脓毒性休克患者对高、低平均动脉压目标反应的异质性:一项随机对照试验的事后分析

IF 21.2 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Romain Pirracchio,Nicholas Fong,Matthieu Legrand
{"title":"脓毒性休克患者对高、低平均动脉压目标反应的异质性:一项随机对照试验的事后分析","authors":"Romain Pirracchio,Nicholas Fong,Matthieu Legrand","doi":"10.1007/s00134-025-08104-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nThe best blood pressure target in sepsis is a matter of debate. SEPSIS-PAM, a large multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial, compared two mean arterial pressure targets (65-70 mmHg vs 80-85 mmHg) in septic shock and did not find any difference in mortality. The goal of this study was to assess whether (i) heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) exists in the response to different targets and (ii) the initial clinical trajectory can inform the optimal blood pressure target.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThe primary outcome was mortality at day 28. Secondary outcomes included mortality at day 90, acute kidney injury (AKI), and severe AKI based on the KDIGO classification, need for renal replacement therapy, renal replacement therapy, and vasopressor-free days. The presence of HTE was tested for and, if present, quantified. The interaction between post-randomization evolution of the MAP, norepinephrine requirements, lactate, mottling score, and urine output was estimated using a multimediation analysis.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\n776 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study. There was no evidence of significant treatment effect heterogeneity based on baseline characteristics (sweep p-value = 0.664; 95% CI: 0.633-0.673). The direct effect of a higher MAP target on mortality, holding 24 h mediators at their control-level values, was not significant (RD = 0.017; 95% CI - 0.052 to 0.086; p = 0.62). However, if reaching a higher MAP required high norepinephrine doses and/or did not result in mottled skin resolution at 24 h, the effect transmitted through those mediators was associated with higher mortality (risk difference = 0.027; 95% CI 0.012-0.047 and 0.012; 95% CI 0.001-0.026).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nOur results suggest the absence of heterogeneity of the response to different blood pressure targets in patients with septic shock. Targeting a higher MAP target may be associated with harm when high norepinephrine doses are required or when mottled skin is present.\r\n\r\nTRIAL REGISTRATION\r\nSEPSISPAM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149278.","PeriodicalId":13665,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":21.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heterogeneity in the response to a high vs low mean arterial pressure target in patients with septic shock a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Romain Pirracchio,Nicholas Fong,Matthieu Legrand\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00134-025-08104-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nThe best blood pressure target in sepsis is a matter of debate. SEPSIS-PAM, a large multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial, compared two mean arterial pressure targets (65-70 mmHg vs 80-85 mmHg) in septic shock and did not find any difference in mortality. The goal of this study was to assess whether (i) heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) exists in the response to different targets and (ii) the initial clinical trajectory can inform the optimal blood pressure target.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nThe primary outcome was mortality at day 28. Secondary outcomes included mortality at day 90, acute kidney injury (AKI), and severe AKI based on the KDIGO classification, need for renal replacement therapy, renal replacement therapy, and vasopressor-free days. The presence of HTE was tested for and, if present, quantified. The interaction between post-randomization evolution of the MAP, norepinephrine requirements, lactate, mottling score, and urine output was estimated using a multimediation analysis.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\n776 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study. There was no evidence of significant treatment effect heterogeneity based on baseline characteristics (sweep p-value = 0.664; 95% CI: 0.633-0.673). The direct effect of a higher MAP target on mortality, holding 24 h mediators at their control-level values, was not significant (RD = 0.017; 95% CI - 0.052 to 0.086; p = 0.62). However, if reaching a higher MAP required high norepinephrine doses and/or did not result in mottled skin resolution at 24 h, the effect transmitted through those mediators was associated with higher mortality (risk difference = 0.027; 95% CI 0.012-0.047 and 0.012; 95% CI 0.001-0.026).