Dataset Information

The Restrictive IV Fluid Trial in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock (RIFTS): A Randomized Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:It is unclear if a low- or high-volume IV fluid resuscitation strategy is better for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. DESIGN:Prospective randomized controlled trial. SETTING:Two adult acute care hospitals within a single academic system. PATIENTS:Patients with severe sepsis and septic shock admitted from the emergency department to the ICU from November 2016 to February 2018. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomly assigned to a restrictive IV fluid resuscitation strategy (? 60?mL/kg of IV fluid) or usual care for the first 72 hours of care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:We enrolled 109 patients, of whom 55 were assigned to the restrictive resuscitation group and 54 to the usual care group. The restrictive group received significantly less resuscitative IV fluid than the usual care group (47.1 vs 61.1?mL/kg; p = 0.01) over 72 hours. By 30 days, there were 12 deaths (21.8%) in the restrictive group and 12 deaths (22.2%) in the usual care group (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.41-2.53). There were no differences between groups in the rate of new organ failure, hospital or ICU length of stay, or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS:This pilot study demonstrates that a restrictive resuscitation strategy can successfully reduce the amount of IV fluid administered to patients with severe sepsis and septic shock compared with usual care. Although limited by the sample size, we observed no increase in mortality, organ failure, or adverse events. These findings further support that a restrictive IV fluid strategy should be explored in a larger multicenter trial.

SUBMITTER: Corl KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6579683 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Restrictive IV Fluid Trial in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock (RIFTS): A Randomized Pilot Study.

Corl Keith A KA Prodromou Michael M Merchant Roland C RC Gareen Ilana I Marks Sarah S Banerjee Debasree D Amass Timothy T Abbasi Adeel A Delcompare Cesar C Palmisciano Amy A Aliotta Jason J Jay Gregory G Levy Mitchell M MM

Critical care medicine 20190701 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>It is unclear if a low- or high-volume IV fluid resuscitation strategy is better for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.<h4>Design</h4>Prospective randomized controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>Two adult acute care hospitals within a single academic system.<h4>Patients</h4>Patients with severe sepsis and septic shock admitted from the emergency department to the ICU from November 2016 to February 2018.<h4>Interventions</h4>Patients were randomly assigned to a restrictiv ...[more]

PMID: 30985449

Similar Datasets

Project description:We previously found decreased levels of Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) in patients with septic shock. The objective of the current study was to assess whether the provision of exogenous ubiquinol (the reduced form of CoQ10) could increase plasma CoQ10 levels and improve mitochondrial function.We performed a randomized, double-blind, pilot trial at a single, tertiary care hospital. Adults (age ?18 years) with severe sepsis or septic shock between November 2012 and January 2014 were included. Patients received 200 mg enteral ubiquinol or placebo twice a day for up to seven days. Blood draws were obtained at baseline (0 h), 12, 24, 48, and 72 h. The primary outcome of the study was change in plasma CoQ10 parameters (total CoQ10 levels, CoQ10 levels relative to cholesterol levels, and levels of oxidized and reduced CoQ10). Secondary outcomes included assessment of: 1) vascular endothelial biomarkers, 2) inflammatory biomarkers, 3) biomarkers related to mitochondrial injury including cytochrome c levels, and 4) clinical outcomes. CoQ10 levels and biomarkers were compared between groups using repeated measures models.We enrolled 38 patients: 19 in the CoQ10 group and 19 in the placebo group. The mean patient age was 62?±?16 years and 47% were female. Baseline characteristics and CoQ10 levels were similar for both groups. There was a significant increase in total CoQ10 levels, CoQ10 levels relative to cholesterol levels, and levels of oxidized and reduced CoQ10 in the ubiquinol group compared to the placebo group. We found no difference between the two groups in any of the secondary outcomes.In this pilot trial we showed that plasma CoQ10 levels could be increased in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, with the administration of oral ubiquinol. Further research is needed to address whether ubiquinol administration can result in improved clinical outcomes in this patient population.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01948063. Registered on 18 February 2013.

