去甲肾上腺素与加压素在脓毒性休克稳定期的对照:RENOVA临床试验。

Cássio Mallmann, Thizá Maria Bianchi Galiotto, Michele Salibe de Oliveira, Rafael Barberena Moraes
{"title":"去甲肾上腺素与加压素在脓毒性休克稳定期的对照:RENOVA临床试验。","authors":"Cássio Mallmann, Thizá Maria Bianchi Galiotto, Michele Salibe de Oliveira, Rafael Barberena Moraes","doi":"10.1016/j.medine.2025.502147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evaluate the incidence of hypotension during the weaning phase of vasopressors.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial between May and December 2022.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>a tertiary care academic medical center.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>91 adult patients over 18 years of age with septic shock (according to Sepsis-3).</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Patients were divided into two groups: initial reduction of norepinephrine or initial reduction of vasopressin.</p><p><strong>Main variables of interest: </strong>The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension within the first 24 h after reducing vasopressors. Additionally, the clinical impact of this hypotension was assessed through mortality, length of hospital stay, duration of vasopressor use, incidence of arrhythmias, and prevalence of hemodialysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of a total of 91 patients, 78 were included in the analysis: 39 in the norepinephrine group and 39 in the vasopressin group. Despite a numerically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension between the groups (norepinephrine 43.6%, vasopressin 25.6%), there was no statistical difference (p =  0.153, relative risk = 1.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-3.2). In this sample, vasopressin withdrawal was predominantly titrated. There were no differences between the groups in terms of the evaluated clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No differences were detected in the incidence of hypotension when weaning was initiated with norepinephrine or vasopressin, although it was non significantly higher in norepinephrine group. In our sample, vasopressin withdrawal was titrated, which differs from North American practice. Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC: RBR-10smbw65).</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov platform (NCT05506319).</p>","PeriodicalId":94139,"journal":{"name":"Medicina intensiva","volume":" ","pages":"502147"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reduction of norepinephrine versus vasopressin in the stabilization phase of septic shock: RENOVA clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Cássio Mallmann, Thizá Maria Bianchi Galiotto, Michele Salibe de Oliveira, Rafael Barberena Moraes\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.medine.2025.502147\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evaluate the incidence of hypotension during the weaning phase of vasopressors.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial between May and December 2022.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>a tertiary care academic medical center.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>91 adult patients over 18 years of age with septic shock (according to Sepsis-3).</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Patients were divided into two groups: initial reduction of norepinephrine or initial reduction of vasopressin.</p><p><strong>Main variables of interest: </strong>The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension within the first 24 h after reducing vasopressors. Additionally, the clinical impact of this hypotension was assessed through mortality, length of hospital stay, duration of vasopressor use, incidence of arrhythmias, and prevalence of hemodialysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of a total of 91 patients, 78 were included in the analysis: 39 in the norepinephrine group and 39 in the vasopressin group. Despite a numerically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension between the groups (norepinephrine 43.6%, vasopressin 25.6%), there was no statistical difference (p =  0.153, relative risk = 1.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-3.2). In this sample, vasopressin withdrawal was predominantly titrated. There were no differences between the groups in terms of the evaluated clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No differences were detected in the incidence of hypotension when weaning was initiated with norepinephrine or vasopressin, although it was non significantly higher in norepinephrine group. In our sample, vasopressin withdrawal was titrated, which differs from North American practice. Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC: RBR-10smbw65).</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov platform (NCT05506319).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina intensiva\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"502147\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina intensiva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medine.2025.502147\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina intensiva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medine.2025.502147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价血管加压药物脱机期低血压的发生率。设计:2022年5月至12月的单中心、开放标签随机临床试验。环境:三级保健学术医疗中心。患者:91例18岁以上脓毒性休克的成人患者(根据《败血症-3》)。干预:患者分为两组:初始降低去甲肾上腺素或初始降低抗利尿激素。主要研究变量:主要结果是降低血管加压药物后24小时内低血压的发生率 h。此外,通过死亡率、住院时间、血管加压药使用时间、心律失常发生率和血液透析患病率来评估这种低血压的临床影响。结果:91例患者中,78例纳入分析:去甲肾上腺素组39例,加压素组39例。尽管两组间低血压的发生率在数值上有显著差异(去甲肾上腺素43.6%,加压素25.6%),但没有统计学差异(p = 0.153,相对风险= 1.7,95%可信区间:0.9-3.2)。在这个样本中,抗利尿激素的戒断主要是滴定的。在评估的临床结果方面,两组之间没有差异。结论:去甲肾上腺素组与加压素组的低血压发生率无显著性差异,但去甲肾上腺素组的低血压发生率无显著性差异。在我们的样本中,抗利尿激素的戒断是滴定的,这与北美的做法不同。巴西临床试验注册中心(REBEC: RBR-10smbw65)。临床试验:政府平台(NCT05506319)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reduction of norepinephrine versus vasopressin in the stabilization phase of septic shock: RENOVA clinical trial.

Objective: Evaluate the incidence of hypotension during the weaning phase of vasopressors.

Design: A single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial between May and December 2022.

Setting: a tertiary care academic medical center.

Patients: 91 adult patients over 18 years of age with septic shock (according to Sepsis-3).

Intervention: Patients were divided into two groups: initial reduction of norepinephrine or initial reduction of vasopressin.

Main variables of interest: The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension within the first 24 h after reducing vasopressors. Additionally, the clinical impact of this hypotension was assessed through mortality, length of hospital stay, duration of vasopressor use, incidence of arrhythmias, and prevalence of hemodialysis.

Results: Out of a total of 91 patients, 78 were included in the analysis: 39 in the norepinephrine group and 39 in the vasopressin group. Despite a numerically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension between the groups (norepinephrine 43.6%, vasopressin 25.6%), there was no statistical difference (p =  0.153, relative risk = 1.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-3.2). In this sample, vasopressin withdrawal was predominantly titrated. There were no differences between the groups in terms of the evaluated clinical outcomes.

Conclusion: No differences were detected in the incidence of hypotension when weaning was initiated with norepinephrine or vasopressin, although it was non significantly higher in norepinephrine group. In our sample, vasopressin withdrawal was titrated, which differs from North American practice. Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC: RBR-10smbw65).

Clinicaltrials: gov platform (NCT05506319).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信