Abstract
Objective:
The hemodynamic profile of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) related shock remains poorly defined and therefore challenging to support with pharmacotherapy in the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to evaluate the hemodynamic profile and vasoactive medication management used in MIS-C patients presenting to the ICU in shock and provide data from high-fidelity continuous cardiac output monitoring.
Design:
Single-center retrospective case-cohort study.
Setting:
Pediatric and Cardiac ICU in a quaternary care hospital.
Patients:
All patients who met United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for MIS-C who were admitted to the ICU between March 2020 and May 2021, required vasoactive support and were placed on continuous cardiac index (CCI) monitoring. Patients requiring extracorporeal life support were excluded.
Interventions:
None.
Measurements and Main Results:
Among 52 children with MIS-C presenting in shock requiring vasoactive support, 14 (27%) patients were placed on CCI monitoring. These 14 patients had hyperdynamic cardiac index (CI) and low indexed systemic vascular resistance (SVRi) in the first 24 hours with normalization of CI and improved SVRi within the subsequent 24 hours.
Conclusion:
Further studies are needed to evaluate the difference between the use of vasoconstrictor versus vasodilators in pediatric patients with MIS-C, because a phenotype with high CI and low SVRi may be important.
Keywords: cardiac output, covid-19, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, shock, vasoplegia
Introduction
Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents with a systemic hyperinflammatory response that, in severe form, leads to circulatory impairment, and ultimately cardiogenic shock1,2. An estimated 50% of children with MIS-C admitted to a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) require vasoactive support1,2. While MIS-C is, in the majority, relatively short-lived and a reversible phenomenon, the hemodynamic profile associated with MIS-C related shock is poorly defined. We hypothesize that with the use of continuous cardiac output monitoring we will be able to describe the hemodynamic characteristics of this population, which may aid in better utilization of vasoactives.
Materials and Methods
This study was approved by the Baylor College of Medicine Internal Review Board Protocol number H-49387 with a waiver of informed consent.
In this retrospective case-cohort study we selected pediatric patients presenting to the PICUs at Texas Children’s Hospital, Texas (March 2020 to May 2021) who met the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for MIS-C3, required vasoactive support, and underwent hemodynamic monitoring with the use of continuous cardiac output monitorization. Invasive hemodynamic monitoring included invasive arterial blood pressure, central venous pressure (CVP), and arteriovenous oxygen saturation gradient (AvO2) measurements during the first 24 hours of PICU admission, compared with the subsequent 24 hours. Continuous cardiac index (CCI) data was obtained using high fidelity arterial pulse contour monitors (PiCCO, Getinge, Wayle, NJ, USA or FloTrac Edwards Lifescience, Irvine, CA), stroke volume index (SVI) and indexed systemic vascular resistance (SVRi) were analyzed during the same two time periods. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was adjusted using median MAP reference values based on age and sex in critically ill children4. Echocardiographic assessments were obtained and characterized by a Pediatric Cardiologist (in accordance with our institutional management protocol), and vasoactive-inotropic scores (VIS)5 were calculated for all children. Patients requiring extracorporeal mechanical circulatory support (ECLS) during this time were excluded since they had different hemodynamics and vasoactive medication requirements. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (percentages or median, interquartile range [IQR]), or Mood’s Median test for statistical significant (p < 0.05), as appropriate. Statistical analyses were performed using JMP® (version 16, SAS, Cary, North Carolina, USA).
Results
We studied 52 patients with MIS-C requiring vasoactive support. Demographics, presenting symptoms, and clinical characteristics are described in Supplemental table 1. Admission echocardiography revealed moderate or severe left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction in 11 (21%) and moderate or severe right ventricular (RV) systolic dysfunction in 6 (12%).
Fourteen of 52 (27%) patients underwent CCI monitoring. In the patients who received CCI monitoring, median age was 13 years [10;17] and weight of 67.6 kg [44.8;96.5]. Common electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities on admission included abnormal T wave morphology in 10/14 (71%), and ST-segment abnormalities in 4/14 (29%). Atrioventricular block was not observed on initial EKG. Initial echocardiogram was performed within 3 hours [2;9] from hospital admission and demonstrated moderate or severe LV systolic dysfunction in 6/14 (43%) patients. Of the 14 patients, 12 underwent coronary artery evaluation with one patient identified with coronary dilation >2.5 z score (Supplemental table 2).
Patients received fluid resuscitation within 1 hour [<1;13] of hospital admission with a median of 14 ml/kg [8;26] of crystalloids within the first 6 hours. Vasoactive therapy was started within a median of 6 hours [1;10] from hospital admission and all were prior to CCI monitoring. Two or more vasoactive agents were required in 11/14 (79%) patients (epinephrine 100%, norepinephrine 57%, milrinone 21%, and vasopressin 21%) with a median duration of vasoactive support of 61 hours [38;98]. MIS-C therapy was started 8 hours [4;13] from admission with all but 2/14 receiving therapy before CCI monitoring (Supplemental figure 1 and Supplemental table 3).
CCI monitoring was started at a median of 11 hours [4;17] from PICU admission and initiated based on provider discretion. Repeat echocardiogram within 24 hours of CCI monitoring demonstrated improvement of LV systolic function (Supplemental table 2). During CCI monitoring, patients remained normotensive based on age reference for MAP (Table 1). Their CI at initiation (Figure 1) of monitoring was elevated at 5.0 l/min/m2 [4.2; 6.6] in the setting of low SVRi, 1039 dynes · sec/cm5/m2 [833; 1239]. CI subsequently normalized to a median of 3.7 l/min/m2 [3.2; 4.8] with improved, but still low, SVRi of 1330 dynes · sec/cm5/m2 [1113;1560] during the subsequent 24 hours (both p < 0.001). Patients had significantly higher median VIS (4 [2; 7] vs 2 [1; 4]; p <0.001) and maximum VIS (6 [4;12] vs 2 [2; 5]) at the initiation of CCI monitoring when compared to the subsequent 24 hours (p=0.003).
Table 1.
0–24 hours | 25–48 hours | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|
| |||
Hemodynamic profile of 14 children from the onset of CCI monitoring | |||
| |||
Age adjusted MAP (% from median) | 1 [−8;11] | 1 [−6;11] | 0.934 |
| |||
CVP (mmHg) | 8 [6;11] | 7 [4;11] | 0.140 |
| |||
SVI (ml/mm2/beat) [normal: 37–47] | 48 [40;66] | 43[33;53] | 0.036 |
| |||
CI (L/min/m2) [normal: 2.5–4.0] | 5.0 [4.2;6.6] | 3.7 [3.2;4.8] | <0001* |
| |||
SVRI (dynes · sec/cm5/m2) [normal: 1970–2390] | 1039 [833;1239] | 1330 [1113;1560] | <0.001* |
| |||
Median vasoactive dose a | |||
Epinephrine | 0.01 [0.2;0.05] | 0.02 [0.01;0.02] | <0.001* |
Norepinephrine | 0.02 [0.02;0.05] | 0.04 [0.01;0.06] | 0.691 |
Vasopressin | 0.01 [0.1;0.02] | 0.01 [0.01;0.02] | 0.952 |
Milrinone | 0 | 0.25 [0.25;0.28] | - |
Dobutamine | 3 [3;3] | 1 [1;1] | 0.003* |
| |||
Median VIS | 4 [2;7] | 2 [1;4] | <0.001* |
| |||
Max VIS | 6 [4;12] | 2 [2;5] | 0.003* |
| |||
AvO2 difference (%) | 11 [8;20] | 17 [15;19] | 0.002* |
| |||
LV function b | n=12 | n=8 | |
Normal | 6 (50) | 6 (75) | |
Mild | 5 (42) | 1 (13) | 0.378 |
Moderate | 1 (8) | 1 (13) | |
Severe | 0 | 0 |
Hemodynamics were collected as a continuous variable and described as a median [IQR] or n (%).
p<0.003.
Vasoactive medication units: epinephrine (mcg/kg/min), vasopressin (U/kg/min), norepinephrine (mcg/kg/min), milrinone (mcg/kg/min), dopamine (mcg/kg/min), dobutamine (mcg/kg/min)
LV EF < 30% severely depressed, 30%–40% moderately depressed, 40%–48% mildly depressed, > 48% normal
Patients were further subdivided based on their initial LV systolic function assessment (Supplemental table 4). CI remained elevated in both groups but was more hyperdynamic in the normal/mild LV systolic function group in the setting of lower SVRi when compared to the moderate/severe LV systolic dysfunction patients. All patients survived to hospital discharge.
Discussion
Involvement of the cardiovascular system occurs in 80–100% of patients with MIS-C6–8. Our study describes the hemodynamic profile and vasoactive requirements of critically ill children with MIS-C and shock. The laboratory profiles and markers of illness severity, including echocardiographic findings, of our cohort are similar to previously published reports9,10. The hemodynamic profile of our cohort highlights a subset of critically ill MIS-C patients who present with vasoplegia and hyperdynamic cardiac output during the first 24 hours of illness. These observations are followed by normalization of hemodynamic parameters, albeit with the use of critical care interventions and immunomodulation.
