Given that the leading clinical conditions associated with acute kidney injury (AKI), namely, sepsis, major surgery, heart failure, and hypovolemia, are all associated with shock, it is tempting to attribute all AKI to ischemia on the basis of macrohemodynamic changes. However, an increasing body of evidence has suggested that in many patients, AKI can occur in the absence of overt signs of global renal hypoperfusion. Indeed, sepsis-induced AKI can occur in the setting of normal or even increased renal blood flow. Accordingly, renal injury may not be entirely explained solely on the basis of the classic paradigm of hypoperfusion, and thus other mechanisms must come into play. Herein, we put forward a “unifying theory” to explain the interplay between inflammation and oxidative stress, microvascular dysfunction, and the adaptive response of the tubular epithelial cell to the septic insult. We propose that this response is mostly adaptive in origin, that it is driven by mitochondria, and that it ultimately results in and explains the clinical phenotype of sepsis-induced AKI.

Sepsis affects practically all aspects of endothelial cell (EC) function and is thought to be the key factor in the progression from sepsis to organ failure. Endothelial functions affected by sepsis include vasoregulation, barrier function, inflammation, and hemostasis. These are among other mechanisms often mediated by glycocalyx shedding, such as abnormal nitric oxide metabolism, up-regulation of reactive oxygen species generation due to down-regulation of endothelial-associated antioxidant defenses, transcellular communication, proteases, exposure of adhesion molecules, and activation of tissue factor. This review covers current insight in EC-associated hemostatic responses to sepsis and the EC response to inflammation. The endothelial cell lining is highly heterogeneous between different organ systems and consequently also in its response to sepsis. In this context, we discuss the response of the endothelial cell lining to sepsis in the kidney, liver, and lung. Finally, we discuss evidence as to whether the EC response to sepsis is adaptive or maladaptive. This study is a result of an Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative XIV Sepsis Workgroup meeting held in Bogota, Columbia, between October 12 and 15, 2014.

This article presents a personal viewpoint of the shortcoming of conventional hemodynamic resuscitation procedures in achieving organ perfusion and tissue oxygenation following conditions of shock and cardiovascular compromise, and why it is important to monitor the microcirculation in such conditions. The article emphasizes that if resuscitation procedures are based on the correction of systemic variables, there must be coherence between the macrocirculation and microcirculation if systemic hemodynamic-driven resuscitation procedures are to be effective in correcting organ perfusion and oxygenation. However, in conditions of inflammation and infection, which often accompany states of shock, vascular regulation and compensatory mechanisms needed to sustain hemodynamic coherence are lost, and the regional circulation and microcirculation remain in shock. We identify four types of microcirculatory alterations underlying the loss of hemodynamic coherence: type 1, heterogeneous microcirculatory flow; type 2, reduced capillary density induced by hemodilution and anemia; type 3, microcirculatory flow reduction caused by vasoconstriction or tamponade; and type 4, tissue edema. These microcirculatory alterations can be observed at the bedside using direct visualization of the sublingual microcirculation with hand-held vital microscopes. Each of these alterations results in oxygen delivery limitation to the tissue cells despite the presence of normalized systemic hemodynamic variables. Based on these concepts, we propose how to optimize the volume of fluid to maximize the oxygen-carrying capacity of the microcirculation to transport oxygen to the tissues.

This paper briefly reviews the physiological components of the microcirculation, focusing on its function in homeostasis and its central function in the realization of oxygen transport to tissue cells. Its pivotal role in the understanding of circulatory compromise in states of shock and renal compromise is discussed. Our introduction of hand-held vital microscopes (HVM) to clinical medicine has revealed the importance of the microcirculation as a central target organ in states of critical illness and inadequate response to therapy. Technical and methodological developments have been made in hardware and in software including our recent introduction and validation of automatic analysis software called MicroTools, which now allows point-of-care use of HVM imaging at the bedside for instant availability of functional microcirculatory parameters needed for microcirculatory targeted resuscitation procedures to be a reality.

Introduction: The purpose of the present study was to investigate microcirculatory blood flow in patients with septic shock treated with levosimendan as compared to an active comparator drug (i.e. dobutamine). The primary end point was a difference of ≥ 20% in the microvascular flow index of small vessels (MFIs) among groups. Methods: The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial and performed in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit. After achieving normovolemia and a mean arterial pressure of at least 65 mmHg, 40 septic shock patients were randomized to receive either levosimendan 0.2 μg·kg^-1·min^-1 (n = 20) or an active comparator (dobutamine 5 μg·kg^-1·min^-1; control; n = 20) for 24 hours. Sublingual microcirculatory blood flow of small and medium vessels was assessed by sidestream dark-field imaging. Microcirculatory variables and data from right heart catheterization were obtained at baseline and 24 hours after randomization. Baseline and demographic data were compared by means of Mann-Whitney rank sum test or chi-square test, as appropriate. Microvascular and hemodynamic variables were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney rank sum test. Results: Microcirculatory flow indices of small and medium vessels increased over time and were significantly higher in the levosimendan group as compared to the control group (24 hrs: MFIm 3.0 (3.0; 3.0) vs. 2.9 (2.8; 3.0); P = .02; MFIs 2.9 (2.9; 3.0) vs. 2.7 (2.3; 2.8); P < .001). The relative increase of perfused vessel density vs. baseline was significantly higher in the levosimendan group than in the control group (dMFIm 10 (3; 23)% vs. 0 (-1; 9)%; P = .007; dMFIs 47 (26; 83)% vs. 10 (-3; 27); P < .001). In addition, the heterogeneity index decreased only in the levosimendan group (dHI -93 (-100; -84)% vs. 0 (-78; 57)%; P < .001). There was no statistically significant correlation between systemic and microcirculatory flow variables within each group (each P > .05). Conclusions: Compared to a standard dose of 5 μg·kg^-1·min^-1 of dobutamine, levosimendan at 0.2 μg·kg^-1·min^-1 improved sublingual microcirculatory blood flow in patients with septic shock, as reflected by changes in microcirculatory flow indices of small and medium vessels. Trial registration: NCT00800306.