Symptoms of shock caused by sepsis are one of the common symptoms of the disease, and the pathology of the patient is extremely complex, difficult to treat and has a high rate of death. In the treatment of sepsis, there is a great need for liquid resuscitation or vascularly active drug treatment, while research and knowledge on vascularly active drug treatment has changed somewhat in recent years, requiring timely updating of clinical principles and increased awareness of sepsis treatment.
Angioactive drug choice
Adrenalin and dopamine are the two priority vascular active drugs for clinical treatment of septic shock. Both are on an equal footing in the early SSC guidelines, both of which are first-line drugs, and the idea that deetrenalin treatment of sepsis is better than dopamine was raised at the International sepsis Forum in 2003, although this view was questioned by most experts in the Forum. In 2010, a multi-centre study by the SOAP II Study Group radically changed the traditional view, leading directly to a major change in the vascularly active part of the SCC guide, with the option of changing peptotoxicity to a first-line vascular active drug with both adrenalin and dopamine as a first-line, with dopamine as an alternative drug only if the patient has a heart attack or a rapid heart disorder. During the actual treatment period, as it is largely impossible to predict accurately what type of sepsis shock is a rapid heart disorder and low, dopamine is actually used only for a small proportion of patients with paracetex shock. In the 2012 revision of the SSC guidelines, the status of dopamine has been rapidly declining, and acute doctors have accepted the preferred status of deadrenalin. In the 2018 International Clinical Report, 97 per cent of clinical doctors preferred medrenalin to treat sepsis shock, still only 2 per cent of the first-line drug choices were for dopamine.
The application of adrenaline, compared to dopamine, can be effective in preventing clinical heart failure, especially for heart-borne shock patients, and rapid heart disorder. Despite the fact that adrenaline is the preferred level of evidence in the SSC Guide, it is still the preferred standard treatment for pusisculous shock because there are no studies and no drugs to challenge its core status. The guidelines clearly indicate that in practice, both the guidelines and the individualization of patients, especially those with a high number of older persons, a combination of other basic diseases of the internal medicine, and the insistence on adrenaline as the preferred drug, even the only alternative, are inappropriate.
Joint application of angiogenesis
In the course of actual clinical treatment, an increase in the dose of the drug at the same time as deetrenalin treatment is often difficult to achieve the desired therapeutic effect, but instead increases the likelihood of an adverse reaction, with more harm than benefit, while in the SCC guidelines, it is recommended to be treated with a combination of second-line vascular active drugs, including angiogenesis, adrenaline, etc., which is constricted through the operation of different receptor mechanisms, increases blood pressure and reduces the dose of detrenalin in order to prevent the occurrence of adverse clinical reactions, which require individualized treatment on the basis of the actual condition of the patient and the trade-off of the merits of the drug.
Priority should be given to co-use of adrenaline treatment for peptotoxic shock in critical or decreasing heart output, although it is also necessary to note that adrenaline may increase the likelihood of adverse effects such as lactacid acid poisoning, heart hypervelocity and heart disorders. For patients with a normal or elevated heart output or a sepsis shock, a combination of vascular pressurizers can also be used to reduce the incidence of complications such as thawing, while reducing the need for kidney substitution treatment, although this treatment may also reduce the new index of the patient and increase the incidence of ischaemic blood. Angiogen-II is more effective than an angiogen, and is currently being approved for treatment for sepsis, although the safety of the treatment is yet to be further tested.
At the same time, it should be noted that the withdrawal of dopamine from first-line treatment does not mean that the drug is a second-line vascular active drug, and that dopamine and deetrenalin can cause a dose-dependent rapid heart disorder. Although there are no reports of increased rates of rapid heart disorder due to combined use of detoxine and dopamine, the joint use programme may have a relatively positive effect on patients with hypothylene or rapid heart disorder, since both drugs are of the type of chlorophenolamine.
Summary
In general, the vascularly active drug treatment response is inconsistent and unpredictable in the treatment of septosis, while the combination of the drug selected is difficult to determine effectively during the treatment of the stairwell, while septosis patients are able to react to their clinically selected aeroactive drug treatment programme in order to reduce the shock time, which will have a direct impact on the patient’s prognosis level, with reference to the intragenotoxic shock antiinfective step treatment model, and can also choose the vascular activity drug step down.