This work also highlights the use of echocardiographic assessment of ejection fraction as an indicator of contractility, which may not translate into changes in stroke volume. Ejection fraction remains dependent on ventricular loading conditions and would require knowledge of end-diastolic volume to properly assess cardiac output11,12. This finding is evident in the patients presenting with LV systolic dysfunction in whom cardiac output remained elevated in the setting of low systemic vascular resistance13.
Our study has some obvious limitations: it was retrospective, and we did not have hemodynamic data before the initiation of invasive monitoring. Comparison of hemodynamic data collected by both the PiCCO system and FloTrac may be challenging as cardiac output is calculated in different manners. PiCCO requires calibration with transpulmonary thermodilution to account for difference in arterial compliance for the individual patient. This may potentially reduce accuracy in the setting of large variations in arterial compliance between calibrations14. FloTrac devices carry a proprietary algorithm that evaluates pulse-contour properties to determine compliance requiring no external calibration, but may overestimate cardiac output in extreme hemodynamic states15.
Conclusion
Understanding the specific shock phenotype associated with MIS-C allows clinicians to devise a tailored approach to vasoactive medication management of this cardiovascular pathophysiology. The use of CCI in this population provides a more complete physiologic profile than echocardiogram alone and allows for continuous monitoring and evaluation of responsiveness to therapies.
Supplementary Material
Financial Support:
No external funding
Footnotes
Copyright Form Disclosure: Dr. Vogel’s institution received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R61HD105593); she received support for article research from the NIH; she disclosed the off-label product use of anakinra for rare hyper inflammatory condition. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.Valverde I, Singh Y, Sanchez-de-Toledo J, et al. Acute Cardiovascular Manifestations in 286 Children With Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome Associated With COVID-19 Infection in Europe. Circulation. 2021;143(1):21–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Feldstein LR, Rose EB, Horwitz SM, et al. Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in U.S. Children and Adolescents. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(4):334–346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.CDC Health Alert Network. Emergency preparedness and response: multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Health advisory. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Published May 14, 2020. Accessed September 2, 2021. https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2020/han00432.asp [Google Scholar]
- 4.Eytan D, Goodwin AJ, Greer R, Guerguerian AM, Laussen PC. Heart Rate and Blood Pressure Centile Curves and Distributions by Age of Hospitalized Critically Ill Children. Front Pediatr. 2017;5:52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gaies MG, Gurney JG, Yen AH, et al. Vasoactive–inotropic score as a predictor of morbidity and mortality in infants after cardiopulmonary bypass*. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. 2010;11(2):234–238. doi: 10.1097/pcc.0b013e3181b806fc [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Godfred-Cato S, Bryant B, Leung J, et al. COVID-19-Associated Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children - United States, March-July 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(32):1074–1080. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Cantarutti N, Battista V, Adorisio R, et al. Cardiac Manifestations in Children with SARS-COV-2 Infection: 1-Year Pediatric Multicenter Experience. Children. 2021;8(8). doi: 10.3390/children8080717 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Alsaied T, Tremoulet AH, Burns JC, et al. Review of Cardiac Involvement in Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children. Circulation. 2021;143(1):78–88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Matsubara D, Kauffman HL, Wang Y, et al. Echocardiographic findings in pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19 in the United States. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(17):1947–1961. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Radia T, Williams N, Agrawal P, et al. Multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children & adolescents (MIS-C): A systematic review of clinical features and presentation. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2021;38:51–57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Konstam MA, Abboud FM. Ejection Fraction: Misunderstood and Overrated (Changing the Paradigm in Categorizing Heart Failure). Circulation. 2017;135(8):717–719. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Rusinaru D, Bohbot Y, Ringle A, Maréchaux S, Diouf M, Tribouilloy C. Impact of low stroke volume on mortality in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(21):1992–1999. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Vieillard-Baron A Septic cardiomyopathy. Ann Intensive Care. 2011;1(1):6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Monnet X, Anguel N, Naudin B, Jabot J, Richard C, Teboul JL. Arterial pressure-based cardiac output in septic patients: different accuracy of pulse contour and uncalibrated pressure waveform devices. Crit Care. 2010;14(3):R109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hadian M, Kim HK, Severyn DA, Pinsky MR. Cross-comparison of cardiac output trending accuracy of LiDCO, PiCCO, FloTrac and pulmonary artery catheters. Crit Care. 2010;14(6):R212. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.