Dataset Information

Effect of a Perioperative Hypotension-Avoidance Strategy Versus a Hypertension-Avoidance Strategy on the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Clinical Research Protocol for a Substudy of the POISE-3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Most patients who take antihypertensive medications continue taking them on the morning of surgery and during the perioperative period. However, growing evidence suggests this practice may contribute to perioperative hypotension and a higher risk of complications. This protocol describes an acute kidney injury substudy of the Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3) trial, which is testing the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

Objective

To conduct a substudy of POISE-3 to determine whether a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy reduces the risk of acute kidney injury compared with a hypertension-avoidance strategy.

Design

Randomized clinical trial with 1:1 randomization to the intervention (a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy) or control (a hypertension-avoidance strategy).

Intervention

If the presurgery systolic blood pressure (SBP) is <130 mmHg, all antihypertensive medications are withheld on the morning of surgery. If the SBP is ≥130 mmHg, some medications (but not angiotensin receptor blockers [ACEIs], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], or renin inhibitors) may be continued in a stepwise manner. During surgery, the patients' mean arterial pressure (MAP) is maintained at ≥80 mmHg. During the first 48 hours after surgery, some antihypertensive medications (but not ACEIs, ARBs, or renin inhibitors) may be restarted in a stepwise manner if the SBP is ≥130 mmHg.

Control

Patients receive their usual antihypertensive medications before and after surgery. The patients' MAP is maintained at ≥60 mmHg from anesthetic induction until the end of surgery.

Setting

Recruitment from 108 centers in 22 countries from 2018 to 2021.

Patients

Patients (~6800) aged ≥45 years having noncardiac surgery who have or are at risk of atherosclerotic disease and who routinely take antihypertensive medications.

Measurements

The primary outcome of the substudy is postoperative acute kidney injury, defined as an increase in serum creatinine concentration of either ≥26.5 μmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) within 48 hours of randomization or ≥50% within 7 days of randomization.

Methods

The primary analysis (intention-to-treat) will examine the relative risk and 95% confidence interval of acute kidney injury in the intervention versus control group. We will repeat the primary analysis using alternative definitions of acute kidney injury and examine effect modification by preexisting chronic kidney disease, defined as a prerandomization estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m².

Results

Substudy results will be analyzed in 2022.

Limitations

It is not possible to mask patients or providers to the intervention; however, objective measures will be used to assess acute kidney injury.

Conclusions

This substudy will provide generalizable estimates of the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy on the risk of acute kidney injury.

SUBMITTER: Garg AX

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8744204 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of a Perioperative Hypotension-Avoidance Strategy Versus a Hypertension-Avoidance Strategy on the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Clinical Research Protocol for a Substudy of the POISE-3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Garg Amit X AX Cuerden Meaghan M Aguado Hector H Amir Mohammed M Belley-Cote Emilie P EP Bhatt Keyur K Biccard Bruce M BM Borges Flavia K FK Chan Matthew M Conen David D Duceppe Emmanuelle E Efremov Sergey S Eikelboom John J Fleischmann Edith E Giovanni Landoni L Gross Peter P Jayaram Raja R Kirov Mikhail M Kleinlugtenbelt Ydo Y Kurz Andrea A Lamy Andre A Leslie Kate K Likhvantsev Valery V Lomivorotov Vladimir V Marcucci Maura M Martínez-Zapata Maria José MJ McGillion Michael M McIntyre William W Meyhoff Christian C Ofori Sandra S Painter Thomas T Paniagua Pilar P Parikh Chirag C Parlow Joel J Patel Ameen A Polanczyk Carisi C Richards Toby T Roshanov Pavel P Schmartz Denis D Sessler Daniel D Short Tim T Sontrop Jessica M JM Spence Jessica J Srinathan Sadeesh S Stillo David D Szczeklik Wojciech W Tandon Vikas V Torres David D Van Helder Thomas T Vincent Jessica J Wang C Y CY Wang Michael M Whitlock Richard R Wittmann Maria M Xavier Denis D Devereaux P J PJ

Canadian journal of kidney health and disease 20220107

<h4>Background</h4>Most patients who take antihypertensive medications continue taking them on the morning of surgery and during the perioperative period. However, growing evidence suggests this practice may contribute to perioperative hypotension and a higher risk of complications. This protocol describes an acute kidney injury substudy of the Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3) trial, which is testing the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension- ...[more]

PMID: 35024154

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPerioperative Ischaemic Evaluation-2 (POISE-2) is an international 2×2 factorial randomised controlled trial of low-dose aspirin versus placebo and low-dose clonidine versus placebo in patients who undergo non-cardiac surgery. Perioperative aspirin (and possibly clonidine) may reduce the risk of postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI).Methods and analysisAfter receipt of grant funding, serial postoperative serum creatinine measurements began to be recorded in consecutive patients enrolled at substudy participating centres. With respect to the study schedule, the last of over 6500 substudy patients from 82 centres in 21 countries were randomised in December 2013. The authors will use logistic regression to estimate the adjusted OR of AKI following surgery (compared with the preoperative serum creatinine value, a postoperative increase ≥26.5 μmol/L in the 2 days following surgery or an increase of ≥50% in the 7 days following surgery) comparing each intervention to placebo, and will report the adjusted relative risk reduction. Alternate definitions of AKI will also be considered, as will the outcome of AKI in subgroups defined by the presence of preoperative chronic kidney disease and preoperative chronic aspirin use. At the time of randomisation, a subpopulation agreed to a single measurement of serum creatinine between 3 and 12 months after surgery, and the authors will examine intervention effects on this outcome.Ethics and disseminationThe authors were competitively awarded a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for this POISE-2 AKI substudy. Ethics approval was obtained for additional kidney data collection in consecutive patients enrolled at participating centres, which first began for patients enrolled after January 2011. In patients who provided consent, the remaining longer term serum creatinine data will be collected throughout 2014. The results of this study will be reported no later than 2015.Clinical trial registration numberNCT01082874.

Project description:BackgroundFor patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, bleeding and hypotension are frequent and associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular complications. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent with the potential to reduce surgical bleeding; however, there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety in noncardiac surgery. Although usual perioperative care is commonly consistent with a hypertension-avoidance strategy (i.e., most patients continue their antihypertensive medications throughout the perioperative period and intraoperative mean arterial pressures of 60 mmHg are commonly accepted), a hypotension-avoidance strategy may improve perioperative outcomes.MethodsThe PeriOperative Ischemic Evaluation (POISE)-3 Trial is a large international randomized controlled trial designed to determine if TXA is superior to placebo for the composite outcome of life-threatening, major, and critical organ bleeding, and non-inferior to placebo for the occurrence of major arterial and venous thrombotic events, at 30 days after randomization. Using a partial factorial design, POISE-3 will additionally determine the effect of a hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy on the risk of major cardiovascular events, at 30 days after randomization. The target sample size is 10,000 participants. Patients ≥45 years of age undergoing noncardiac surgery, with or at risk of cardiovascular and bleeding complications, are randomized to receive a TXA 1 g intravenous bolus or matching placebo at the start and at the end of surgery. Patients, health care providers, data collectors, outcome adjudicators, and investigators are blinded to the treatment allocation. Patients on ≥ 1 chronic antihypertensive medication are also randomized to either of the two blood pressure management strategies, which differ in the management of patient antihypertensive medications on the morning of surgery and on the first 2 days after surgery, and in the target mean arterial pressure during surgery. Outcome adjudicators are blinded to the blood pressure treatment allocation. Patients are followed up at 30 days and 1 year after randomization.DiscussionBleeding and hypotension in noncardiac surgery are common and have a substantial impact on patient prognosis. The POISE-3 trial will evaluate two interventions to determine their impact on bleeding, cardiovascular complications, and mortality.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03505723. Registered on 23 April 2018.

Project description:BackgroundSimultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation (SPK) has benefits for patients with kidney failure and type I diabetes mellitus, but is associated with greater perioperative risk compared with kidney-alone transplantation. Postoperative care settings for SPK recipients vary across Canada and may have implications for patient outcomes and hospital resource use.ObjectiveTo compare outcomes following SPK transplantation between patients receiving postoperative care in the intensive care unit (ICU) compared with the ward.DesignRetrospective cohort study using administrative health data.SettingIn Alberta, the 2 transplant centers (Calgary and Edmonton) have different protocols for routine postoperative care of SPK recipients. In Edmonton, SPK recipients are routinely transferred to the ICU, whereas in Calgary, SPK recipients are transferred to the ward.Patients129 adult SPK recipients (2002-2019).MeasurementsData from the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database (CIHI-DAD) were used to identify SPK recipients (procedure codes) and the outcomes of inpatient mortality, length of initial hospital stay (LOS), and the occurrence of 16 different patient safety indicators (PSIs).MethodsWe followed SPK recipients from the admission date of their transplant hospitalization until the first of hospital discharge or death. Unadjusted quantile regression was used to determine differences in LOS, and age- and sex-adjusted marginal probabilities were used to determine differences in PSIs between centers.ResultsThere were no perioperative deaths and no major differences in the demographic characteristics between the centers. The majority of the SPK transplants were performed in Edmonton (n = 82, 64%). All SPK recipients in Edmonton were admitted to the ICU postoperatively, compared with only 11% in Calgary. There was no statistically significant difference in the LOS or probability of a PSI between the 2 centers (LOS for Edmonton vs Calgary:16 vs 13 days, P = .12; PSIs for Edmonton vs Calgary: 60%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.50-0.71 vs 44%, 95% CI = 0.29-0.59, P = .08).LimitationsThis study was conducted using administrative data and is limited by variable availability. The small sample size limited precision of estimated differences between type of postoperative care.ConclusionsFollowing SPK transplantation, we found no difference in inpatient outcomes for recipients who received routine postoperative ICU care compared with ward care. Further research using larger data sets and interventional study designs is needed to better understand the implications of postoperative care settings on patient outcomes and health care resource utilization.

Project description:PurposeToday's clinical trial partnerships frequently join multi-disciplinary investigators and stakeholders, from different countries and cultures, to conduct research with a broad array of goals. This diversity, while a strength, can also foster divergent views about priorities and what constitutes success, thereby posing challenges for management, operations, and evaluation. As a sponsor and partner in such collaborations, we seek to assist and support their development and implementation of sound research strategies, to optimize their efficiency, sustainability, and public health impact. This report describes our efforts using an adaptation of the well-established Kaplan-Norton strategy management paradigm, in our clinical trials setting. We share findings from our first test of the utility and acceptance of this approach for evaluating and managing research strategies in a collaborative clinical research partnership.ResultsFindings from pilot studies and our first implementation in an ongoing clinical research partnership in Liberia, provide initial support for our hypothesis that an adapted version of the Kaplan-Norton strategy management model can have use in this setting. With leadership from within the partnership, analysis artifacts were gathered, and assessments made using standardized tools. Practical feasibility, resonance of the findings with partners, and convergence with other empirical assessments lend initial support for the view that this approach holds promise for obtaining meaningful, useable results for assessing and improving clinical research management.Conclusions and implicationsEngaged leadership, thoughtful timing to align with partnership planning cycles, support for the process, and an eye towards the collaboration's long-term goals appear important for developing model understanding and practice. Skepticism about evaluations, and unease at exposing weaknesses, may hinder the effort. Acceptance of findings and associated opportunities for improvement by group leadership, support a growing sense of validity. Next steps aim to test the approach in other partnerships, streamline the methodology for greater ease of use, and seek possible correlations of strategy management assessments with performance evaluation. There is hardly a better example than the COVID-19 pandemic, to spotlight the need for efficient and effective clinical research partnerships to address global health challenges. While heartened by the collaborative spirit driving the effort so far, we cannot let our enthusiasm lull us into thinking that nobility of purpose or an abundance of good will is sufficient. Careful monitoring and adjustment of clinical research strategy in response to changes (e.g., demographics, pathogen evolution, research acceptance, political and cultural environments) are vital to making the needed adjustments that can guide these programs toward successful outcomes. We hope that our work can raise awareness about the importance, relevance, and feasibility of sound strategy management in clinical research partnerships, especially during this time when there is so much at stake.

Dataset Information

Effect of a Perioperative Hypotension-Avoidance Strategy Versus a Hypertension-Avoidance Strategy on the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Clinical Research Protocol for a Substudy of the POISE-3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background

Objective

Design

Intervention

Control

Setting

Patients

Measurements

Methods

Results

Limitations

Conclusions

Publications

Effect of a Perioperative Hypotension-Avoidance Strategy Versus a Hypertension-Avoidance Strategy on the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Clinical Research Protocol for a Substudy of the POISE-3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets