabogal CE, Correa-Rivera AF, Joya-Higuera AY. Lactato y déficit de bases en trauma: valor pronóstico. Rev Colomb Anestesiol. 2014; 42 (1): 60-64.

12. Mutschler M, Hoffmann M, Wölfl C, Münzberg M, Schipper I, Paffrath T et al. Is the ATLS classification of hypovolaemic shock appreciated in daily trauma care? An online-survey among 383 ATLS course directors and instructors. Emerg Med J. 2015; 32 (2): 134-137.

13. Guly HR, Bouamra O, Little R, Dark P, Coats T, Driscoll P et al. Testing the validity of the ATLS classification of hypovolaemic shock. Resuscitation. 2010; 81 (9): 1142-1147.

14. van Olden GD, Meeuwis JD, Bolhuis HW, Boxma H, Goris RJ. Clinical impact of advanced trauma life support. Am J Emerg Med. 2004; 22 (7): 522-525.

15. Mutschler M, Nienaber U, Münzberg M, Fabian T, Paffrath T, Wölfl C et al. Assessment of hypovolaemic shock at scene: is the PHTLS classification of hypovolaemic shock really valid? Emerg Med J. 2014; 31 (1): 35-40.

16. Cantle PM, Cotton BA. Prediction of massive transfusion in trauma. Crit Care Clin. 2017; 33 (1): 71-84.

17. Kraut JA, Madias NE. Lactic acidosis. N Engl J Med. 2014; 371 (24): 2309-2319.

18. Lai WH, Rau CS, Hsu SY, Wu SC, Kuo PJ, Hsieh HY et al. Using the reverse shock index at the injury scene and in the emergency department to identify high-risk patients: a cross-sectional retrospective study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016; 13 (4): 357.

19. Birkhahn RH, Gaeta TJ, Terry D, Bove JJ, Tloczkowski J. Shock index in diagnosing early acute hypovolemia. Am J Emerg Med. 2005; 23 (3): 323-326.

20. Liu YC, Liu JH, Fang ZA, Shan GL, Xu J, Qi ZW et al. Modified shock index and mortality rate of emergency patients. World J Emerg Med. 2012; 3 (2): 114-117.

21. Keller AS, Kirkland LL, Rajasekaran SY, Cha S, Rady MY, Huddleston JM. Unplanned transfers to the intensive care unit: the role of the shock index. J Hosp Med. 2010; 5 (8): 460-465.

22. Nguyen HB, Banta DP, Stewart G, Kim T, Bansal R, Anholm J et al. Cardiac index measurements by transcutaneous Doppler ultrasound and transthoracic echocardiography in adult and pediatric emergency patients. J Clin Monit Comput. 2010; 24 (3): 237-247.

23. Witting MD. Standing shock index: an alternative to orthostatic vital signs. Am J Emerg Med. 2017; 35 (4): 637-639.

24. Parks JK, Elliott AC, Gentilello LM, Shafi S. Systemic hypotension is a late marker of shock after trauma: a validation study of Advanced Trauma Life Support principles in a large national sample. Am J Surg. 2006; 192 (6): 727-731.

25. Brasel KJ, Guse C, Gentilello LM, Nirula R. Heart rate: is it truly a vital sign? J Trauma. 2007; 62 (4): 812-817.

26. Magder S. Central venous pressure monitoring. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2006; 12 (3): 219-227.

27. Préau S, Saulnier F, Dewavrin F, Durocher A, Chagnon JL. Passive leg raising is predictive of fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with severe sepsis or acute pancreatitis. Crit Care Med. 2010; 38 (3): 819-825.

28. Silva OD, Quintero L, Herrera A. Choque en el paciente traumatizado. Congreso PHTLS; 2014. pp. 117-146.

29. Cecconi M, De Backer D, Antonelli M, Beale R, Bakker J, Hofer C et al. Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 2014; 40 (12): 1795-1815.

30. Rincón-Salas JJ. Manual de ultrasonido en terapia intensiva y emergencias. 2.a edición. México: ZarPra; 2017.

31. Melniker LA, Leibner E, McKenney MG, Lopez P, Briggs WM, Mancuso CA. Randomized controlled clinical trial of point-of-care, limited ultrasonography for trauma in the emergency department: the first sonography outcomes assessment program trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2006; 48 (3): 227-235.

32. Ultrasound guidelines: emergency, point-of-care and clinical ultrasound guidelines in medicine. Consultada 22/11/17. Disponible en: http://www.annemergmed.com/article/S0196-0644(16)30935-0/fulltext

33. Perera P, Mailhot T, Riley D, Mandavia D. The RUSH exam: rapid ultrasound in shock in the evaluation of the critically lll. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2010; 28 (1): 29-56, vii.

34. Muller L, Bobbia X, Toumi M, Louart G, Molinari N, Ragonnet B et al. Respiratory variations of inferior vena cava diameter to predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with acute circulatory failure: need for a cautious use. Crit Care. 2012; 16 (5): R188.

35. Bajwa EK, Malhotra A, Thompson BT. Methods of monitoring shock. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2004; 25 (6): 629-644.

36. Bedreag OH, Papurica M, Rogobete AF, Sarandan M, Cradigati CA, Vernic C et al. New perspectives of volemic resuscitation in polytrauma patients: a review. Burns Trauma. 2016; 4: 5.

37. ATLS Subcommittee; American College of Surgeons’ Committee on Trauma; International ATLS working group. Advanced trauma life support (ATLS®): the ninth edition. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013; 74 (5): 1363-1366.

38. Annane D, Siami S, Jaber S, Martin C, Elatrous S, Declère AD et al. Effects of fluid resuscitation with colloids vs. crystalloids on mortality in critically ill patients presenting with hypovolemic shock: the CRISTAL randomized trial. JAMA. 2013; 310 (17): 1809-1817.

39. Bayer O, Reinhart K, Sakr Y, Kabisch B, Kohl M, Riedemann NC et al. Renal effects of synthetic colloids and crystalloids in patients with severe sepsis: a prospective sequential comparison. Crit Care Med. 2011; 39 (6): 1335-1342.

40. Ueyama H, Kiyonaka S. Predicting the need for fluid therapy-does fluid responsiveness work? J Intensive Care. 2017; 5: 34.

41. Perel P, Roberts I, Ker K. Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (2): CD000567.

42. Mårtensson J, Bellomo R. Are all fluids bad for the kidney? Curr Opin Crit Care. 2015; 21 (4): 292-301.

43. Bakker J, Nijsten MW, Jansen TC. Clinical use of lactate monitoring in critically ill patients. Ann Intensive Care. 2013; 3 (1): 12.

44. Mackenzie DC, Noble VE. Assessing volume status and fluid responsiveness in the emergency department. Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2014; 1 (2): 67-77.

45. Maitland K, George EC, Evans JA, Kiguli S, Olupot-Olupot P, Akech SO et al. Exploring mechanisms of excess mortality with early fluid resuscitation: insights from the FEAST trial. BMC Med. 2013; 11: 68.

46. Hadimioglu N, Saadawy I, Saglam T, Ertug Z, Dinckan A. The effect of different crystalloid solutions on acid-base balance and early kidney function after kidney transplantation. Anesth Analg. 2008; 107 (1): 264-269.

47. Soni N. British consensus guidelines on intravenous fluid therapy for adult surgical patients (GIFTASUP): Cassandra’s view. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64 (3): 235-238.

48. McGee S, Abernethy WB 3rd, Simel DL. The rational clinical examination. Is this patient hypovolemic? JAMA. 1999; 281 (11): 1022-1029.

49. Hoste EA, Maitland K, Brudney CS, Mehta R, Vincent JL, Yates D et al. Four phases of intravenous fluid therapy: a conceptual model. Br J Anaesth. 2014; 113 (5): 740-747.

50. Marino P. The ICU book. 4th edition. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2014. pp. 113-121.