Dataset Information

Pragmatic Pediatric Trial of Balanced Versus Normal Saline Fluid in Sepsis: The PRoMPT BOLUS Randomized Controlled Trial Pilot Feasibility Study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Resuscitation with crystalloid fluid is a cornerstone of pediatric septic shock treatment. However, the optimal type of crystalloid fluid is unknown. We aimed to determine the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic randomized trial to compare balanced (lactated Ringer's [LR]) with 0.9% normal saline (NS) fluid resuscitation in children with suspected septic shock. METHODS:Open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial at a single academic children's hospital from January to August 2018. Eligible patients were >6 months to <18 years old who were treated in the emergency department for suspected septic shock, operationalized as blood culture, parenteral antibiotics, and fluid resuscitation for abnormal perfusion. Screening, enrollment, and randomization were carried out by the clinical team as part of routine care. Patients were randomized to receive either LR or NS for up to 48 hours following randomization. Other than fluid type, all treatment decisions were at the clinical team's discretion. Feasibility outcomes included proportion of eligible patients enrolled, acceptability of enrollment via the U.S. federal exception from informed consent (EFIC) regulations, and adherence to randomized study fluid administration. RESULTS:Of 59 eligible patients, 50 (85%) were enrolled and randomized. Twenty-four were randomized to LR and 26 to NS. Only one (2%) of 44 patients enrolled using EFIC withdrew before study completion. Total median (interquartile range [IQR]) crystalloid fluid volume received during the intervention window was 107 (60 to 155) mL/kg and 98 (63 to 128) mL/kg in the LR and NS arms, respectively (p = 0.50). Patients randomized to LR received a median (IQR) of only 20% (13 to 32) of all study fluid as NS compared to 99% (64% to 100%) of study fluid as NS in the NS arm (absolute difference = 79%, 95% CI = 48% to 85%). CONCLUSIONS:A pragmatic study design proved feasible to study comparative effectiveness of LR versus NS fluid resuscitation for pediatric septic shock.

SUBMITTER: Balamuth F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7302266 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pragmatic Pediatric Trial of Balanced Versus Normal Saline Fluid in Sepsis: The PRoMPT BOLUS Randomized Controlled Trial Pilot Feasibility Study.

Balamuth Fran F Kittick Marlena M McBride Peter P Woodford Ashley L AL Vestal Nicole N Casper T Charles TC Metheney Melissa M Smith Katherine K Atkin Natalie J NJ Baren Jill M JM Dean J Michael JM Kuppermann Nathan N Weiss Scott L SL

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 20190718 12

<h4>Background</h4>Resuscitation with crystalloid fluid is a cornerstone of pediatric septic shock treatment. However, the optimal type of crystalloid fluid is unknown. We aimed to determine the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic randomized trial to compare balanced (lactated Ringer's [LR]) with 0.9% normal saline (NS) fluid resuscitation in children with suspected septic shock.<h4>Methods</h4>Open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial at a single academic children's hospital from Janua ...[more]

PMID: 31183919

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/aimsDespite evidence that preferential use of balanced/buffered fluids may improve outcomes compared with chloride-rich 0.9% saline, saline remains the most commonly used fluid for children with septic shock. We aim to determine if resuscitation with balanced/buffered fluids as part of usual care will improve outcomes, in part through reduced kidney injury and without an increase in adverse effects, compared to 0.9% saline for children with septic shock.MethodsThe Pragmatic Pediatric Trial of Balanced versus Normal Saline Fluid in Sepsis (PRoMPT BOLUS) study is an international, open-label pragmatic interventional trial being conducted at > 40 sites in the USA, Canada, and Australia/New Zealand starting on August 25, 2020, and continuing for 5 years. Children > 6 months to < 18 years treated for suspected septic shock with abnormal perfusion in an emergency department will be randomized to receive either balanced/buffered crystalloids (intervention) or 0.9% saline (control) for initial resuscitation and maintenance fluids for up to 48 h. Eligible patients are enrolled and randomized using serially numbered, opaque envelopes concurrent with clinical care. Given the life-threatening nature of septic shock and narrow therapeutic window to start fluid resuscitation, patients may be enrolled under "exception from informed consent" in the USA or "deferred consent" in Canada and Australia/New Zealand. Other than fluid type, all decisions about timing, volume, and rate of fluid administration remain at the discretion of the treating clinicians. For pragmatic reasons, clinicians will not be blinded to study fluid type. Anticipated enrollment is 8800 patients. The primary outcome will be major adverse kidney events within 30 days (MAKE30), a composite of death, renal replacement therapy, and persistent kidney dysfunction. Additional effectiveness, safety, and biologic outcomes will also be analyzed.DiscussionPRoMPT BOLUS will provide high-quality evidence for the comparative effectiveness of buffered/balanced crystalloids versus 0.9% saline for the initial fluid management of children with suspected septic shock in emergency settings.Trial registrationPRoMPT BOLUS was first registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04102371 ) on September 25, 2019. Enrollment started on August 25, 2020.

Project description:ObjectivesNormal saline (NS) and Ringer's lactate (RL) are the most common crystalloids used for fluid therapy. Despite evidence of possible harm associated with NS (eg, hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis, impaired kidney function and death), few large multi-centre randomised trials have evaluated the effect of these fluids on clinically important outcomes. We conducted a pilot trial to explore the feasibility of a large trial powered for clinically important outcomes.DesignFLUID was a pragmatic pilot cluster randomised cross-over trial.SettingFour hospitals in the province of Ontario, Canada PARTICIPANTS: All hospitalised adult and paediatric patients with an incident admission to the hospital over the course of each study period.InterventionsA hospital wide policy/strategy which stocked either NS or RL throughout the hospital for 12 weeks before crossing over to the alternate fluid for the subsequent 12 weeks.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary feasibility outcome was study fluid protocol adherence. Secondary feasibility outcomes included time to Research Ethics Board (REB) approval and trial initiation. Primary (composite of death or re-admission to hospital in first 90 days of index hospitalisation) and secondary clinical outcomes were analysed descriptively.ResultsAmong 24 905 included patients, mean age 59.1 (SD 20.5); 13 977 (56.1%) were female and 21 150 (85.0%) had medical or surgical admitting diagnoses. Overall, 96 821 L were administered in the NS arm, and 78 348 L in the RL arm. Study fluid adherence to NS and RL was 93.7% (site range: 91.6%-98.0%) and 79.8% (site range: 72.5%-83.9%), respectively. Time to REB approval ranged from 2 to 48 days and readiness for trial initiation from 51 to 331 days. 5544 (22.3%) patients died or required hospital re-admission in the first 90 days.ConclusionsThe future large trial is feasible. Anticipating and addressing logistical challenges during the planning stages will be imperative.Trial registration numberNCT02721485.

Project description:BackgroundFluid resuscitation is the recommended management of shock, but increased mortality in febrile African children in the FEAST trial. We hypothesised that fluid bolus-induced deaths in FEAST would be associated with detectable changes in cardiovascular, neurological, or respiratory function, oxygen carrying capacity, and blood biochemistry.MethodsWe developed composite scores for respiratory, cardiovascular, and neurological function using vital sign data from the FEAST trial, and used them to compare participants from FEAST with those from four other cohorts and to identify differences between the bolus (n=2097) and no bolus (n=1044) groups of FEAST. We calculated the odds of adverse outcome for each ten-unit increase in baseline score using logistic regression for each cohort. Within FEAST participants, we also compared haemoglobin and plasma biochemistry between bolus and non-bolus patients, assessed the effects of these factors along with the vital sign scores on the contribution of bolus to mortality using Cox proportional hazard models, and used Bayesian clustering to identify subgroups that differed in response to bolus. The FEAST trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN69856593.FindingsIncreasing respiratory (odds ratio 1·09, 95% CI 1·07-1·11), neurological (1·26, 1·21-1·31), and cardiovascular scores (1·09, 1·05-1·14) were associated with death in FEAST (all p<0·0001), and with adverse outcomes for specific scores in the four other cohorts. In FEAST, fluid bolus increased respiratory and neurological scores and decreased cardiovascular score at 1 h after commencement of the infusion. Fluid bolus recipients had mean 0·33 g/dL (95% CI 0·20-0·46) reduction in haemoglobin concentration after 8 h (p<0·0001), and at 24 h had a decrease of 1·41 mEq/L (95% CI 0·76-2·06; p=0·0002) in mean base excess and increase of 1·65 mmol/L (0·47-2·8; p=0·0070) in mean chloride, and a decrease of 0·96 mmol/L (0·45 to 1·47; p=0·0003) in bicarbonate. There were similar effects of fluid bolus in three patient subgroups, identified on the basis of their baseline characteristics. Hyperchloraemic acidosis and respiratory and neurological dysfunction induced by saline or albumin bolus explained the excess mortality due to bolus in Cox survival models.InterpretationIn the resuscitation of febrile children, albumin and saline boluses can cause respiratory and neurological dysfunction, hyperchloraemic acidosis, and reduction in haemoglobin concentration. The findings support the notion that fluid resuscitation with unbuffered electrolyte solutions may cause harm and their use should be cautioned. The effects of lower volumes of buffered solutions should be evaluated further.FundingMedical Research Council, Department for International Development, National Institute for Health Research, Imperial College Biomedical Research Centre.

Dataset Information

Pragmatic Pediatric Trial of Balanced Versus Normal Saline Fluid in Sepsis: The PRoMPT BOLUS Randomized Controlled Trial Pilot Feasibility Study.

Publications

Pragmatic Pediatric Trial of Balanced Versus Normal Saline Fluid in Sepsis: The PRoMPT BOLUS Randomized Controlled Trial Pilot Feasibility Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets