Background: Septic shock (SS) and cardiogenic shock (CS) are two types of circulatory shock with a different etiology. Several studies have described the molecular alterations in SS patients, whereas the molecular factors involved in CS have been poorly investigated. We aimed to assess in the whole blood of CS and SS patients, using septic patients without shock (SC) as controls, transcriptomic modifications that occur over 1 week after ICU admission and are common to the two types of shock.Methods: We performed whole blood RNA sequencing in 21 SS, 11 CS, and 5 SC. In shock patients, blood samples were collected within 16 h from ICU admission (T1), 48 h after ICU admission (T2), and at day 7 or before discharge (T3). In controls, blood samples were available at T1 and T2. Gene expression changes over time have been studied in CS, SS, and SC separately with a paired analysis. Genes withpvalue < 0.01 (Benjamini-Hochberg multiple test correction) were defined differentially expressed (DEGs). We used gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) to identify the biological processes and transcriptional regulators significantly enriched in both types of shock.Results: In both CS and SS patients, GO terms of inflammatory response and pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) were downregulated following ICU admission, whereas gene sets of DNA replication were upregulated. At the gene level, we observed that alarmins, interleukin receptors, PRRs, inflammasome, and DNA replication genes significantly changed their expression in CS and SS, but not in SC. Analysis of transcription factor targets showed in both CS and SS patients, an enrichment of CCAAT-enhancer-binding protein beta (CEBPB) targets in genes downregulated over time and an enrichment of E2F targets in genes with an increasing expression trend.Conclusions: This pilot study supports, within the limits of a small sample size, the role of alarmins, PRRs, DNA replication, and immunoglobulins in the pathophysiology of circulatory shock, either in the presence of infection or not. We hypothesize that these genes could be potential targets of therapeutic interventions in CS and SS.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT02141607. Registered 19 May 2014.

Septic shock is the most severe complication of sepsis and this syndrome is associated with high mortality. Treatment of septic shock remains largely supportive of hemodynamics and tissue perfusion. Early changes in organ function assessed by the Sequential Organ Function Assessment (SOFA) score are highly predictive of the outcome. However, the individual patient’s response to supportive therapy is very heterogeneous, and the mechanisms underlying this variable response remain elusive. The aim of the study was to investigate the transcriptome of whole blood in septic shock patients with different responses to early supportive hemodynamic therapy assessed by changes in SOFA scores within the first 48 h from intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We performed whole blood RNA sequencing in 31 patients: 17 classified as responders (R) and 14 as non-responders (NR). Gene expression was investigated at ICU admission (time point 1, or T1), comparing R with NR [padj < 0.01; Benjamini–Hochberg (BH)] and over time from T1 to T2 (48 h later) in R and NR independently (paired analysis, padj < 0.01; BH). Then the differences in gene expression trends over time were evaluated (Mann–Whitney, P <0.01). To identify enriched biological processes, we performed an over-representation analysis based on a right-sided hypergeometric test with Bonferroni step-down as multiple testing correction (padj < 0.05). At ICU admission, we did not identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the two groups. In the transition from T1 to T2, the activation of genes involved in T cell–mediated immunity, granulocyte and natural killer (NK) cell functions, and pathogen lipid clearance was noted in the R group. Genes involved in acute inflammation were downregulated in both groups. Within the limits of a small sample size, our results could suggest that early activation of genes of the adaptive immune response is associated with an improvement in organ function.

Septic cardiomyopathy is associated with poor outcomes but its definition remains unclear. In a previous meta-analysis, left ventricular (LV) longitudinal strain (LS) showed significant prognostic value in septic patients, but findings were not robust due to a limited number of studies, differences in effect size and no adjustment for confounders. We conducted an updated systematic review (PubMed and Scopus up to 14.02.2023) and meta-analysis to investigate the association between LS and survival in septic patients. We included studies reporting global (from three apical views) or regional LS (one or two apical windows). A secondary analysis evaluated the association between LV ejection fraction (EF) and survival using data from the selected studies. We included fourteen studies (1678 patients, survival 69.6%) and demonstrated an association between better performance (more negative LS) and survival with a mean difference (MD) of -1.45%[-2.10, -0.80] (p < 0.0001;I² = 42%). No subgroup differences were found stratifying studies according to number of views used to calculate LS (p = 0.31;I² = 16%), severity of sepsis (p = 0.42;I² = 0%), and sepsis criteria (p = 0.59;I² = 0%). Trial sequential analysis and sensitivity analyses confirmed the primary findings. Grade of evidence was low. In the included studies, thirteen reported LVEF and we found an association between higher LVEF and survival (MD = 2.44% [0.44,4.45]; p = 0.02;I² = 42%). We confirmed that more negative LS values are associated with higher survival in septic patients. The clinical relevance of this difference and whether the use of LS may improve understanding of septic cardiomyopathy and prognostication deserve further investigation. The association found between LVEF and survival is of unlikely clinical meaning. PROSPERO number CRD42023432354.

In sepsis, limited food intake and increased energy expenditure induce a starvation response, which is compromised by a quick decline in the expression of hepatic PPARα, a transcription factor essential in intracellular catabolism of free fatty acids. The mechanism upstream of this PPARα downregulation is unknown. We found that sepsis causes a progressive hepatic loss-of-function of HNF4α, which has a strong impact on the expression of several important nuclear receptors, including PPARα. HNF4α depletion in hepatocytes dramatically increases sepsis lethality, steatosis, and organ damage and prevents an adequate response to IL6, which is critical for liver regeneration and survival. An HNF4α agonist protects against sepsis at all levels, irrespectively of bacterial loads, suggesting HNF4α is crucial in tolerance to sepsis. In conclusion, hepatic HNF4α activity is decreased during sepsis, causing PPARα downregulation, metabolic problems, and a disturbed IL6-mediated acute phase response. The findings provide new insights and therapeutic options in sepsis.

Both acute and advanced heart failure are an increasing threat in term of survival, quality of life and socio-economical burdens. Paradoxically, the use of successful treatments for chronic heart failure can prolong life but—per definition—causes the rise in age of patients experiencing acute decompensations, since nothing at the moment helps avoiding an acute or final stage in the elderly population. To complicate the picture, acute heart failure syndromes are a collection of symptoms, signs and markers, with different aetiologies and different courses, also due to overlapping morbidities and to the plethora of chronic medications. The palette of cardio- and vasoactive drugs used in the hospitalization phase to stabilize the patient’s hemodynamic is scarce and even scarcer is the evidence for the agents commonly used in the practice (e.g., catecholamines). The pipeline in this field is poor and the clinical development chronically unsuccessful. Recent set backs in expected clinical trials for new agents in acute heart failure (AHF) (omecamtiv, serelaxine, ularitide) left a field desolately empty, where only few drugs have been approved for clinical use, for example, levosimendan and nesiritide. In this consensus opinion paper, experts from 26 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, U.K. and Ukraine) analyse the situation in details also by help of artificial intelligence applied to bibliographic searches, try to distil some lesson-learned to avoid that future projects would make the same mistakes as in the past and recommend how to lead a successful development project in this field in dire need of new agents.