Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 694 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 16  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 321-325

Hyperglycemia risk evaluation of hydrocortisone intermittent boluses versus continuous infusion in septic shock: A prospective randomized trial

Department of Trauma and Emergency (Anaesthesiology), Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, Bihar, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Ravi Anand
Fellowship Senior Resident, Department of Trauma and Emergency (Anaesthesiology), Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, Bihar
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/aer.aer_115_22

Rights and Permissions

Background: Hydrocortisone showed an important role in reversal of shock when added to standard therapy in managing septic shock. Hyperglycemia is one of the most common side effects associated with corticosteroid treatment. Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of hyperglycemia of intermittent hydrocortisone boluses versus continuous infusion in septic shock patients. Settings and Design: This was a prospective randomized controlled study conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Materials and Methods: One hundred and forty patients with septic shock and who received noradrenaline were enrolled in this randomized study. Group 1 was intermittent bolus hydrocortisone group (n = 70) and Group 2 was continuous infusion group (n = 70). All patients who were admitted with septic shock and who received noradrenaline and hydrocortisone were included in the study. Those patients who had exceeded 200 mg per day of hydrocortisone were excluded from the study. The primary outcome of the study was mean blood glucose. Statistical Analysis Used: Qualitative variables were compared between the two groups with the Chi-square of the Fisher's exact test and continuous variables were compared using the Student's t-test or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: Out of 112 patients, 54 patients received hydrocortisone as intermittent boluses (48.2%), and 58 patients (51.8%) received continuous infusion. For the primary outcome, no statistically or clinically significant difference was found in the blood glucose estimated marginal mean: 154.44 mg.dL−1 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 144.18–166.88) in the bolus group and 160.2 mg.dL−1 (95% CI: 143.82–176.76) in the infusion group with a mean difference of 05.76 mg.dL−1 (95% CI: −13.86–25.38). For the secondary outcomes of the study, no difference was found between the two groups in hyperglycemic or hypoglycemic events, mortality, length of stay in intensive care unit, and reversal of shock. Conclusions: The risk of hyperglycemia is almost equal in both intermittent and continuous infusions of hydrocortisone in septic shock patients.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded44    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal