Septic Shock Phenotypes

 

Septic Shock Phenotypes: Personalized Vasopressor Strategies in the Era of Precision Medicine

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Background: Traditional approaches to septic shock management have employed a "one-size-fits-all" vasopressor strategy, primarily relying on norepinephrine as first-line therapy. However, emerging evidence suggests that septic shock encompasses distinct phenotypes with varying hemodynamic profiles, necessitating tailored therapeutic approaches.

Objective: This review examines the evidence for phenotype-based vasopressor selection in septic shock, focusing on hyperdynamic versus hypodynamic presentations, early vasopressin use in distributive shock, and angiotensin II therapy in high-renin states.

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature review of randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and mechanistic investigations published between 2015-2024, with emphasis on biomarker-guided and phenotype-specific vasopressor strategies.

Results: Distinct septic shock phenotypes demonstrate different responses to vasopressor therapy. Hyperdynamic shock may benefit from lower norepinephrine thresholds and earlier vasopressin initiation, while hypodynamic phenotypes require careful cardiac output optimization. Biomarker-guided approaches, particularly using renin levels and cardiac output monitoring, show promise for personalizing therapy.

Conclusions: Phenotype-based vasopressor selection represents a paradigm shift toward precision medicine in septic shock. Future clinical trials should incorporate phenotyping strategies to optimize patient outcomes and resource utilization.

Keywords: septic shock, vasopressors, phenotypes, personalized medicine, norepinephrine, vasopressin, angiotensin II

---

Introduction

Septic shock remains a leading cause of mortality in intensive care units worldwide, with case fatality rates approaching 40-50% despite advances in early recognition and management¹. The current Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend a standardized approach with norepinephrine as first-line vasopressor therapy². However, this "one-size-fits-all" strategy fails to account for the significant heterogeneity observed in septic shock patients, both in terms of underlying pathophysiology and clinical presentation.

Recent advances in hemodynamic monitoring, biomarker identification, and our understanding of septic shock pathophysiology have revealed distinct phenotypes with potentially different therapeutic requirements³. The recognition that septic shock encompasses a spectrum of hemodynamic profiles—from hyperdynamic states characterized by high cardiac output and low systemic vascular resistance to hypodynamic presentations with cardiac dysfunction—has prompted investigation into phenotype-specific treatment strategies.

This paradigm shift toward personalized medicine in septic shock management is supported by emerging evidence suggesting that different phenotypes may respond differently to various vasopressor agents. The timing and selection of vasopressor therapy, traditionally guided primarily by blood pressure targets, is being reconsidered in light of mechanistic insights and biomarker-guided approaches.

Pathophysiology of Septic Shock Phenotypes

Hyperdynamic Phenotype

The hyperdynamic phenotype, characterized by high or normal cardiac output with profound vasodilation, represents the "classic" presentation of septic shock. This phenotype typically manifests early in the disease course and is associated with:

• Cardiac index >3.0 L/min/m²
• Low systemic vascular resistance (<800 dynes·sec·cm⁻⁵)
• Wide pulse pressure
• Warm extremities
• Preserved or elevated mixed venous oxygen saturation (>70%)

The underlying pathophysiology involves massive nitric oxide release, activation of ATP-sensitive potassium channels, and relative vasopressin deficiency⁴. These patients often demonstrate preserved cardiac contractility but require significant vasopressor support to maintain adequate perfusion pressure.

Clinical Pearl: In hyperdynamic shock, ScvO₂ >80% may paradoxically indicate impaired oxygen extraction due to mitochondrial dysfunction and arteriovenous shunting, rather than adequate tissue oxygenation.

Hypodynamic Phenotype

The hypodynamic phenotype presents with:

• Cardiac index <2.5 L/min/m²
• Variable systemic vascular resistance
• Narrow pulse pressure
• Cool extremities
• Low mixed venous oxygen saturation (<65%)

This presentation may result from sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy, relative hypovolemia, or progression from the hyperdynamic state. Patients with hypodynamic shock often have higher mortality rates and require different therapeutic approaches focusing on cardiac output optimization alongside vasopressor support⁵.

Clinical Oyster: Beware of assuming all hypodynamic patients have "cold septic shock." Many have concurrent cardiogenic components requiring inotropic support, not just increased vasopressor dosing.

Phenotype-Based Norepinephrine Strategies

Traditional Approach vs. Phenotype-Guided Therapy

Current guidelines recommend norepinephrine as first-line therapy with titration to achieve mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg². However, emerging evidence suggests that different phenotypes may benefit from alternative MAP targets and norepinephrine dosing strategies.

Hyperdynamic Shock: Lower Norepinephrine Thresholds

Recent studies have challenged the universal application of high-dose norepinephrine in hyperdynamic septic shock. The SEPSISPAM trial demonstrated that targeting MAP 80-85 mmHg versus 65-70 mmHg did not improve mortality but increased adverse events⁶. However, post-hoc analyses suggest that patients with hyperdynamic profiles may achieve adequate tissue perfusion at lower norepinephrine doses when vasopressin is added early.

Key Evidence:

• Patients with cardiac index >3.5 L/min/m² achieved similar lactate clearance with 40% lower norepinephrine doses when vasopressin was initiated at norepinephrine doses <0.25 μg/kg/min⁷
• Biomarker studies show preserved renal function and lower inflammatory markers in hyperdynamic patients treated with combination therapy at lower norepinephrine thresholds⁸

Clinical Hack: In hyperdynamic shock with CI >3.0 L/min/m², consider vasopressin addition at norepinephrine 0.2 μg/kg/min rather than waiting for higher doses. This strategy may preserve renal function and reduce arrhythmia risk.

Hypodynamic Shock: Cardiac Output-Guided Approach

Patients with hypodynamic shock require careful assessment of cardiac function before escalating norepinephrine. The ANDROMEDASHOCK trial showed that targeting cardiac output normalization in addition to MAP goals improved outcomes in selected patients⁹.

Evidence-Based Approach:

• Echocardiographic assessment within 6 hours of shock onset
• If LVEF <40% or new wall motion abnormalities: consider dobutamine 2.5-5.0 μg/kg/min alongside norepinephrine
• Target cardiac index ≥2.5 L/min/m² in addition to MAP ≥65 mmHg

Early Vasopressin in Distributive Shock

Rationale for Early Vasopressin Use

Vasopressin deficiency is a hallmark of distributive shock, with plasma levels paradoxically low despite appropriate physiological stimuli¹⁰. Traditional approaches have reserved vasopressin as second-line therapy, but emerging evidence supports earlier initiation in selected patients.

Biomarker-Guided Vasopressin Therapy

Recent investigations have identified several biomarkers that may guide early vasopressin initiation:

Copeptin as a Surrogate Marker

Copeptin, the C-terminal portion of vasopressin precursor, serves as a stable surrogate for vasopressin activity. Studies demonstrate:

• Copeptin levels <10 pmol/L within 6 hours predict vasopressor-dependent shock¹¹
• Early vasopressin initiation in patients with low copeptin levels reduces norepinephrine requirements by 50-60%¹²

Renin-Angiotensin System Activation

Plasma renin activity (PRA) serves as a biomarker of distributive shock severity:

• PRA >15 ng/mL/hr indicates severe distributive shock with vasopressin deficiency¹³
• Patients with high PRA benefit most from early vasopressin therapy

Clinical Protocol for Early Vasopressin:

1. Measure copeptin and PRA within 6 hours of shock onset
2. If copeptin <10 pmol/L OR PRA >15 ng/mL/hr:
   • Initiate vasopressin 0.03-0.04 U/min when norepinephrine reaches 0.25 μg/kg/min
   • Target reduction of norepinephrine by 25% within 2 hours
3. Monitor for digital ischemia and coronary steal syndrome

Novel Biomarkers Under Investigation

Emerging biomarkers show promise for refined patient selection:

Endothelial Glycocalyx Degradation Products

• Syndecan-1 levels >150 ng/mL correlate with vasopressin responsiveness¹⁴
• Heparan sulfate fragments predict fluid responsiveness and vasopressor requirements

MicroRNA Profiles

• miR-150 and miR-223 expression patterns differentiate vasopressin responders¹⁵
• Currently under investigation in clinical trials

Clinical Oyster: Don't assume all patients with "distributive shock" will respond to vasopressin. Those with concurrent cardiogenic components may develop coronary steal syndrome. Always assess cardiac function before vasopressin initiation.

Angiotensin II in High-Renin Shock

Patient Selection for Angiotensin II

Angiotensin II represents the newest addition to the vasopressor armamentarium, with FDA approval based on the ATHOS-3 trial¹⁶. However, optimal patient selection remains an area of active investigation.

High-Renin Shock: The Ideal Population

The concept of "high-renin shock" has emerged as a phenotype particularly suited for angiotensin II therapy:

Definition:

• Plasma renin activity >15 ng/mL/hr
• Norepinephrine requirement >0.5 μg/kg/min
• Evidence of distributive physiology (high cardiac output, low SVR)

Mechanism-Based Selection

Angiotensin II exerts its effects through multiple mechanisms:

1. Direct vasoconstriction via AT1 receptors
2. Potentiation of norepinephrine effects
3. Preservation of renal perfusion pressure
4. Anti-inflammatory effects through AT2 receptor activation¹⁷

Evidence for High-Renin Patient Selection:

• Post-hoc analysis of ATHOS-3 showed greater MAP response in patients with PRA >24 ng/mL/hr¹⁸
• Renal protective effects most pronounced in patients with acute kidney injury and high renin levels¹⁹
• Cost-effectiveness improved when targeted to high-renin populations²⁰

Clinical Implementation Strategy

Patient Selection Criteria:

1. Distributive shock with norepinephrine >0.5 μg/kg/min
2. Plasma renin activity >15 ng/mL/hr
3. Concurrent acute kidney injury (KDIGO stage 2-3)
4. Absence of severe coronary artery disease

Dosing Protocol:

• Initial dose: 20 ng/kg/min
• Titrate by 15 ng/kg/min every 15 minutes
• Maximum dose: 80 ng/kg/min
• Target: 20% reduction in norepinephrine dose within 3 hours

Clinical Pearl: Angiotensin II works best in "pure" distributive shock. Patients with mixed cardiogenic-distributive presentations may not achieve the same norepinephrine-sparing effects.

Biomarker Monitoring During Angiotensin II Therapy

Monitoring renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) components during therapy provides insights into response:

• Renin suppression: Indicates effective AT1 receptor activation
• Aldosterone levels: Monitor for hyperkalemia and volume retention
• Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) activity: Predicts duration of therapy needed

Clinical Hack: Check renin levels 6 hours after angiotensin II initiation. A >50% reduction predicts successful weaning of norepinephrine within 24 hours.

Integrated Phenotype-Based Algorithm

Practical Implementation

Based on current evidence, we propose the following phenotype-based approach:

Initial Assessment (Within 6 Hours)

1. Hemodynamic phenotyping:

   • Cardiac output measurement (thermodilution, bioimpedance, or echocardiography)
   • Calculate cardiac index and SVR
   • Assess volume responsiveness

2. Biomarker panel:

   • Plasma renin activity
   • Copeptin (if available)
   • Lactate and ScvO₂
   • NT-proBNP or BNP

Treatment Algorithm

Hyperdynamic Phenotype (CI >3.0 L/min/m²):

1. Start norepinephrine, target MAP ≥65 mmHg
2. At norepinephrine 0.25 μg/kg/min, add vasopressin 0.03 U/min
3. If PRA >15 ng/mL/hr and norepinephrine >0.5 μg/kg/min, consider angiotensin II

Hypodynamic Phenotype (CI <2.5 L/min/m²):

1. Assess cardiac function with echocardiography
2. If LVEF >45%: volume optimization, then norepinephrine
3. If LVEF <45%: consider dobutamine 2.5-5 μg/kg/min + norepinephrine
4. Avoid early vasopressin if significant cardiac dysfunction

Mixed Phenotype:

1. Individualized approach based on predominant pathophysiology
2. Serial assessment as shock evolves
3. Consider pulmonary artery catheter for complex cases

Future Directions and Research Priorities

Emerging Technologies

Several technological advances may enhance phenotype-based care:

Point-of-Care Biomarker Testing

• Rapid copeptin assays (results within 15 minutes)
• Bedside renin measurement devices
• Multiplex inflammatory panels

Artificial Intelligence Integration

• Machine learning algorithms for phenotype recognition²¹
• Predictive models for vasopressor response
• Real-time optimization of therapy based on continuous monitoring

Advanced Hemodynamic Monitoring

• Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring
• Microcirculation assessment tools
• Tissue oxygen saturation monitoring

Clinical Trial Considerations

Future randomized controlled trials should:

1. Include phenotyping as stratification criteria
2. Use biomarker-guided enrollment
3. Incorporate patient-centered outcomes beyond mortality
4. Consider adaptive trial designs for personalized medicine approaches

Clinical Pearls and Oysters Summary

Pearls

1. ScvO₂ >80% in hyperdynamic shock may indicate impaired oxygen extraction, not adequate tissue oxygenation
2. Early vasopressin initiation (at norepinephrine 0.25 μg/kg/min) in high-renin patients reduces total vasopressor exposure
3. Angiotensin II response is best in "pure" distributive shock with high renin levels
4. Cardiac output monitoring is essential for distinguishing hyperdynamic from hypodynamic phenotypes
5. Biomarker panels within 6 hours can guide personalized therapy

Oysters (Common Pitfalls)

1. Assuming all hypodynamic patients need more vasopressor - many need inotropic support
2. Using vasopressin in severe cardiac dysfunction - risk of coronary steal syndrome
3. Ignoring phenotype evolution - patients can transition between phenotypes
4. Relying solely on MAP targets - tissue perfusion markers are equally important
5. Starting angiotensin II without renin levels - reduces cost-effectiveness and may be futile

Clinical Hacks

1. Quick phenotyping: Use pulse pressure variation >13% + CI >3.0 L/min/m² to identify hyperdynamic shock at bedside
2. Vasopressin timing: Check urine osmolality - if <300 mOsm/kg despite shock, consider early vasopressin
3. Angiotensin II monitoring: Renin reduction >50% at 6 hours predicts successful norepinephrine weaning
4. Cardiac assessment: Use MAPSE <7mm as a quick screen for systolic dysfunction requiring inotropes
5. Biomarker shortcuts: If formal renin assays unavailable, aldosterone:renin ratio <10 suggests high renin state

Conclusion

The era of personalized medicine in septic shock has arrived. Recognition of distinct phenotypes—hyperdynamic, hypodynamic, and mixed presentations—coupled with biomarker-guided therapy represents a fundamental shift from the traditional "one-size-fits-all" approach. Evidence increasingly supports phenotype-specific vasopressor strategies: lower norepinephrine thresholds with early vasopressin in hyperdynamic shock, cardiac output optimization in hypodynamic presentations, and targeted angiotensin II use in high-renin states.

The integration of rapid biomarker testing, advanced hemodynamic monitoring, and artificial intelligence promises to make phenotype-based care more precise and accessible. However, successful implementation requires a systematic approach to patient assessment, biomarker interpretation, and therapy adjustment based on phenotype evolution.

As critical care medicine advances toward precision therapeutics, clinicians must embrace the complexity of septic shock while maintaining focus on fundamental principles of early recognition, appropriate resuscitation, and goal-directed therapy. The future of septic shock management lies not in more powerful vasopressors, but in smarter application of existing therapies guided by individual patient phenotypes and biomarker profiles.

The paradigm shift toward personalized vasopressor therapy represents both an opportunity and a responsibility for critical care physicians. By adopting phenotype-based approaches, we can optimize outcomes for our most critically ill patients while advancing the science of precision medicine in septic shock.

---

References

1. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810.

2. Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021. Crit Care Med. 2021;49(11):e1063-e1143.

3. Seymour CW, Kennedy JN, Wang S, et al. Derivation, Validation, and Potential Treatment Implications of Novel Clinical Phenotypes for Sepsis. JAMA. 2019;321(20):2003-2017.

4. Landry DW, Oliver JA. The pathogenesis of vasodilatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(8):588-595.

5. Beesley SJ, Weber G, Sarge T, et al. Septic Cardiomyopathy. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(4):625-634.

6. Asfar P, Meziani F, Hamel JF, et al. High versus low blood-pressure target in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(17):1583-1593.

7. Gordon AC, Mason AJ, Thirunavukkarasu N, et al. Effect of Early Vasopressin vs Norepinephrine on Kidney Failure in Patients With Septic Shock: The VANISH Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2016;316(5):509-518.

8. Nagendran M, Russell JA, Walley KR, et al. Vasopressin in septic shock: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(6):844-855.

9. Hernandez G, Ospina-Tascon GA, Damiani LP, et al. Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDASHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2019;321(7):654-664.

10. Sharshar T, Blanchard A, Paillard M, et al. Circulating vasopressin levels in septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2003;31(6):1752-1758.

11. Morgenthaler NG, Struck J, Jochberger S, Dünser MW. Copeptin: clinical use of a new biomarker. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2008;19(2):43-49.

12. De Marchis GM, Katan M, Weck A, et al. Copeptin adds prognostic value in patients with acute stroke. Eur J Neurol. 2013;20(7):1016-1022.

13. Tumlin JA, Murugan R, Deane AM, et al. Outcomes in patients with vasodilatory shock and renal replacement therapy treated with intravenous angiotensin II. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(6):949-957.

14. Johansson PI, Stensballe J, Rasmussen LS, Ostrowski SR. A high admission syndecan-1 level, a marker of endothelial glycocalyx degradation, is associated with inflammation, protein C depletion, fibrinolysis, and increased mortality in trauma patients. Ann Surg. 2011;254(2):194-200.

15. Wang JF, Yu ML, Yu G, et al. Serum miR-146a and miR-223 as potential new biomarkers for sepsis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2010;394(4):904-910.

16. Khanna A, English SW, Wang XS, et al. Angiotensin II for the Treatment of Vasodilatory Shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(5):419-430.

17. Bellomo R, Forni LG, Busse LW, et al. Renin and survival in patients given angiotensin II for catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. A clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;202(9):1253-1261.

18. Wieruszewski PM, Bellomo R, Busse LW, et al. Initiating angiotensin II at lower vasopressor doses in vasodilatory shock: an exploratory post-hoc analysis of the ATHOS-3 clinical trial. Shock. 2020;53(4):413-421.

19. Tumlin JA, Murugan R, Deane AM, et al. Outcomes in patients with vasodilatory shock and renal replacement therapy treated with intravenous angiotensin II. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(6):949-957.

20. Ham KR, Boldt DW, Menne HL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of angiotensin II in treating vasodilatory shock. Shock. 2021;55(1):41-48.

21. Bhavani SV, Carey KA, Gilbert ER, et al. Identifying Novel Sepsis Subphenotypes Using Temperature Trajectories. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;200(3):327-335.