Dataset Information

Very early hypothermia induction in patients with severe brain injury (the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II): a randomised trial.

ABSTRACT: The inconsistent effect of hypothermia treatment on severe brain injury in previous trials might be because hypothermia was induced too late after injury. We aimed to assess whether very early induction of hypothermia improves outcome in patients with severe brain injury.The National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II (NABIS: H II) was a randomised, multicentre clinical trial of patients with severe brain injury who were enrolled within 2·5 h of injury at six sites in the USA and Canada. Patients with non-penetrating brain injury who were 16-45 years old and were not responsive to instructions were randomly assigned (1:1) by a random number generator to hypothermia or normothermia. Patients randomly assigned to hypothermia were cooled to 35°C until their trauma assessment was completed. Patients who had none of a second set of exclusion criteria were either cooled to 33°C for 48 h and then gradually rewarmed or treated at normothermia, depending upon their initial treatment assignment. Investigators who assessed the outcome measures were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the Glasgow outcome scale score at 6 months. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00178711.Enrolment occurred from December, 2005, to June, 2009, when the trial was terminated for futility. Follow-up was from June, 2006, to December, 2009. 232 patients were initially randomised a mean of 1·6 h (SD 0·5) after injury: 119 to hypothermia and 113 to normothermia. 97 patients (52 in the hypothermia group and 45 in the normothermia group) did not meet any of the second set of exclusion criteria. The mean time to 35°C for the 52 patients in the hypothermia group was 2·6 h (SD 1·2) and to 33°C was 4·4 h (1·5). Outcome was poor (severe disability, vegetative state, or death) in 31 of 52 patients in the hypothermia group and 25 of 56 in the normothermia group (relative risk [RR] 1·08, 95% CI 0·76-1·53; p=0·67). 12 patients in the hypothermia group died compared with eight in the normothermia group (RR 1·30, 95% CI 0·58-2·52; p=0·52).This trial did not confirm the utility of hypothermia as a primary neuroprotective strategy in patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

SUBMITTER: Clifton GL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3628679 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Very early hypothermia induction in patients with severe brain injury (the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II): a randomised trial.

Clifton Guy L GL Valadka Alex A Zygun David D Coffey Christopher S CS Drever Pamala P Fourwinds Sierra S Janis L Scott LS Wilde Elizabeth E Taylor Pauline P Harshman Kathy K Conley Adam A Puccio Ava A Levin Harvey S HS McCauley Stephen R SR Bucholz Richard D RD Smith Kenneth R KR Schmidt John H JH Scott James N JN Yonas Howard H Okonkwo David O DO

The Lancet. Neurology 20101217 2

<h4>Background</h4>The inconsistent effect of hypothermia treatment on severe brain injury in previous trials might be because hypothermia was induced too late after injury. We aimed to assess whether very early induction of hypothermia improves outcome in patients with severe brain injury.<h4>Methods</h4>The National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II (NABIS: H II) was a randomised, multicentre clinical trial of patients with severe brain injury who were enrolled within 2·5 h of injury at ...[more]

PMID: 21169065

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Hypothermia has been used in the treatment of brain injury for many years. Encouraging results from small trials and laboratory studies led to renewed interest in the area and some larger trials. OBJECTIVES:To determine the effect of mild hypothermia for traumatic brain injury (TBI) on mortality, long-term functional outcomes and complications. SEARCH METHODS:We ran and incorporated studies from database searches to 21 March 2016. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase Classic+Embase (OvidSP), PubMed, ISI Web of science (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S & CPSI-SSH), clinical trials registers, and screened reference lists. We also re-ran these searches pre-publication in June 2017; the result from this search is presented in 'Studies awaiting classification'. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included randomised controlled trials of participants with closed TBI requiring hospitalisation who were treated with hypothermia to a maximum of 35 ºC for at least 12 consecutive hours. Treatment with hypothermia was compared to maintenance with normothermia (36.5 to 38 ºC). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors assessed data on mortality, unfavourable outcomes according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale, and pneumonia. MAIN RESULTS:We included 37 eligible trials with a total of 3110 randomised participants; nine of these were new studies since the last update (2009) and five studies had been previously excluded but were re-assessed and included during the 2017 update. We identified two ongoing studies from searches of clinical trials registers and database searches and two studies await classification.Studies included both adults and children with TBI. Most studies commenced treatment immediately on admission to hospital or after craniotomies and all treatment was maintained for at least 24 hours. Thirty-three studies reported data for mortality, 31 studies reported data for unfavourable outcomes (death, vegetative state or severe disability), and 14 studies reported pneumonia. Visual inspection of the results for these outcomes showed inconsistencies among studies, with differences in the direction of effect, and we did not pool these data for meta-analysis. We considered duration of hypothermia therapy and the length of follow-up in collected data for these subgroups; differences in study data remained such that we did not perform meta-analysis.Studies were generally poorly reported and we were unable to assess risk of bias adequately. Heterogeneity was evident both in the trial designs and participant inclusion. Inconsistencies in results may be explained by heterogeneity among study participants or bias introduced by individual study methodology but we did not explore this in detail in subgroup or sensitivity analyses. We used the GRADE approach to judge the quality of the evidence for each outcome and downgraded the evidence for mortality and unfavourable outcome to very low. We downgraded the evidence for the pneumonia outcome to low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Despite a large number studies, there remains no high-quality evidence that hypothermia is beneficial in the treatment of people with TBI. Further research, which is methodologically robust, is required in this field to establish the effect of hypothermia for people with TBI.

Project description:Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Progesterone has been shown to improve neurologic outcome in multiple experimental models and two early-phase trials involving patients with TBI.We conducted a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial in which patients with severe, moderate-to-severe, or moderate acute TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score of 4 to 12, on a scale from 3 to 15, with lower scores indicating a lower level of consciousness) were randomly assigned to intravenous progesterone or placebo, with the study treatment initiated within 4 hours after injury and administered for a total of 96 hours. Efficacy was defined as an increase of 10 percentage points in the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome, as determined with the use of the stratified dichotomy of the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale score at 6 months after injury. Secondary outcomes included mortality and the Disability Rating Scale score.A total of 882 of the planned sample of 1140 patients underwent randomization before the trial was stopped for futility with respect to the primary outcome. The study groups were similar with regard to baseline characteristics; the median age of the patients was 35 years, 73.7% were men, 15.2% were black, and the mean Injury Severity Score was 24.4 (on a scale from 0 to 75, with higher scores indicating greater severity). The most frequent mechanism of injury was a motor vehicle accident. There was no significant difference between the progesterone group and the placebo group in the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome (relative benefit of progesterone, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.06; P=0.35). Phlebitis or thrombophlebitis was more frequent in the progesterone group than in the placebo group (relative risk, 3.03; CI, 1.96 to 4.66). There were no significant differences in the other prespecified safety outcomes.This clinical trial did not show a benefit of progesterone over placebo in the improvement of outcomes in patients with acute TBI. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and others; PROTECT III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00822900.).

Project description:ImportanceAfter severe traumatic brain injury, induction of prophylactic hypothermia has been suggested to be neuroprotective and improve long-term neurologic outcomes.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of early prophylactic hypothermia compared with normothermic management of patients after severe traumatic brain injury.Design, setting, and participantsThe Prophylactic Hypothermia Trial to Lessen Traumatic Brain Injury-Randomized Clinical Trial (POLAR-RCT) was a multicenter randomized trial in 6 countries that recruited 511 patients both out-of-hospital and in emergency departments after severe traumatic brain injury. The first patient was enrolled on December 5, 2010, and the last on November 10, 2017. The final date of follow-up was May 15, 2018.InterventionsThere were 266 patients randomized to the prophylactic hypothermia group and 245 to normothermic management. Prophylactic hypothermia targeted the early induction of hypothermia (33°C-35°C) for at least 72 hours and up to 7 days if intracranial pressures were elevated, followed by gradual rewarming. Normothermia targeted 37°C, using surface-cooling wraps when required. Temperature was managed in both groups for 7 days. All other care was at the discretion of the treating physician.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was favorable neurologic outcomes or independent living (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score, 5-8 [scale range, 1-8]) obtained by blinded assessors 6 months after injury.ResultsAmong 511 patients who were randomized, 500 provided ongoing consent (mean age, 34.5 years [SD, 13.4]; 402 men [80.2%]) and 466 completed the primary outcome evaluation. Hypothermia was initiated rapidly after injury (median, 1.8 hours [IQR, 1.0-2.7 hours]) and rewarming occurred slowly (median, 22.5 hours [IQR, 16-27 hours]). Favorable outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score, 5-8) at 6 months occurred in 117 patients (48.8%) in the hypothermia group and 111 (49.1%) in the normothermia group (risk difference, 0.4% [95% CI, -9.4% to 8.7%]; relative risk with hypothermia, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.82-1.19]; P = .94). In the hypothermia and normothermia groups, the rates of pneumonia were 55.0% vs 51.3%, respectively, and rates of increased intracranial bleeding were 18.1% vs 15.4%, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with severe traumatic brain injury, early prophylactic hypothermia compared with normothermia did not improve neurologic outcomes at 6 months. These findings do not support the use of early prophylactic hypothermia for patients with severe traumatic brain injury.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00987688; Anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12609000764235.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:A relationship between reduced brain tissue oxygenation and poor outcome following severe traumatic brain injury has been reported in observational studies. We designed a Phase II trial to assess whether a neurocritical care management protocol could improve brain tissue oxygenation levels in patients with severe traumatic brain injury and the feasibility of a Phase III efficacy study. DESIGN:Randomized prospective clinical trial. SETTING:Ten ICUs in the United States. PATIENTS:One hundred nineteen severe traumatic brain injury patients. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to treatment protocol based on intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation monitoring versus intracranial pressure monitoring alone. Brain tissue oxygenation data were recorded in the intracranial pressure -only group in blinded fashion. Tiered interventions in each arm were specified and impact on intracranial pressure and brain tissue oxygenation measured. Monitors were removed if values were normal for 48 hours consecutively, or after 5 days. Outcome was measured at 6 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:A management protocol based on brain tissue oxygenation and intracranial pressure monitoring reduced the proportion of time with brain tissue hypoxia after severe traumatic brain injury (0.45 in intracranial pressure-only group and 0.16 in intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation group; p < 0.0001). Intracranial pressure control was similar in both groups. Safety and feasibility of the tiered treatment protocol were confirmed. There were no procedure-related complications. Treatment of secondary injury after severe traumatic brain injury based on brain tissue oxygenation and intracranial pressure values was consistent with reduced mortality and increased proportions of patients with good recovery compared with intracranial pressure-only management; however, the study was not powered for clinical efficacy. CONCLUSIONS:Management of severe traumatic brain injury informed by multimodal intracranial pressure and brain tissue oxygenation monitoring reduced brain tissue hypoxia with a trend toward lower mortality and more favorable outcomes than intracranial pressure-only treatment. A Phase III randomized trial to assess impact on neurologic outcome of intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation-directed treatment of severe traumatic brain injury is warranted.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Prophylactic hypOthermia to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial (POLAR-RCT) will evaluate whether early and sustained prophylactic hypothermia delivered to patients with severe traumatic brain injury improves patient-centred outcomes. METHODS:The POLAR-RCT is a multicentre, randomised, parallel group, phase III trial of early, prophylactic cooling in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury, conducted in Australia, New Zealand, France, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. A total of 511 patients aged 18-60 years have been enrolled with severe acute traumatic brain injury. The trial intervention of early and sustained prophylactic hypothermia to 33 °C for 72 h will be compared to standard normothermia maintained at a core temperature of 37 °C. The primary outcome is the proportion of favourable neurological outcomes, comprising good recovery or moderate disability, observed at six months following randomisation utilising a midpoint dichotomisation of the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE). Secondary outcomes, also assessed at six months following randomisation, include the probability of an equal or greater GOSE level, mortality, the proportions of patients with haemorrhage or infection, as well as assessment of quality of life and health economic outcomes. The planned sample size will allow 80% power to detect a 30% relative risk increase from 50% to 65% (equivalent to a 15% absolute risk increase) in favourable neurological outcome at a two-sided alpha of 0.05. DISCUSSION:Consistent with international guidelines, a detailed and prospective analysis plan has been developed for the POLAR-RCT. This plan specifies the statistical models for evaluation of primary and secondary outcomes, as well as defining covariates for adjusted analyses and methods for exploratory analyses. Application of this statistical analysis plan to the forthcoming POLAR-RCT trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of these important clinical data. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00987688 (first posted 1 October 2009); Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12609000764235 . Registered on 3 September 2009.

Dataset Information

Very early hypothermia induction in patients with severe brain injury (the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II): a randomised trial.

Publications

Very early hypothermia induction in patients with severe brain injury (the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II): a randomised trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets