Adjunctive Hemoadsorption Therapy with CytoSorb in Patients with Septic/Vasoplegic Shock: A Best Practice Consensus Statement

Hemoadsorption; Hyperinflammation; Septic shockHemoadsorción; Hiperinflamación; Shock sépticoHemoadsorció; Hiperinflamació; Shock sèpticA dysregulated host response is a common feature in critically ill patients due to both infectious and non-infectious origins that can lead to life-threatening organ dysfunction, which is still the primary cause of death in intensive care units worldwide. In its course, pathologic, unregulated levels of inflammatory mediators are often released into the circulation, a phenomenon also referred to as a “cytokine storm”. To date, there are no approved therapies to modulate the excessive immune response and limit hyperinflammation with the goal of preventing related organ failure and death. In this context, extracorporeal blood purification therapies aiming at the alteration of the host inflammatory response through broad-spectrum, non-selective removal of inflammatory mediators have come into focus. A novel hemoadsorption device (CytoSorb®, CytoSorbents Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA) has shown promising results in patients with hyperinflammation from various origins. Although a significant body of literature exists, there is ongoing research to address many important remaining questions, including the optimal selection of patient groups who might benefit the most, optimal timing for therapy initiation, optimal schedule for adsorber exchanges and therapy duration, as well as an investigation into the potential removal of concomitant antibiotics and other medications. In this review, we discuss the existing evidence and provide a consensus-based best practice guidance for CytoSorb® hemoadsorption therapy in patients with vasoplegic shock.This work was partially funded (artwork, editing) by CytoSorbents Inc. US Monmouth Junction, NJ, USA

Hemoadsorption in ‘liver indication’: analysis of 109 patients’ data from the CytoSorb international registry

Background: Our aim is to report the results of the ‘liver indication’ subset of patients in the CytoSorb International Registry. Methods: Structured data were recorded. Treatment characteristics and changes from T1 (start of hemoadsorption) to T2 (termination) were evaluated with a special focus on bilirubin, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, interleukin-6, platelet levels, SOFA scores, mortality, and subjective assessment by the attending physicians. Results: Until January 2021, from the total 1434 patients, 109 (age: 49.2 ± 17.1 years, 57.8% males) received treatment for hyperbilirubinemia. APACHE II-predicted mortality was 49.6 ± 26.8%. In the study, 91% of patients were alive at the termination of hemoadsorption and improvement was observed by the physicians in 75 cases. Overall, 65 (59.6%) patients died in the hospital, and 60 (55.0%) died in the ICU. Patients received a median of two treatments for a median of 43 h (interquartile range: 24–72 h) in total. Serum bilirubin levels reduced significantly to −4.6 (95% CI: −6.329 to −2.8) mg/dL. Thrombocytopenia was reported in four patients as an adverse event. Conclusions: We report the largest case series on hemoadsorption for ‘liver indication’ from the CytoSorb International Registry. The finding of significant bilirubin removal observed in our study could have substantial impact in designing and executing further studies on the effects of hemoadsorption in liver dysfunction, which are certainly warranted

Reply to Supady et al. On the Use of Hemadsorption with CytoSorb in Patients with Septic Shock. Comment on “Kogelmann et al. First Evaluation of a New Dynamic Scoring System Intended to Support Prescription of Adjuvant CytoSorb Hemoadsorption Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 2939”

Thank you very much for your interest in our research [...

First Evaluation of a New Dynamic Scoring System Intended to Support Prescription of Adjuvant CytoSorb Hemoadsorption Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock

Introduction: Despite advances in critical care medicine, adjunctive approaches in sepsis therapy have failed to prove their efficacy. Notwithstanding promising results using hemoadsorption (CytoSorb), questions remain concerning timing and dosing. We created a dynamic scoring system (DSS) to assess patients with early septic shock and performed a first evaluation of the system in this patient population. Methods: Data from 502 patients with septic shock according to Sepsis-3 criteria were retrospectively analyzed. Score parameters were documented at the time of diagnosis (T0) and 6 h later (T6) to calculate a dynamic score. Survival on day 7 and 56 as well as ICU and hospital mortality were analyzed in regard to the score as well as the delay of hemoadsorption therapy. Results: Of the 502 patients analyzed, 198 received adjunctive CytoSorb treatment and 304 received standard therapy. Septic shock was typically represented by 5 points, while >6 points indicated a situation refractory to standard therapy with the worst outcome in patients shown by >8 points. The differences in mortality between the score groups (<6, 6–8, >8 points) were significant. Analysis further showed a significant 56-day, ICU and hospital survival advantage in CytoSorb patients when therapy was started early. Conclusion: We created a scoring system allowing for the assessment of the clinical development of patients in the early phase of septic shock. Applying this approach, we were able to detect populations with a distinct mortality pattern. The data also showed that an early start of CytoSorb therapy was associated with significantly improved survival. As a next step, this easy-to-apply scoring system would require validation in a prospective manner to learn whether patients to be treated with hemoadsorption therapy in the course of septic shock could thereby be identified

Hemoadsorption by CytoSorb in septic patients: a case series

Abstract Background Septic shock, defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection, is a highly lethal condition that causes substantial morbidity and mortality among critically ill patients. One of the hallmarks of sepsis is the excessive release of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators causing refractory hypotension, tissue damage, metabolic acidosis and ultimately multiple organ failure. In this context, cytokine reduction by hemoadsorption represents a new concept for blood purification, developed to attenuate the overwhelming systemic levels of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators released in the early phase of sepsis. Methods In the present case series, we evaluated the impact of a new hemoadsorption device (CytoSorb) used as adjunctive therapy, on hemodynamics and clinically relevant outcome parameters in 26 critically ill patients with septic shock and in need of renal replacement therapy. Results We found that treatment of these patients with septic shock was associated with hemodynamic stabilization and a reduction in blood lactate levels. Actual mortality in the overall patient population was lower than mortality predicted by acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II). These effects seem to be more pronounced in patients in whom therapy started within 24 h of sepsis diagnosis, whereas a delay in the start of therapy was associated with a poor response to therapy in terms of reduction of catecholamine demand and survival. Moreover, from our patient population, medical patients seemed to benefit more than post-surgical patients in terms of survival. Treatment using the CytoSorb device was safe and well-tolerated with no device-related adverse events during or after the treatment sessions. Conclusion Hemoadsorption using CytoSorb resulted in rapid hemodynamic stabilization and increased survival, particularly in patients in whom therapy was started early. Given the positive clinical experience of this case series, randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to define the potential benefits of this new treatment option

Reply to Supady et al. On the Use of Hemadsorption with CytoSorb in Patients with Septic Shock. Comment on “Kogelmann et al. First Evaluation of a New Dynamic Scoring System Intended to Support Prescription of Adjuvant CytoSorb Hemoadsorption Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock. <i>J. Clin. Med.</i> 2021, <i>10</i>, 2939”

Thank you very much for your interest in our research [...

International registry on the use of the CytoSorb® adsorber in ICU patients : Study protocol and preliminary results

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this clinical registry is to record the use of CytoSorb(R) adsorber device in critically ill patients under real-life conditions. METHODS: The registry records all relevant information in the course of product use, e. g., diagnosis, comorbidities, course of the condition, treatment, concomitant medication, clinical laboratory parameters, and outcome (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02312024). Primary endpoint is in-hospital mortality as compared to the mortality predicted by the APACHE II and SAPS II score, respectively. RESULTS: As of January 30, 2017, 130 centers from 22 countries were participating. Data available from the start of the registry on May 18, 2015 to November 24, 2016 (122 centers; 22 countries) were analyzed, of whom 20 centers from four countries provided data for a total of 198 patients (mean age 60.3 +/- 15.1 years, 135 men [68.2%]). In all, 192 (97.0%) had 1 to 5 Cytosorb(R) adsorber applications. Sepsis was the most common indication for CytoSorb(R) treatment (135 patients). Mean APACHE II score in this group was 33.1 +/- 8.4 [range 15-52] with a predicted risk of death of 78%, whereas the observed mortality was 65%. There were no significant decreases in the SOFA scores after treatment (17.2 +/- 4.8 [3-24]). However interleukin-6 levels were markedly reduced after treatment (median 5000 pg/ml before and 289 pg/ml after treatment, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This third interim report demonstrates the feasibility of the registry with excellent data quality and completeness from 20 study centers. The results must be interpreted with caution, since the numbers are still small; however the disease severity is remarkably high and suggests that adsorber treatment might be used as an ultimate treatment in life-threatening situations. There were no device-associated side effects

Dosing of Extracorporeal Cytokine Removal in Septic Shock (DECRISS) : protocol of a prospective, randomised, adaptive, multicentre clinical trial

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis and septic shock have mortality rates between 20% and 50%. In sepsis, the immune response becomes dysregulated, which leads to an imbalance between proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators. When standard therapeutic measures fail to improve patients’ condition, additional therapeutic alternatives are applied to reduce morbidity and mortality. One of the most recent alternatives is extracorporeal cytokine adsorption with a device called CytoSorb. This study aims to compare the efficacy of standard medical therapy and continuous extracorporeal cytokine removal with CytoSorb therapy in patients with early refractory septic shock. Furthermore, we compare the dosing of CytoSorb adsorber device changed every 12 or 24 hours. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: It is a prospective, randomised, controlled, open-label, international, multicentre, phase III study. Patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to receive standard medical therapy (group A) or—in addition to standard treatment—CytoSorb therapy. CytoSorb treatment will be continuous and last for at least 24 hours, CytoSorb adsorber device will be changed every 12 (group B) or 24 hours (group C). Our primary outcome is shock reversal (no further need or a reduced (≤10% of the maximum dose) vasopressor requirement for 3 hours) and time to shock reversal (number of hours elapsed from the start of the treatment to shock reversal). Based on sample size calculation, 135 patients (1:1:1) will need to be enrolled in the study. A predefined interim analysis will be performed after reaching 50% of the planned sample size, therefore, the corrected level of significance (p value) will be 0.0294. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Scientific and Research Ethics Committee of the Hungarian Medical Research Council (OGYÉI/65049/2020). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04742764; Pre-results