During the COVID-19 pandemic, many intensive care units (ICUs) halted research to focus on COVID-19-specific studies.
To describe the conduct of an international randomized trial of stress ulcer ...prophylaxis (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU REVISE) during the pandemic, addressing enrolment patterns, center engagement, informed consent processes, data collection, a COVID-specific substudy, patient transfers, and data monitoring.
REVISE is a randomized trial among mechanically ventilated patients, comparing pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. We documented protocol implementation status from March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022.
The Steering Committee did not change the scientific protocol. From the first enrolment on July 9th 2019 to March 10th 2020 (8 months preceding the pandemic), 267 patients were enrolled in 18 centers. From March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022 (30 months thereafter), 41 new centers joined; 59 were participating by August 30th 2022 which enrolled 2961 patients. During a total of 1235 enrolment-months in the pandemic phase, enrolment paused for 106 (8.6%) months in aggregate (median 3 months, interquartile range 2;6). Protocol implementation involved a shift from the a priori consent model pre-pandemic (188, 58.8%) to the consent to continue model (1615, 54.1%, p < 0.01). In one new center, an opt-out model was approved. The informed consent rate increased slightly (80.7% to 85.0%, p = 0.05). Telephone consent encounters increased (16.6% to 68.2%, p < 0.001). Surge capacity necessitated intra-institutional transfers; receiving centers continued protocol implementation whenever possible. We developed a nested COVID-19 substudy. The Methods Centers continued central statistical monitoring of trial metrics. Site monitoring was initially remote, then in-person when restrictions lifted.
Protocol implementation adaptations during the pandemic included a shift in the consent model, a sustained high consent rate, and launch of a COVID-19 substudy. Recruitment increased as new centers joined, patient transfers were optimized, and monitoring methods were adapted.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
The REVISE (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU) trial will evaluate the impact of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole compared to placebo in invasively ...ventilated critically ill patients.
To outline the statistical analysis plan for the REVISE trial.
REVISE is a randomized clinical trial ongoing in intensive care units (ICUs) internationally. Patients ≥ 18 years old, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and expected to remain ventilated beyond the calendar day after randomization are allocated to either 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously or placebo while mechanically ventilated.
The primary efficacy outcome is clinically important upper GI bleeding; the primary safety outcome is 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes are ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, new renal replacement therapy, ICU and hospital mortality, and patient-important GI bleeding. Tertiary outcomes are total red blood cells transfused, peak serum creatinine concentration, and duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU, and hospital length of stay. Following an interim analysis of results from 2400 patients (50% of 4800 target sample size), the data monitoring committee recommended continuing enrolment.
This statistical analysis plan outlines the statistical analyses of all outcomes, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses. REVISE will inform clinical practice and guidelines worldwide.
www.
gov NCT03374800. November 21, 2017.
IntroductionThe Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial aims to determine the impact of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole compared with placebo on clinically important ...upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU), 90-day mortality and other endpoints in critically ill adults. The objective of this report is to describe the rationale, methodology, ethics and management of REVISE.Methods and analysisREVISE is an international, randomised, concealed, stratified, blinded parallel-group individual patient trial being conducted in ICUs in Canada, Australia, Saudi Arabia, UK, US, Kuwait, Pakistan and Brazil. Patients≥18 years old expected to remain invasively mechanically ventilated beyond the calendar day after enrolment are being randomised to either 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously or an identical placebo daily while mechanically ventilated in the ICU. The primary efficacy outcome is clinically important upper GI bleeding within 90 days of randomisation. The primary safety outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, new renal replacement therapy, ICU and hospital mortality, and patient-important GI bleeding. Tertiary outcomes are total red blood cells transfused, peak serum creatinine level in the ICU, and duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay. The sample size is 4800 patients; one interim analysis was conducted after 2400 patients had complete 90-day follow-up; the Data Monitoring Committee recommended continuing the trial.Ethics and disseminationAll participating centres receive research ethics approval before initiation by hospital, region or country, including, but not limited to – Australia: Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee and Mater Misericordiae Ltd Human Research Ethics Committee; Brazil: Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa; Canada: Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board; Kuwait: Ministry of Health Standing Committee for Coordination of Health and Medical Research; Pakistan: Maroof Institutional Review Board; Saudi Arabia: Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs Institutional Review Board: United Kingdom: Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee; United States: Institutional Review Board of the Nebraska Medical Centre. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice and guidelines worldwide.Trial registration number NCT03374800.
Abstract
Background
Critically ill patients commonly receive proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding from stress-induced ulceration. Despite widespread use in the ...intensive care unit (ICU), observational data suggest that PPIs may be associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infection. This preplanned study is nested within a large randomized trial evaluating pantoprazole versus placebo in invasively ventilated patients. The 3 objectives are as follows: (1) to describe the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in terms of demographics, biomarkers, venous thromboembolism, tracheostomy incidence and timing, and other clinical outcomes; (2) to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 infection on clinically important GI bleeding, 90-day mortality, and other outcomes compared to a propensity-matched non-infected cohort; and (3) to explore whether pantoprazole has a differential treatment effect on clinically important GI bleeding, 90-day mortality, and other outcomes in patients with and without COVID-19 infection.
Methods
The ongoing trial Re-EValuating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) compares pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important GI bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. The protocol described in this report is for a substudy focused on patients with COVID-19 infection that was not in the original pre-pandemic trial protocol. We developed a one-page case report form to characterize these patients including data related to biomarkers, venous thromboembolism, COVID-19 therapies, tracheostomy incidence and timing, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU and hospital stay. Our analysis will describe the trajectory of patients with COVID-19 infection, a propensity-matched analysis of infected and non-infected patients, and an extended subgroup analysis comparing the effect of PPI among patients with and without COVID-19 infection.
Discussion
Prophylactic acid suppression in invasively ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection has unknown consequences. The results of these investigations will inform practice, guidelines, and future research.
Trial registration
REVISE Trial NCT03374800 December 15, 2017, COVID-19 Cohort Study NCT05715567 February 8, 2023.
There are no randomized controlled trials comparing different oxygenation targets for intensive care unit (ICU) patients.
To determine whether a conservative oxygenation strategy is a feasible ...alternative to a liberal oxygenation strategy among ICU patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV).
At four multidisciplinary ICUs, 103 adult patients deemed likely to require IMV for greater than or equal to 24 hours were randomly allocated to either a conservative oxygenation strategy with target oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2) of 88-92% (n = 52) or a liberal oxygenation strategy with target SpO2 of greater than or equal to 96% (n = 51).
The mean area under the curve and 95% confidence interval (CI) for SpO2 (93.4% 92.9-93.9% vs. 97% 96.5-97.5%), SaO2 (93.5% 93.1-94% vs. 96.8% 96.3-97.3%), PaO2 (70 68-73 mm Hg vs. 92 89-96 mm Hg), and FiO2 (0.26 0.25-0.28 vs. 0.36 0.34-0.39) in the conservative versus liberal oxygenation arm were significantly different (P < 0.0001 for all). There were no significant between-group differences in any measures of new organ dysfunction, or ICU or 90-day mortality. The percentage time spent with SpO2 less than 88% in conservative versus liberal arm was 1% versus 0.3% (P = 0.03), and percentage time spent with SpO2 greater than 98% in conservative versus liberal arm was 4% versus 22% (P < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio for 90-day mortality in the conservative arm was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.40-1.50; P = 0.44) overall and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.20-1.17; P = 0.10) in the prespecified subgroup of patients with a baseline PaO2/FiO2 less than 300.
Our study supports the feasibility of a conservative oxygenation strategy in patients receiving IMV. Larger randomized controlled trials of this intervention appear justified. Clinical trial registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12613000505707).