Project description:ObjectivesRapid fluid resuscitation has become standard in sepsis care, despite "low-quality" evidence and absence of guidelines for populations "at risk" for volume overload. Our objectives include as follows: 1) identify predictors of reaching a 30 mL/kg crystalloid bolus within 3 hours of sepsis onset (30by3); 2) assess the impact of 30by3 and fluid dosing on clinical outcomes; 3) examine differences in perceived "at-risk" volume-sensitive populations, including end-stage renal disease, heart failure, obesity, advanced age, or with documentation of volume "overload" by bedside examination.DesignRetrospective cohort study. All outcome analyses controlled for sex, end-stage renal disease, heart failure, sepsis severity (severe sepsis vs septic shock), obesity, Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score, and time to antibiotics.SettingUrban, tertiary care center between January 1, 2014, and May 31, 2017.PatientsEmergency Department treated adults (age ≥18 yr; n = 1,032) with severe sepsis or septic shock.InterventionsAdministration of IV fluids by bolus.Measurements and main resultsIn total, 509 patients received 30by3 (49.3%). Overall mortality was 17.1% (n = 176), with 20.4% mortality in the shock group. Patients who were elderly (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83), male (odds ratio, 0.66; CI, 0.49-0.87), obese (odds ratio, 0.18; CI, 0.13-0.25), or with end-stage renal disease (odds ratio, 0.23; CI, 0.13-0.40), heart failure (odds ratio, 0.42; CI, 0.29-0.60), or documented volume "overload" (odds ratio, 0.30; CI, 0.20-0.45) were less likely to achieve 30by3. Failure to meet 30by3 had increased odds of mortality (odds ratio, 1.52; CI, 1.03-2.24), delayed hypotension (odds ratio, 1.42; CI, 1.02-1.99), and increased ICU stay (~2 d) (β = 2.0; CI, 0.5-3.6), without differential effects for "at-risk" groups. Higher fluid volumes administered by 3 hours correlated with decreased mortality, with a plateau effect between 35 and 45 mL/kg (p < 0.05).ConclusionsFailure to reach 30by3 was associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality, irrespective of comorbidities. Predictors of inadequate resuscitation can be identified, potentially leading to interventions to improve survival. These findings are retrospective and require future validation.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Observational evidence suggests physiological benefits and lower mortality with lower chloride solutions; however, 0.9% saline remains the most widely used fluid worldwide. Given uncertainty regarding the association of lower chloride on mortality, it is unlikely that practice will change without direct randomised clinical trial (RCT) evidence. This pilot RCT will investigate the feasibility of a large-scale trial directly comparing low chloride with high chloride fluids in patients with septic shock. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This is a randomised, concealed, blinded parallel-group multicentre pilot trial. We will include adult critically ill patients with septic shock, defined as ongoing hypotension despite 1 L of fluid, or a serum lactate >4?mmol/L, who are within 6?hours of hospital presentation or rapid response team activation. We will exclude patients if they have an aetiology of shock other than sepsis, if they have acute burn injury, elevated intracranial pressure, intent to withdraw life support or previous enrolment in this or a competing trial. Following informed consent, patients will be randomised to a low chloride fluid strategy or a high chloride fluid strategy for the duration of their ICU stay or until 30 days postrandomisation. Clinicians, patients, families and research staff will be blinded. The primary outcome for this trial will be feasibility, assessed by consent rate, recruitment success and protocol adherence. Patient-important clinical outcomes include mortality, receipt of renal replacement therapy, intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay and surrogate outcomes of incidence of acidosis, hyperkalaemia and acute kidney injury. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This pilot trial will test the feasibility of conducting the main trial, which will examine the effect of high versus low chloride fluids in patients with septic shock on patient-important outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02748382, registered 8 April 2016. PROTOCOL DATE:1 July 2016.

Project description:RationaleThe feasibility and clinical outcomes of conservative fluid management after sepsis resuscitation remain unknown.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effect of a conservative fluid management protocol on fluid balance and intensive care unit (ICU)-free days among patients with sepsis.MethodsIn a single-center phase II/III randomized trial, we enrolled adults with suspected infection, ≥2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, and either shock (mean arterial pressure <60 mm Hg or vasopressors) or respiratory insufficiency (mechanical ventilation or oxygen saturation <97% and fraction of inspired oxygen ≥0.3). Patients were randomized 1:1 to usual care or a conservative fluid management protocol. The protocol restricted intravenous fluid administration during shock to treatment of oliguria or increasing vasopressor requirement. In the absence of shock, loop diuretic infusion targeted equal fluid input and output each study day. The primary outcomes were mean daily fluid balance (phase II) and ICU-free days (phase III).ResultsAt the completion of phase II (n = 30), the difference in mean daily fluid balance between groups (-398 mL) was less than the prespecified threshold (-500 mL) and the trial was stopped. Patients in the conservative fluid management (n = 15) and usual care (n = 15) groups experienced similar cumulative fluid input (8450 mL vs 7049 mL; P = .90) of which only 14% was intravenous crystalloid or colloid. Loop diuretic infusion occurred more frequently in the conservative fluid management group (40% vs 0%; P = .02), and cumulative fluid output was 10 645 mL in the conservative fluid management group compared to 6286 mL in the usual care group (P = .39). Hemodynamic, respiratory, and renal function did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsIn this phase II trial, a conservative fluid management protocol did not decrease mean daily fluid balance by more than 500 mL among patients with sepsis.RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov; NCT02159079.

Project description:The role of recombinant activated protein C (aPC) during sepsis is still controversial. It showed anti-inflammatory effect and improved the microvascular perfusion in experimental models of septic shock. The present study was aimed at testing the hypothesis that recombinant aPC therapy improves the microcirculation during severe sepsis.Prospective observational study on patients admitted in a 12-beds intensive care unit of a university hospital from July 2010 to December 2011, with severe sepsis and at least two sepsis-induced organ failures occurring within 48 hours from the onset of sepsis, who received an infusion of aPC (24 mcg/kg/h for 96 hours) (aPC group). Patients with contraindications to aPC administration were also monitored (no-aPC group).At baseline (before starting aPC infusion, T0), after 24 hours (T1a), 48 hours (T1b), 72 hours (T1c) and 6 hours after the end of aPC infusion (T2), general clinical and hemodynamic parameters were collected and the sublingual microcirculation was evaluated with sidestream dark-field imaging. Total vessel density (TVD), perfused vessel density (PVD), De Backer score, microvascular flow index (MFIs), the proportion of perfused vessels (PPV) and the flow heterogeneity index (HI) were calculated for small vessels. The perfused boundary region (PBR) was measured as an index of glycocalyx damage. Variables were compared between time points and groups using non parametric or parametric statistical tests, as appropriate.In the 13 aPC patients mean arterial pressure (MAP), base excess, lactate, PaO2/FiO2 and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score significantly improved over time, while CI and ITBVI did not change. MFIs, TVD, PVD, PPV significantly increased over time and the HI decreased (p?<?0.05 in all cases), while the PBR did not change. No-aPC patients (n?=?9) did not show any change in the microcirculation over time. A positive correlation was found between MFIs and MAP. TVD, PVD and De Backer score negatively correlated with norepinephrine dose, and the SOFA score negatively correlated with MFIs, TVD and PVD.aPC significantly improves the microcirculation in patients with severe sepsis/septic shock.NCT01806428.

Dataset Information

The Restrictive IV Fluid Trial in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock (RIFTS): A Randomized Pilot Study.

Publications

The Restrictive IV Fluid Trial in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock (RIFTS): A Randomized Pilot Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets