Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Dec;40(12):1795-815.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-014-3525-z. Epub 2014 Nov 13.

Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

Affiliations

Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

Maurizio Cecconi et al. Intensive Care Med. 2014 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: Circulatory shock is a life-threatening syndrome resulting in multiorgan failure and a high mortality rate. The aim of this consensus is to provide support to the bedside clinician regarding the diagnosis, management and monitoring of shock.

Methods: The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine invited 12 experts to form a Task Force to update a previous consensus (Antonelli et al.: Intensive Care Med 33:575-590, 2007). The same five questions addressed in the earlier consensus were used as the outline for the literature search and review, with the aim of the Task Force to produce statements based on the available literature and evidence. These questions were: (1) What are the epidemiologic and pathophysiologic features of shock in the intensive care unit? (2) Should we monitor preload and fluid responsiveness in shock? (3) How and when should we monitor stroke volume or cardiac output in shock? (4) What markers of the regional and microcirculation can be monitored, and how can cellular function be assessed in shock? (5) What is the evidence for using hemodynamic monitoring to direct therapy in shock? Four types of statements were used: definition, recommendation, best practice and statement of fact.

Results: Forty-four statements were made. The main new statements include: (1) statements on individualizing blood pressure targets; (2) statements on the assessment and prediction of fluid responsiveness; (3) statements on the use of echocardiography and hemodynamic monitoring.

Conclusions: This consensus provides 44 statements that can be used at the bedside to diagnose, treat and monitor patients with shock.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Antonelli M, Levy M, Andrews PJ, Chastre J, Hudson LD, Manthous C, Meduri GU, Moreno RP, Putensen C, Stewart T, Torres A. Hemodynamic monitoring in shock and implications for management. International Consensus Conference, Paris, France, 27-28 April 2006. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:575–590. - PubMed
    1. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O’Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schunemann HJ, Edejer T, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW, Jr, Zaza S, Grade Working Group Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weil MH, Henning RJ. New concepts in the diagnosis and fluid treatment of circulatory shock. Thirteenth annual Becton, Dickinson and Company Oscar Schwidetsky Memorial Lecture. Anesth Analg. 1979;58:124–132. - PubMed
    1. Vincent JL, De Backer D. Circulatory shock. N Eng J Med. 2013;369:1726–1734. - PubMed
    1. Schulman AM, Claridge JA, Carr G, Diesen DL, Young JS. Predictors of patients who will develop prolonged occult hypoperfusion following blunt trauma. J Trauma. 2004;57:795–800. - PubMed

Publication types