Dataset Information

Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Abnormal peripheral perfusion after septic shock resuscitation has been associated with organ dysfunction and mortality. The potential role of the clinical assessment of peripheral perfusion as a target during resuscitation in early septic shock has not been established.

Objective

To determine if a peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation during early septic shock in adults is more effective than a lactate level-targeted resuscitation for reducing mortality.

Design, setting, and participants

Multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 28 intensive care units in 5 countries. Four-hundred twenty-four patients with septic shock were included between March 2017 and March 2018. The last date of follow-up was June 12, 2018.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to a step-by-step resuscitation protocol aimed at either normalizing capillary refill time (n = 212) or normalizing or decreasing lactate levels at rates greater than 20% per 2 hours (n = 212), during an 8-hour intervention period.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were organ dysfunction at 72 hours after randomization, as assessed by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (range, 0 [best] to 24 [worst]); death within 90 days; mechanical ventilation-, renal replacement therapy-, and vasopressor-free days within 28 days; intensive care unit and hospital length of stay.

Results

Among 424 patients randomized (mean age, 63 years; 226 [53%] women), 416 (98%) completed the trial. By day 28, 74 patients (34.9%) in the peripheral perfusion group and 92 patients (43.4%) in the lactate group had died (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.55 to 1.02]; P = .06; risk difference, -8.5% [95% CI, -18.2% to 1.2%]). Peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation was associated with less organ dysfunction at 72 hours (mean SOFA score, 5.6 [SD, 4.3] vs 6.6 [SD, 4.7]; mean difference, -1.00 [95% CI, -1.97 to -0.02]; P = .045). There were no significant differences in the other 6 secondary outcomes. No protocol-related serious adverse reactions were confirmed.

Conclusions and relevance

Among patients with septic shock, a resuscitation strategy targeting normalization of capillary refill time, compared with a strategy targeting serum lactate levels, did not reduce all-cause 28-day mortality.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03078712.

SUBMITTER: Hernandez G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6439620 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hernández Glenn G Ospina-Tascón Gustavo A GA Damiani Lucas Petri LP Estenssoro Elisa E Dubin Arnaldo A Hurtado Javier J Friedman Gilberto G Castro Ricardo R Alegría Leyla L Teboul Jean-Louis JL Cecconi Maurizio M Ferri Giorgio G Jibaja Manuel M Pairumani Ronald R Fernández Paula P Barahona Diego D Granda-Luna Vladimir V Cavalcanti Alexandre Biasi AB Bakker Jan J Hernández Glenn G Ospina-Tascón Gustavo G Petri Damiani Lucas L Estenssoro Elisa E Dubin Arnaldo A Hurtado Javier J Friedman Gilberto G Castro Ricardo R Alegría Leyla L Teboul Jean-Louis JL Cecconi Maurizio M Cecconi Maurizio M Ferri Giorgio G Jibaja Manuel M Pairumani Ronald R Fernández Paula P Barahona Diego D Cavalcanti Alexandre Biasi AB Bakker Jan J Hernández Glenn G Alegría Leyla L Ferri Giorgio G Rodriguez Nicolás N Holger Patricia P Soto Natalia N Pozo Mario M Bakker Jan J Cook Deborah D Vincent Jean-Louis JL Rhodes Andrew A Kavanagh Bryan P BP Dellinger Phil P Rietdijk Wim W Carpio David D Pavéz Nicolás N Henriquez Elizabeth E Bravo Sebastian S Valenzuela Emilio Daniel ED Vera Magdalena M Dreyse Jorge J Oviedo Vanessa V Cid Maria Alicia MA Larroulet Macarena M Petruska Edward E Sarabia Claudio C Gallardo David D Sanchez Juan Eduardo JE González Hugo H Arancibia José Miguel JM Muñoz Alex A Ramirez Germán G Aravena Florencia F Aquevedo Andrés A Zambrano Fabián F Bozinovic Milan M Valle Felipe F Ramirez Manuel M Rossel Victor V Muñoz Pilar P Ceballos Carolina C Esveile Christian C Carmona Cristian C Candia Eva E Mendoza Daniela D Sanchez Aída A Ponce Daniela D Ponce Daniela D Lastra Jaime J Nahuelpán Bárbara B Fasce Fabrizio F Luengo Cecilia C Medel Nicolas N Cortés Cesar C Campassi Luz L Rubatto Paolo P Horna Nahime N Furche Mariano M Pendino Juan Carlos JC Bettini Lisandro L Lovesio Carlos C González María Cecilia MC Rodruguez Jésica J Canales Héctor H Caminos Francisco F Galletti Cayetano C Minoldo Estefanía E Aramburu Maria Jose MJ Olmos Daniela D Nin Nicolás N Tenzi Jordán J Quiroga Carlos C Lacuesta Pablo P Gaudín Agustín A Pais Richard R Silvestre Ana A Olivera Germán G Rieppi Gloria G Berrutti Dolores D Ochoa Marcelo M Cobos Paul P Vintimilla Fernando F Ramirez Vanessa V Tobar Milton M García Fernanda F Picoita Fabricio F Remache Nelson N Granda Vladimir V Paredes Fernando F Barzallo Eduardo E Garcés Paul P Guerrero Fausto F Salazar Santiago S Torres German G Tana Cristian C Calahorrano José J Solis Freddy F Torres Pedro P Herrera Luís L Ornes Antonio A Peréz Verónica V Delgado Glenda G López Alexei A Espinosa Eliana E Moreira José J Salcedo Blanca B Villacres Ivonne I Suing Jhonny J Lopez Marco M Gomez Luis L Toctaquiza Guillermo G Cadena Zapata Mario M Orazabal Milton Alonso MA Pardo Espejo Ruben R Jimenez Jorge J Calderón Alexander A Paredes Gustavo G Barberán José Luis JL Moya Tatiana T Atehortua Horacio H Sabogal Rodolfo R Ortiz Guillermo G Lara Antonio A Sanchez Fabio F Hernán Portilla Alvaro A Dávila Humberto H Mora Jorge Antonio JA Calderón Luis Eduardo LE Alvarez Ingrid I Escobar Elena E Bejarano Alejandro A Bustamante Luis Alfonso LA Aldana José Luis JL

JAMA 20190201 7

<h4>Importance</h4>Abnormal peripheral perfusion after septic shock resuscitation has been associated with organ dysfunction and mortality. The potential role of the clinical assessment of peripheral perfusion as a target during resuscitation in early septic shock has not been established.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine if a peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation during early septic shock in adults is more effective than a lactate level-targeted resuscitation for reducing mortality.<h4>Desig ...[more]

PMID: 30772908

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Fluid boluses are administered to septic shock patients with the purpose of increasing cardiac output as a means to restore tissue perfusion. Unfortunately, fluid therapy has a narrow therapeutic index, and therefore, several approaches to increase safety have been proposed. Fluid responsiveness (FR) assessment might predict which patients will effectively increase cardiac output after a fluid bolus (FR+), thus preventing potentially harmful fluid administration in non-fluid responsive (FR-) patients. However, there are scarce data on the impact of assessing FR on major outcomes. The recent ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial included systematic per-protocol assessment of FR. We performed a post hoc analysis of the study dataset with the aim of exploring the relationship between FR status at baseline, attainment of specific targets, and clinically relevant outcomes. METHODS:ANDROMEDA-SHOCK compared the effect of peripheral perfusion- vs. lactate-targeted resuscitation on 28-day mortality. FR was assessed before each fluid bolus and periodically thereafter. FR+ and FR- subgroups, independent of the original randomization, were compared for fluid administration, achievement of resuscitation targets, vasoactive agents use, and major outcomes such as organ dysfunction and support, length of stay, and 28-day mortality. RESULTS:FR could be determined in 348 patients at baseline. Two hundred and forty-two patients (70%) were categorized as fluid responders. Both groups achieved comparable successful resuscitation targets, although non-fluid responders received less resuscitation fluids (0 [0-500] vs. 1500 [1000-2500] mL; p 0.0001), exhibited less positive fluid balances, but received more vasopressor testing. No difference in clinically relevant outcomes between FR+ and FR- patients was found, including 24-h SOFA score (9 [5-12] vs. 8 [5-11], p = 0.4), need for MV (78% vs. 72%, p = 0.16), need for RRT (18% vs. 21%, p = 0.7), ICU-LOS (6 [3-11] vs. 6 [3-16] days, p = 0.2), and 28-day mortality (40% vs. 36%, p = 0.5). Only thirteen patients remained fluid responsive along the intervention period. CONCLUSIONS:Systematic assessment allowed determination of fluid responsiveness status in more than 80% of patients with early septic shock. Fluid boluses could be stopped in non-fluid responsive patients without any negative impact on clinical relevant outcomes. Our results suggest that fluid resuscitation might be safely guided by FR assessment in septic shock patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03078712. Registered retrospectively on March 13, 2017.