\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSION\\r\\nOur results suggest the absence of heterogeneity of the response to different blood pressure targets in patients with septic shock. Targeting a higher MAP target may be associated with harm when high norepinephrine doses are required or when mottled skin is present.\\r\\n\\r\\nTRIAL REGISTRATION\\r\\nSEPSISPAM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149278.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intensive Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":21.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intensive Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-025-08104-8\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-025-08104-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:脓毒症的最佳血压靶点是一个有争议的问题。SEPSIS-PAM是一项大型多中心实用随机对照试验,比较了感染性休克的两个平均动脉压目标(65-70 mmHg vs 80-85 mmHg),未发现死亡率有任何差异。本研究的目的是评估(i)治疗效果(HTE)在不同靶点的反应中是否存在异质性(ii)初始临床轨迹可以为最佳血压靶点提供信息。方法主要观察指标为第28天的死亡率。次要结局包括第90天死亡率、急性肾损伤(AKI)、基于KDIGO分级的严重AKI、是否需要肾脏替代治疗、肾脏替代治疗和无血管加压药天数。检测HTE的存在,如果存在,则进行量化。随机化后的MAP进化、去甲肾上腺素需求、乳酸、斑纹评分和尿量之间的相互作用通过多中介分析进行估计。结果本研究共纳入776例患者。没有证据表明基于基线特征的治疗效果存在显著的异质性(扫描p值= 0.664;95% CI: 0.633-0.673)。较高的MAP目标对死亡率的直接影响不显著(RD = 0.017; 95% CI - 0.052 ~ 0.086; p = 0.62)。然而,如果达到较高的MAP需要高去甲肾上腺素剂量和/或在24小时内没有导致皮肤斑点化,则通过这些介质传递的效应与较高的死亡率相关(风险差异= 0.027;95% CI 0.012-0.047和0.012;95% CI 0.001-0.026)。结论:脓毒性休克患者对不同血压指标的反应不存在异质性。当需要高剂量去甲肾上腺素或出现皮肤斑驳时,靶向较高的MAP目标可能与伤害相关。试验注册:sepsispam ClinicalTrials.gov号码:NCT01149278。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Heterogeneity in the response to a high vs low mean arterial pressure target in patients with septic shock a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
BACKGROUND The best blood pressure target in sepsis is a matter of debate. SEPSIS-PAM, a large multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial, compared two mean arterial pressure targets (65-70 mmHg vs 80-85 mmHg) in septic shock and did not find any difference in mortality. The goal of this study was to assess whether (i) heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) exists in the response to different targets and (ii) the initial clinical trajectory can inform the optimal blood pressure target. METHODS The primary outcome was mortality at day 28. Secondary outcomes included mortality at day 90, acute kidney injury (AKI), and severe AKI based on the KDIGO classification, need for renal replacement therapy, renal replacement therapy, and vasopressor-free days. The presence of HTE was tested for and, if present, quantified. The interaction between post-randomization evolution of the MAP, norepinephrine requirements, lactate, mottling score, and urine output was estimated using a multimediation analysis. RESULTS 776 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study. There was no evidence of significant treatment effect heterogeneity based on baseline characteristics (sweep p-value = 0.664; 95% CI: 0.633-0.673). The direct effect of a higher MAP target on mortality, holding 24 h mediators at their control-level values, was not significant (RD = 0.017; 95% CI - 0.052 to 0.086; p = 0.62). However, if reaching a higher MAP required high norepinephrine doses and/or did not result in mottled skin resolution at 24 h, the effect transmitted through those mediators was associated with higher mortality (risk difference = 0.027; 95% CI 0.012-0.047 and 0.012; 95% CI 0.001-0.026). CONCLUSION Our results suggest the absence of heterogeneity of the response to different blood pressure targets in patients with septic shock. Targeting a higher MAP target may be associated with harm when high norepinephrine doses are required or when mottled skin is present. TRIAL REGISTRATION SEPSISPAM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149278.
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
Intensive Care Medicine
Intensive Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
51.50
自引率
2.80%
发文量
326
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Intensive Care Medicine is the premier publication platform fostering the communication and exchange of cutting-edge research and ideas within the field of intensive care medicine on a comprehensive scale. Catering to professionals involved in intensive medical care, including intensivists, medical specialists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals, ICM stands as the official journal of The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. ICM is dedicated to advancing the understanding and practice of intensive care medicine among professionals in Europe and beyond. The journal provides a robust platform for disseminating current research findings and innovative ideas in intensive care medicine. Content published in Intensive Care Medicine encompasses a wide range, including review articles, original research papers, letters, reviews, debates, and more.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信