IMPORTANCE: Whether selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) reduces mortality in critically ill patients remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether SDD reduces in-hospital ...mortality in critically ill adults. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cluster, crossover, randomized clinical trial that recruited 5982 mechanically ventilated adults from 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia between April 2018 and May 2021 (final follow-up, August 2021). A contemporaneous ecological assessment recruited 8599 patients from participating ICUs between May 2017 and August 2021. INTERVENTIONS: ICUs were randomly assigned to adopt or not adopt a SDD strategy for 2 alternating 12-month periods, separated by a 3-month interperiod gap. Patients in the SDD group (n = 2791) received a 6-hourly application of an oral paste and administration of a gastric suspension containing colistin, tobramycin, and nystatin for the duration of mechanical ventilation, plus a 4-day course of an intravenous antibiotic with a suitable antimicrobial spectrum. Patients in the control group (n = 3191) received standard care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality within 90 days. There were 8 secondary outcomes, including the proportion of patients with new positive blood cultures, antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs), and Clostridioides difficile infections. For the ecological assessment, a noninferiority margin of 2% was prespecified for 3 outcomes including new cultures of AROs. RESULTS: Of 5982 patients (mean age, 58.3 years; 36.8% women) enrolled from 19 ICUs, all patients completed the trial. There were 753/2791 (27.0%) and 928/3191 (29.1%) in-hospital deaths in the SDD and standard care groups, respectively (mean difference, −1.7% 95% CI, −4.8% to 1.3%; odds ratio, 0.91 95% CI, 0.82-1.02; P = .12). Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 showed no significant differences. In the SDD vs standard care groups, 23.1% vs 34.6% had new ARO cultures (absolute difference, −11.0%; 95% CI, −14.7% to −7.3%), 5.6% vs 8.1% had new positive blood cultures (absolute difference, −1.95%; 95% CI, −3.5% to −0.4%), and 0.5% vs 0.9% had new C difficile infections (absolute difference, −0.24%; 95% CI, −0.6% to 0.1%). In 8599 patients enrolled in the ecological assessment, use of SDD was not shown to be noninferior with regard to the change in the proportion of patients who developed new AROs (−3.3% vs −1.59%; mean difference, −1.71% 1-sided 97.5% CI, −∞ to 4.31% and 0.88% vs 0.55%; mean difference, −0.32% 1-sided 97.5% CI, −∞ to 5.47%) in the first and second periods, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, SDD, compared with standard care without SDD, did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality. However, the confidence interval around the effect estimate includes a clinically important benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02389036
A study which examines the magnitude of relative hypotension during vasopressor support among critically ill patients with shock and to determine whether such relative hypotension is associated with ...new significant acute kidney injury (AKI) or major adverse kidney events (MAKE) within 14 days of vasopressor initiation is presented. Vasopressor-treated patients with shock are often exposed to a significant degree and duration of relative hypotension, which is associated with new-onset, adverse kidney-related outcomes.
The role of procalcitonin (PCT), a widely used sepsis biomarker, in critically ill patients with sepsis is undetermined.
To investigate the effect of a low PCT cut-off on antibiotic prescription and ...to describe the relationships between PCT plasma concentration and sepsis severity and mortality.
This was a multicenter (11 Australian intensive care units ICUs), prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial involving 400 patients with suspected bacterial infection/sepsis and expected to receive antibiotics and stay in ICU longer than 24 hours. The primary outcome was the cumulative number of antibiotics treatment days at Day 28.
PCT was measured daily while in the ICU. A PCT algorithm, including 0.1 ng/ml cut-off, determined antibiotic cessation. Published guidelines and antimicrobial stewardship were used in all patients. Primary analysis included 196 (PCT) versus 198 standard care patients. Ninety-three patients in each group had septic shock. The overall median (interquartile range) number of antibiotic treatment days were 9 (6-21) versus 11 (6-22), P = 0.58; in patients with positive pulmonary culture, 11 (7-27) versus 15 (8-27), P = 0.33; and in patients with septic shock, 9 (6-22) versus 11 (6-24), P = 0.64; with an overall 90-day all-cause mortality of 35 (18%) versus 31 (16%), P = 0.54 in the PCT versus standard care, respectively. Using logistic regression, adjusted for age, ventilation status, and positive culture, the decline rate in log(PCT) over the first 72 hours independently predicted hospital and 90-day mortality (odds ratio 95% confidence interval, 2.76 1.10-6.96, P = 0.03; 3.20 1.30-7.89, P = 0.01, respectively).
In critically ill adults with undifferentiated infections, a PCT algorithm including 0.1 ng/ml cut-off did not achieve 25% reduction in duration of antibiotic treatment. Clinical trial registered with http://www.anzctr.org.au (ACTRN12610000809033).
In this randomized trial involving patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole decreased the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding as compared with placebo but did not affect mortality.