Project description:BackgroundPersistent hyperlactatemia has been considered as a signal of tissue hypoperfusion in septic shock patients, but multiple non-hypoperfusion-related pathogenic mechanisms could be involved. Therefore, pursuing lactate normalization may lead to the risk of fluid overload. Peripheral perfusion, assessed by the capillary refill time (CRT), could be an effective alternative resuscitation target as recently demonstrated by the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial. We designed the present randomized controlled trial to address the impact of a CRT-targeted (CRT-T) vs. a lactate-targeted (LAC-T) fluid resuscitation strategy on fluid balances within 24 h of septic shock diagnosis. In addition, we compared the effects of both strategies on organ dysfunction, regional and microcirculatory flow, and tissue hypoxia surrogates.ResultsForty-two fluid-responsive septic shock patients were randomized into CRT-T or LAC-T groups. Fluids were administered until target achievement during the 6 h intervention period, or until safety criteria were met. CRT-T was aimed at CRT normalization (≤ 3 s), whereas in LAC-T the goal was lactate normalization (≤ 2 mmol/L) or a 20% decrease every 2 h. Multimodal perfusion monitoring included sublingual microcirculatory assessment; plasma-disappearance rate of indocyanine green; muscle oxygen saturation; central venous-arterial pCO2 gradient/ arterial-venous O2 content difference ratio; and lactate/pyruvate ratio. There was no difference between CRT-T vs. LAC-T in 6 h-fluid boluses (875 [375-2625] vs. 1500 [1000-2000], p = 0.3), or balances (982[249-2833] vs. 15,800 [740-6587, p = 0.2]). CRT-T was associated with a higher achievement of the predefined perfusion target (62 vs. 24, p = 0.03). No significant differences in perfusion-related variables or hypoxia surrogates were observed.ConclusionsCRT-targeted fluid resuscitation was not superior to a lactate-targeted one on fluid administration or balances. However, it was associated with comparable effects on regional and microcirculatory flow parameters and hypoxia surrogates, and a faster achievement of the predefined resuscitation target. Our data suggest that stopping fluids in patients with CRT ≤ 3 s appears as safe in terms of tissue perfusion. Clinical Trials: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03762005 (Retrospectively registered on December 3rd 2018).

Project description:BackgroundCapillary refill time (CRT) may improve more rapidly than lactate in response to increments in systemic flow. Therefore, it can be assessed more frequently during septic shock (SS) resuscitation. Hyperlactatemia, in contrast, exhibits a slower recovery in SS survivors, probably explained by the delayed resolution of non-hypoperfusion-related sources. Thus, targeting lactate normalization may be associated with impaired outcomes. The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial compared CRT- versus lactate-targeted resuscitation in early SS. CRT-targeted resuscitation associated with lower mortality and organ dysfunction; mechanisms were not investigated. CRT was assessed every 30 min and lactate every 2 h during the 8-h intervention period, allowing a first comparison between groups at 2 h (T2). Our primary aim was to determine if SS patients evolving with normal CRT at T2 after randomization (T0) exhibited a higher mortality and organ dysfunction when allocated to the LT arm than when randomized to the CRT arm. Our secondary aim was to determine if those patients with normal CRT at T2 had received more therapeutic interventions when randomized to the LT arm. To address these issues, we performed a post hoc analysis of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK dataset.ResultsPatients randomized to the lactate arm at T0, evolving with normal CRT at T2 exhibited significantly higher mortality than patients with normal CRT at T2 initially allocated to CRT (40 vs 23%, p = 0.009). These results replicated at T8 and T24. LT arm received significantly more resuscitative interventions (fluid boluses: 1000[500-2000] vs. 500[0-1500], p = 0.004; norepinephrine test in previously hypertensive patients: 43 (35) vs. 19 (19), p = 0.001; and inodilators: 16 (13) vs. 3 (3), p = 0.003). A multivariate logistic regression of patients with normal CRT at T2, including APACHE-II, baseline lactate, cumulative fluids administered since emergency admission, source of infection, and randomization group) confirmed that allocation to LT group was a statistically significant determinant of 28-day mortality (OR 3.3; 95%CI[1.5-7.1]); p = 0.003).ConclusionsSeptic shock patients with normal CRT at baseline received more therapeutic interventions and presented more organ dysfunction when allocated to the lactate group. This could associate with worse outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThe decision of when to stop septic shock resuscitation is a critical but yet a relatively unexplored aspect of care. This is especially relevant since the risks of over-resuscitation with fluid overload or inotropes have been highlighted in recent years. A recent guideline has proposed normalization of central venous oxygen saturation and/or lactate as therapeutic end-points, assuming that these variables are equivalent or interchangeable. However, since the physiological determinants of both are totally different, it is legitimate to challenge the rationale of this proposal. We designed this study to gain more insights into the most appropriate resuscitation goal from a dynamic point of view. Our objective was to compare the normalization rates of these and other potential perfusion-related targets in a cohort of septic shock survivors.MethodsWe designed a prospective, observational clinical study. One hundred and four septic shock patients with hyperlactatemia were included and followed until hospital discharge. The 84 hospital-survivors were kept for final analysis. A multimodal perfusion assessment was performed at baseline, 2, 6, and 24 h of ICU treatment.ResultsSome variables such as central venous oxygen saturation, central venous-arterial pCO2 gradient, and capillary refill time were already normal in more than 70% of survivors at 6 h. Lactate presented a much slower normalization rate decreasing significantly at 6 h compared to that of baseline (4.0 [3.0 to 4.9] vs. 2.7 [2.2 to 3.9] mmol/L; p < 0.01) but with only 52% of patients achieving normality at 24 h. Sublingual microcirculatory variables exhibited the slowest recovery rate with persistent derangements still present in almost 80% of patients at 24 h.ConclusionsPerfusion-related variables exhibit very different normalization rates in septic shock survivors, most of them exhibiting a biphasic response with an initial rapid improvement, followed by a much slower trend thereafter. This fact should be taken into account to determine the most appropriate criteria to stop resuscitation opportunely and avoid the risk of over-resuscitation.

Project description:Background: Some septic shock patients have persistent hyperlactacidemia despite a normal systemic hemodynamics after resuscitation. Central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and central venous pressure (CVP) cannot be target in subsequent hemodynamic treatments. Vasoplegia is considered to be one of the main causes of oxygen metabolism abnormalities in septic shock patients, and norepinephrine (NE) is the first-line vasopressor in septic shock treatment; its dosage represents the severity of vasoplegia. This study was performed to determine whether vasoplegia, as assessed by NE dosage, can indicate patients' lactate clearance after the completion of resuscitation. Methods: A retrospective study was performed, and 106 patients with septic shock in an intensive care unit were analyzed. Laboratory values and hemodynamic variables were obtained upon completion of resuscitation (H 0) and 6 h after (H 6). Lactate clearance was defined as the percent decrease in lactate from H 0 to H 6. Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, logistic regression analysis, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were performed for statistical analysis. Results: Patients with a mean age of 63.7 ± 13.8 years, baseline APACHE II score of 21.0 ± 5.1, and SOFA score of 12.7 ± 2.7 were enrolled. The study found that after 6-h of resuscitation, lactate clearance (LC) was <10% in 33 patients (31.1%). Patients with 6-h LC <10% compared with 6-h LC ≥ 10% had a higher NE dose (μg·kg-1·min-1) (0.55 [0.36-0.84] vs. 0.25 [0.18-0.41], p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis of statistically significant univariate variables showed that NE dose had a significant inverse relationship with 6-h LC < 10%. The cutoff for NE was ≥ 0.32 μg·kg-1·min-1 for predicting 6-h lactate clearance after resuscitation, with a sensitivity of 75.76% and a specificity of 70.00%. Septic shock patients with an NE dose ≥ 0.32 μg·kg-1·min-1, relative to patients with an NE dose < 0.32 μg·kg-1·min-1, had a greater 30-day mortality rate (69.8% vs. 26.4% p < 0.001). Conclusion: Some patients with septic shock had persistent oxygen metabolism disorders after hemodynamic resuscitation. NE dose may indicate vasoplegia and oxygen metabolism disorder. After resuscitation, septic shock patients with high-dose NE have lower lactate clearance and a greater 30-day mortality rate than those with low-dose NE.

Dataset Information

Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Interventions

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Trial registration

Publications

Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets