Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of early target-controlled plasma volume replacement with a balanced gelatine solution versus a balanced electrolyte solution in patients with severe sepsis/septic shock: study protocol, design, and rationale of a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicentric, international clinical trial : GENIUS-Gelatine use in ICU and sepsis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sepsis is associated with capillary leakage and vasodilatation and leads to hypotension and tissue hypoperfusion. Early plasma volume replacement is required to achieve haemodynamic stability (HDS) and maintain adequate tissue oxygenation. The right choice of fluids to be used for plasma volume replacement (colloid or crystalloid solutions) is still a matter of debate, and large trials investigating the use of colloid solutions containing gelatine are missing. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of plasma volume replacement using either a combined gelatine-crystalloid regime (1:1 ratio) or a pure crystalloid regime.

Methods

This is a prospective, controlled, randomized, double-blind, international, multicentric phase IV study with two parallel groups that is planned to be conducted at European intensive care units (ICUs) in a population of patients with hypovolaemia in severe sepsis/septic shock. A total of 608 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either a gelatine-crystalloid regime (Gelaspan® 4% and Sterofundin® ISO, B. Braun Melsungen AG, in a 1:1 ratio) or a pure crystalloid regime (Sterofundin® ISO) for plasma volume replacement. The primary outcome is defined as the time needed to achieve HDS. Plasma volume replacement will be target-controlled, i.e. fluids will only be administered to volume-responsive patients. Volume responsiveness will be assessed through passive leg raising or fluid challenges. The safety and efficacy of both regimens will be assessed daily for 28 days or until ICU discharge (whichever occurs first) as the secondary outcomes of this study. Follow-up visits/calls will be scheduled on day 28 and day 90.

Discussion

This study aims to generate evidence regarding which regimen-a gelatine-crystalloid regimen or a pure crystalloid regimen-is more effective in achieving HDS in critically ill patients with hypovolaemia. Study participants in both groups will benefit from the increased safety of target-controlled plasma volume replacement, which prevents fluid administration to already haemodynamically stable patients and reduces the risk of harmful fluid overload.

Trial registration

The European clinical trial database EudraCT 2015-000057-20 and the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02715466 . Registered on 17 March 2016.

SUBMITTER: Marx G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8170449 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStudies suggest that using balanced crystalloids (lactated Ringer's solution or Plasma-Lyte A) rather than saline (0.9% sodium chloride) may improve outcomes for patients with sepsis in the ED and ICU.Research questionWhat is the relative impact on sepsis outcomes of fluid composition during early resuscitation in the ED vs after ICU admission?Study design and methodsWe performed a secondary analysis of the Isotonic Solutions and Major Adverse Renal Events Trial (SMART) data set, examining medical ICU patients with a diagnosis of sepsis (n = 1,641). SMART was a cluster-crossover trial comparing balanced crystalloids vs saline among critically ill adults. During the first 7 months of SMART, fluid choice was controlled only in the ICU ("ICU-only period"). In the final 15 months, fluid choice was coordinated between the ED and ICU ("ED and ICU period"). We performed logistic regression modeling for 30-day in-hospital mortality with an interaction term between randomized group (balanced crystalloids vs saline) and study period (ICU-only period vs ED and ICU period).ResultsThree hundred and sixty-seven patients with sepsis were enrolled during the ICU-only period and 1,274 were enrolled during the ED and ICU period. Thirty-day in-hospital mortality occurred in 47 of 142 patients (33.1%) in the balanced crystalloid group vs 74 of 225 patients (32.9%) in the saline group during the ICU-only period (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.70-1.88) and in 170 of 682 patients (24.9%) in the balanced crystalloid group vs 181 of 592 patients (30.6%) in the saline group in the ED and ICU period (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.89) (P value for interaction, .07), consistent with a beneficial effect of balanced crystalloid primarily in the ED and ICU period.InterpretationAmong patients with sepsis, the effect of balanced crystalloids vs saline on mortality was greater among patients for whom fluid choice was controlled starting in the ED compared with starting in the ICU.

Project description:IntroductionBalanced fluid replacement solutions can possibly reduce the risks for electrolyte imbalances, for acid-base imbalances, and thus for renal failure. To assess the intraoperative change of base excess (BE) and chloride in serum after treatment with either a balanced gelatine/electrolyte solution or a non-balanced gelatine/electrolyte solution, a prospective, controlled, randomized, double-blind, dual centre phase III study was conducted in two tertiary care university hospitals in Germany.Material and methods40 patients of both sexes, aged 18 to 90 years, who were scheduled to undergo elective abdominal surgery with assumed intraoperative volume requirement of at least 15 mL/kg body weight gelatine solution were included. Administration of study drug was performed intravenously according to patients need. The trigger for volume replacement was a central venous pressure (CVP) minus positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) <10 mmHg (CVP <10 mmHg). The crystalloid:colloid ratio was 1:1 intra- and postoperatively. The targets for volume replacement were a CVP between 10 and 14 mmHg minus PEEP after treatment with vasoactive agent and mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 65 mmHg.ResultsThe primary endpoints, intraoperative changes of base excess -2.59 ± 2.25 (median: -2.65) mmol/L (balanced group) and -4.79 ± 2.38 (median: -4.70) mmol/L (non-balanced group)) or serum chloride 2.4 ± 1.9 (median: 3.0) mmol/L and 5.2 ± 3.1 (median: 5.0) mmol/L were significantly different (p = 0.0117 and p = 0.0045, respectively). In both groups (each n = 20) the investigational product administration in terms of volume and infusion rate was comparable throughout the course of the study, i.e. before, during and after surgery.DiscussionBalanced gelatine solution 4% combined with a balanced electrolyte solution demonstrated significant smaller impact on blood gas analytic parameters in the primary endpoints BE and serum chloride when compared to a non-balanced gelatine solution 4% combined with NaCl 0.9%. No marked treatment differences were observed with respect to haemodynamics, coagulation and renal function.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01515397) and clinicaltrialsregister.eu, EudraCT number 2010-018524-58.

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.