SepsisPPVNCT02308371
PPV to Guide Fluid Management in the PICU
A study testing Automated Pulse Pressure Variation in people with Sepsis and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, run by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Children who are critically ill often require large amounts of fluid during their acute illness. It has been shown in multiple studies that appropriate administration of fluid decreases morbidity and mortality, but giving too much fluid can also cause increased morbidity and mortality. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages Up to 17 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Sepsis, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
- What is being tested?
- Automated Pulse Pressure Variation
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Nov 2014to Jun 2016
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Up to 17 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Admission to the University of North Carolina pediatric critical care unit, includes all patients admitted to the pediatric critical care service as well as all post-operative patients.
- No limitations for age or gender.
- Patient requires standard mechanical ventilation.
- Patient has an arterial line in place.
Who cannot join
- Patient not mechanically ventilated.
- Patient does not have arterial line placed.
- Patient requires extracorporeal life support.
- Patient requires placement on high frequency oscillatory ventilation.
- Pulse pressure variation unable to be obtained on monitor.
- Patient has open chest.
- Patient has arrhythmias.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27514
About this study
Official title: Automated Pulse Pressure Variation Guided Fluid Management in the Pediatric Intensive Care Setting
Children who are critically ill often require large amounts of fluid during their acute illness. It has been shown in multiple studies that appropriate administration of fluid decreases morbidity and mortality, but giving too much fluid can also cause increased morbidity and mortality. It is often difficult to discern from physical exam, vital signs and labs if the amount of fluid that has been given is appropriate or if a pediatric patient requires more fluid. Pulse pressure variation (PPV) is the change in blood pressure when a patient is on a ventilator or breathing machine. PPV has been used in multiple adult studies to help predict fluid needs in a critically ill patient. In this study, we would like to investigate if PPV can help better predict if critically ill pediatric patients in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) need fluid. The investigators hope that by having the additional information that PPV can provide, physicians can more judiciously give fluid and thereby improve morbidity of critically ill patients in the PICU.
Read the detailed description
In pediatric critical care, it is difficult to discern a patient's intravascular fluid status (hypovolemia, hypervolemia, euvolemia). Often, pediatric sepsis patients exhibit profound hypovolemia and early aggressive fluid resuscitation has been shown to decrease mortality (1,2). Within the first 48 hours of presentation, pediatric patients with sepsis can have profound changes in physiology with changes in cardiac function and systemic vascular resistance which can make it difficult to discern whether continued fluid resuscitation or the addition of vasopressor support is needed (1,2). Similar physiology can also be seen in other patients with systemic inflammatory response such as postoperative cardiac patients and general pediatric post-surgical patients. While appropriate fluid resuscitation is needed, it has been shown that fluid overload does increase mortality (3-5). Clinicians often use clinical exam, vital signs, urine output and central venous pressure (CVP) as guides for need of fluid resuscitation, but static measures such as central venous pressure, pulmonary wedge pressure, and clinical exam have not been shown to be strong predictors of fluid responsiveness and cardiac output in patients (6-8). A more accurate way to discern fluid status and heart function is through measurement of cardiac output, but in order to calculate cardiac output, additional tests such as an echocardiogram is needed or additional invasive monitoring using thermodilution such as a continuous cardiac output monitor is needed (7,8).
In the last 30 years, dynamic changes in arterial pressure during the respiratory cycle have been described, where there is a decrease in cardiac preload during time of inspiration of a positive pressure breath followed by an increase in cardiac preload during the expiration of a positive pressure breath 9,10. Using this change in arterial pressure, information about cardiac preload or volume status can be inferred. The most common forms of dynamic pressure monitoring that are used are systolic pressure variation and pulse pressure variation.
Several adult studies have shown that systolic pressure variation (SPV) and pulse pressure variation (PPV) more accurately predict fluid response (defined in majority of studies as increase stroke volume index or cardiac index/output >15% after receiving a fluid bolus) in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients compared to static measures, such as CVP (2,10-24). PPV has also been shown to be predictive of fluid responsiveness in many patients with many different pathologies including intraoperative patients, postoperative cardiac bypass patients, patients in septic shock and patients with acute lung injury requiring lower tidal volumes (11,13-15,17-23,25). PPV has also been validated as a helpful and accurate guide for fluid responsiveness in clinical scenarios requiring vasopressors (12,26). Lopes et al demonstrated not only that PPV accurately predicts fluid response, but by using PPV directed fluid resuscitation in the operating room, patients had better postoperative outcomes as defined by decreased ventilator time (1 vs 5 days, P<0.05), and decreased length of hospital stay (7 vs 17 days, P< 0.1) (22).
There are very few studies evaluating pulse pressure variation in the pediatric patient population and results have been mixed. Similar to the adult studies, these studies evaluated dynamic parameters, including SPV and/or PPV, by comparing changes in dynamic parameters to changes seen in stroke volume index calculated by continuous cardiac index monitoring or echocardiogram. Fluid boluses were given and if the SPV or PPV decreased as the stroke volume index increased, then these dynamic parameters were proven to be predictive of fluid responsiveness. Some studies showed that PPV or SPV were not reliable predictors of fluid responsiveness (27-29). In contrast, a study in infants and neonates undergoing congenital heart surgery (ventricular septal defect and atrial septal defect repairs) illustrated that PPV was predictive of fluid response both before and after repair of the cardiac lesion (30). This study was particularly interesting since PPV was able to predict fluid response in two different physiologic states, with and without an intracardiac shunt (30). Two other pediatric studies also demonstrated that dynamic parameters were predictive of fluid response (31,32). There have been no pediatric studies thus far that have investigated if dynamic variable (PPV or SPV) guided fluid resuscitation improves patient outcomes.
Dynamic pressure monitoring, including PPV and SPV, is considered standard of care within the adult anesthesia setting and is currently being used in the adult operating rooms at University of North Carolina Hospitals. Most of the monitors within the hospital are equipped to measure PPV, including the monitors in the PICU. Several PICU attendings and fellows are familiar with PPV and have been using it as an aid in fluid management over the last couple of months. The investigator's hope is that with the use of PPV that physicians will be better able to gauge a patient's intravascular status and judiciously give fluid leading to appropriate fluid management and better patient outcomes in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU).
Hypothesis: Using pulse pressure variation will reduce the amount of fluid in the first 48 hours of acute illness (first 48 hours after placement of arterial line and intubation on conventional mechanical ventilation) by 30%. Appropriate fluid management will reduce the amount of time on the ventilator, the number of days in the PICU, and time on vasopressors.
Methods:
Patient Population and Recruitment: All patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit will be screened for recruitment for study by pediatric critical care attending or fellow. Patients that require standard mechanical ventilation and arterial line will be eligible for the study. Study will include 75 patients admitted to the PICU that require an arterial line and conventional mechanical ventilation that will be prospectively followed. There will be 75 matched, historic patients that will be used for controls. The investigators do not expect any difficulty enrolling 75 patients to the study as there were 1069 patients admitted to the PICU in the last year (July 2013 to July 2014).
Study Procedure: Prior to any accrual of patients, all nurses in the PICU and all PICU physicians (attendings and fellows) will have formal education and training on use of PPV and the study protocol. In addition, all physicians will have consent training. All patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit who are mechanically ventilated on conventional ventilator settings with arterial line will be eligible for the study. Primary investigator (during the day) or physician on call in the PICU (during the night) will obtain consent if patient is eligible for the study. The bedside physician (co-investigator) will give fluid as needed based on standard clinical data (heart rate, central venous pressure if available, blood pressure, urine output, physical exam, lactate level) and pulse pressure variation. Boluses of 5 cc/kg will be given so as to give fluid incrementally. Pulse pressure variation value before fluid bolus and after fluid bolus will be recorded in the electronic medical record. Pulse pressure variation will be followed for 48 hours. Pulse pressure variation, central venous pressure, total fluid for PICU stay, total fluid during 48 hours while on the PPV protocol (cc/kg/day), days mechanically ventilated, hours on vasopressors, any echocardiograms, age, weight at admission, daily weights, sex, diagnosis will be recorded in the patient's medical record. All data will be collected from patient's record by the primary investigator.
Data Analysis: Continuous baseline variables will have descriptions with means and standard deviations, and categorical baseline variables will be described with frequency distributions. A two-sided t-test and corresponding confidence interval will be used to compare matched historic controls to prospectively recruited test group subjects for total amount of fluid in 48 hours (cc/kg/day). Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests for time-to-event data will be applied to time on ventilator (days), time in the PICU (days), and time on vasopressors (hours), together with Kaplan-Meyer curves for descriptive purposes.
- Conditions
- Sepsis, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
- Being tested
- Automated Pulse Pressure Variation
- Keywords
- critically ill pediatric patients, fluid resuscitation
- Medical subject headings
- Sepsis, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Automated Pulse Pressure VariationDevice
Also called Realtime automated pulse pressure variation algorithm, Philips MX800 monitor
Based on standard of care, the physician will give fluid as needed based on standard clinical data (heart rate, central venous pressure if available, blood pressure, urine output, physical exam, lactate level) and pulse pressure variation. PPV should be elevated consistently greater than 15 minutes before giving fluid without other symptoms of patient instability (low blood pressure, elevated lactate, tachycardia). Pulse pressure variation will be followed for 48 hours.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Prospective | Experimental | Patients in this arm will have fluid given based on standard clinical data (blood pressure, heart rate, lactate level, urine output) in addition to information provided by automated pulse pressure variation (PPV). PPV will be followed for first 48 hours after recruitment to the study. Fluid (normal saline, albumin 5%, hetastarch per the clinician preference) will be given in 5cc/kg increments for PPV> 13 (in addition to standard clinical data) until PPV < 13. Receives: Device: Automated Pulse Pressure Variation |
| Retrospective | No intervention | Patients in this arm were previously admitted to the PICU and were given fluid based on standard clinical data. PPV was not used to guide therapy in this group of patients. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Total Fluid (ml/kg/Day) Given
Total fluid (ml/kg/day) given during the first 48 hours of enrollment
Measured: First 48 hours after enrollment
Total Fluid Bolused
Total fluid bolused within 48 hours after enrollment.
Measured: 48 hours after enrollment
Secondary outcomes (3)
Number of Hours on Vasopressors
Hours that a subject remained intubated during pediatric intensive care admission during subject recruitment
Measured: From pediatric ICU admission to pediatric ICU discharge (up to 149 days)
Number of Days on Ventilatory Support
Number of days subject was on ventilatory support (during time of subject enrollment) to the pediatric critical care unit. This included subjects that were intubated or was on a ventilator with a tracheotomy
Measured: From pediatric ICU admission to pediatric ICU discharge (up to 149 days)
Number of Days in the PICU
Number of days for admission pediatric critical care unit (admission during which subject was enrolled into the study)
Measured: From pediatric ICU admission to pediatric ICU discharge (up to 149 days)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Dec 2014 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2014
- Primary completionMay 2016
- Study completionJun 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (30)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for SepsisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Melissa R Hines, MD, Principal investigator, University of North CarolinaUmesh Joashi, MD, Study director, University of North Carolina
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02308371
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 14-2019
- Acronym
- PPV
- Status last verified
- Jun 2016
- First submitted
- 24 Oct 2014
- Last updated
- 2 Jan 2017
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Brierley J, Carcillo JA, Choong K, Cornell T, Decaen A, Deymann A, Doctor A, Davis A, Duff J, Dugas MA, Duncan A, Evans B, Feldman J, Felmet K, Fisher G, Frankel L, Jeffries H, Greenwald B, Gutierrez J, Hall M, Han YY, Hanson J, Hazelzet J, Hernan L, Kiff J, Kissoon N, Kon A, Irazuzta J, Lin J, Lorts A, Mariscalco M, Mehta R, Nadel S, Nguyen T, Nicholson C, Peters M, Okhuysen-Cawley R, Poulton T, Relves M, Rodriguez A, Rozenfeld R, Schnitzler E, Shanley T, Kache S, Skippen P, Torres A, von Dessauer B, Weingarten J, Yeh T, Zaritsky A, Stojadinovic B, Zimmerman J, Zuckerberg A. Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med. 2009 Feb;37(2):666-88. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819323c6.
PubMed 19325359Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M; Early Goal-Directed Therapy Collaborative Group. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001 Nov 8;345(19):1368-77. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa010307.
PubMed 11794169Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada TA, Walley KR, Russell JA. Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: a positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressure are associated with increased mortality. Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb;39(2):259-65. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181feeb15.
PubMed 20975548Rosenberg AL, Dechert RE, Park PK, Bartlett RH; NIH NHLBI ARDS Network. Review of a large clinical series: association of cumulative fluid balance on outcome in acute lung injury: a retrospective review of the ARDSnet tidal volume study cohort. J Intensive Care Med. 2009 Jan-Feb;24(1):35-46. doi: 10.1177/0885066608329850. Epub 2008 Dec 22.
PubMed 19103612Maitland K, Kiguli S, Opoka RO, Engoru C, Olupot-Olupot P, Akech SO, Nyeko R, Mtove G, Reyburn H, Lang T, Brent B, Evans JA, Tibenderana JK, Crawley J, Russell EC, Levin M, Babiker AG, Gibb DM; FEAST Trial Group. Mortality after fluid bolus in African children with severe infection. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2483-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1101549. Epub 2011 May 26.
PubMed 21615299Marik PE, Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med. 2013 Jul;41(7):1774-81. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31828a25fd.
PubMed 23774337Tibby SM, Hatherill M, Marsh MJ, Murdoch IA. Clinicians' abilities to estimate cardiac index in ventilated children and infants. Arch Dis Child. 1997 Dec;77(6):516-8. doi: 10.1136/adc.77.6.516.
PubMed 9496187Egan JR, Festa M, Cole AD, Nunn GR, Gillis J, Winlaw DS. Clinical assessment of cardiac performance in infants and children following cardiac surgery. Intensive Care Med. 2005 Apr;31(4):568-73. doi: 10.1007/s00134-005-2569-5. Epub 2005 Feb 15.
PubMed 15711976Perel A, Pizov R, Cotev S. Respiratory variations in the arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation reflect volume status and fluid responsiveness. Intensive Care Med. 2014 Jun;40(6):798-807. doi: 10.1007/s00134-014-3285-9. Epub 2014 Apr 16.
PubMed 24737260Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med. 2009 Sep;37(9):2642-7. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a590da.
PubMed 19602972Hadian M, Severyn DA, Pinsky MR. The effects of vasoactive drugs on pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in postoperative ventilated patients. J Crit Care. 2011 Jun;26(3):328.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.08.018. Epub 2010 Oct 30.
PubMed 21036528Preisman S, Kogan S, Berkenstadt H, Perel A. Predicting fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: functional haemodynamic parameters including the Respiratory Systolic Variation Test and static preload indicators. Br J Anaesth. 2005 Dec;95(6):746-55. doi: 10.1093/bja/aei262.
PubMed 16286349Huang CC, Fu JY, Hu HC, Kao KC, Chen NH, Hsieh MJ, Tsai YH. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients ventilated with low tidal volume and high positive end-expiratory pressure. Crit Care Med. 2008 Oct;36(10):2810-6. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318186b74e.
PubMed 18766099Yazigi A, Khoury E, Hlais S, Madi-Jebara S, Haddad F, Hayek G, Jabbour K. Pulse pressure variation predicts fluid responsiveness in elderly patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2012 Jun;26(3):387-90. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2011.09.014. Epub 2011 Nov 17.
PubMed 22100211Pizov R, Segal E, Kaplan L, Floman Y, Perel A. The use of systolic pressure variation in hemodynamic monitoring during deliberate hypotension in spine surgery. J Clin Anesth. 1990 Mar-Apr;2(2):96-100. doi: 10.1016/0952-8180(90)90061-7.
PubMed 2346658
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Jan 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Automated Pulse Pressure Variation Guided Fluid Management in the Pediatric Intensive Care Setting
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02308371
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PPV / 14-2019
- Conditions
- Sepsis, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
- Keywords
- critically ill pediatric patients, fluid resuscitation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel HillUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2014
- Primary completion
- May 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jun 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Dec 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 2 Jan 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Children who are critically ill often require large amounts of fluid during their acute illness. It has been shown in multiple studies that appropriate administration of fluid decreases morbidity and mortality, but giving too much fluid can also cause increased morbidity and mortality. It is often difficult to discern from physical exam, vital signs and labs if the amount of fluid that has been given is appropriate or if a pediatric patient requires more fluid. Pulse pressure variation (PPV) is the change in blood pressure when a patient is on a ventilator or breathing machine. PPV has been used in multiple adult studies to help predict fluid needs in a critically ill patient. In this study, we would like to investigate if PPV can help better predict if critically ill pediatric patients in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) need fluid. The investigators hope that by having the additional information that PPV can provide, physicians can more judiciously give fluid and thereby improve morbidity of critically ill patients in the PICU.
Detailed description
In pediatric critical care, it is difficult to discern a patient's intravascular fluid status (hypovolemia, hypervolemia, euvolemia). Often, pediatric sepsis patients exhibit profound hypovolemia and early aggressive fluid resuscitation has been shown to decrease mortality (1,2). Within the first 48 hours of presentation, pediatric patients with sepsis can have profound changes in physiology with changes in cardiac function and systemic vascular resistance which can make it difficult to discern whether continued fluid resuscitation or the addition of vasopressor support is needed (1,2). Similar physiology can also be seen in other patients with systemic inflammatory response such as postoperative cardiac patients and general pediatric post-surgical patients. While appropriate fluid resuscitation is needed, it has been shown that fluid overload does increase mortality (3-5). Clinicians often use clinical exam, vital signs, urine output and central venous pressure (CVP) as guides for need of fluid resuscitation, but static measures such as central venous pressure, pulmonary wedge pressure, and clinical exam have not been shown to be strong predictors of fluid responsiveness and cardiac output in patients (6-8). A more accurate way to discern fluid status and heart function is through measurement of cardiac output, but in order to calculate cardiac output, additional tests such as an echocardiogram is needed or additional invasive monitoring using thermodilution such as a continuous cardiac output monitor is needed (7,8).
In the last 30 years, dynamic changes in arterial pressure during the respiratory cycle have been described, where there is a decrease in cardiac preload during time of inspiration of a positive pressure breath followed by an increase in cardiac preload during the expiration of a positive pressure breath 9,10. Using this change in arterial pressure, information about cardiac preload or volume status can be inferred. The most common forms of dynamic pressure monitoring that are used are systolic pressure variation and pulse pressure variation.
Several adult studies have shown that systolic pressure variation (SPV) and pulse pressure variation (PPV) more accurately predict fluid response (defined in majority of studies as increase stroke volume index or cardiac index/output >15% after receiving a fluid bolus) in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients compared to static measures, such as CVP (2,10-24). PPV has also been shown to be predictive of fluid responsiveness in many patients with many different pathologies including intraoperative patients, postoperative cardiac bypass patients, patients in septic shock and patients with acute lung injury requiring lower tidal volumes (11,13-15,17-23,25). PPV has also been validated as a helpful and accurate guide for fluid responsiveness in clinical scenarios requiring vasopressors (12,26). Lopes et al demonstrated not only that PPV accurately predicts fluid response, but by using PPV directed fluid resuscitation in the operating room, patients had better postoperative outcomes as defined by decreased ventilator time (1 vs 5 days, P<0.05), and decreased length of hospital stay (7 vs 17 days, P< 0.1) (22).
There are very few studies evaluating pulse pressure variation in the pediatric patient population and results have been mixed. Similar to the adult studies, these studies evaluated dynamic parameters, including SPV and/or PPV, by comparing changes in dynamic parameters to changes seen in stroke volume index calculated by continuous cardiac index monitoring or echocardiogram. Fluid boluses were given and if the SPV or PPV decreased as the stroke volume index increased, then these dynamic parameters were proven to be predictive of fluid responsiveness. Some studies showed that PPV or SPV were not reliable predictors of fluid responsiveness (27-29). In contrast, a study in infants and neonates undergoing congenital heart surgery (ventricular septal defect and atrial septal defect repairs) illustrated that PPV was predictive of fluid response both before and after repair of the cardiac lesion (30). This study was particularly interesting since PPV was able to predict fluid response in two different physiologic states, with and without an intracardiac shunt (30). Two other pediatric studies also demonstrated that dynamic parameters were predictive of fluid response (31,32). There have been no pediatric studies thus far that have investigated if dynamic variable (PPV or SPV) guided fluid resuscitation improves patient outcomes.
Dynamic pressure monitoring, including PPV and SPV, is considered standard of care within the adult anesthesia setting and is currently being used in the adult operating rooms at University of North Carolina Hospitals. Most of the monitors within the hospital are equipped to measure PPV, including the monitors in the PICU. Several PICU attendings and fellows are familiar with PPV and have been using it as an aid in fluid management over the last couple of months. The investigator's hope is that with the use of PPV that physicians will be better able to gauge a patient's intravascular status and judiciously give fluid leading to appropriate fluid management and better patient outcomes in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU).
Hypothesis: Using pulse pressure variation will reduce the amount of fluid in the first 48 hours of acute illness (first 48 hours after placement of arterial line and intubation on conventional mechanical ventilation) by 30%. Appropriate fluid management will reduce the amount of time on the ventilator, the number of days in the PICU, and time on vasopressors.
Methods:
Patient Population and Recruitment: All patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit will be screened for recruitment for study by pediatric critical care attending or fellow. Patients that require standard mechanical ventilation and arterial line will be eligible for the study. Study will include 75 patients admitted to the PICU that require an arterial line and conventional mechanical ventilation that will be prospectively followed. There will be 75 matched, historic patients that will be used for controls. The investigators do not expect any difficulty enrolling 75 patients to the study as there were 1069 patients admitted to the PICU in the last year (July 2013 to July 2014).
Study Procedure: Prior to any accrual of patients, all nurses in the PICU and all PICU physicians (attendings and fellows) will have formal education and training on use of PPV and the study protocol. In addition, all physicians will have consent training. All patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit who are mechanically ventilated on conventional ventilator settings with arterial line will be eligible for the study. Primary investigator (during the day) or physician on call in the PICU (during the night) will obtain consent if patient is eligible for the study. The bedside physician (co-investigator) will give fluid as needed based on standard clinical data (heart rate, central venous pressure if available, blood pressure, urine output, physical exam, lactate level) and pulse pressure variation. Boluses of 5 cc/kg will be given so as to give fluid incrementally. Pulse pressure variation value before fluid bolus and after fluid bolus will be recorded in the electronic medical record. Pulse pressure variation will be followed for 48 hours. Pulse pressure variation, central venous pressure, total fluid for PICU stay, total fluid during 48 hours while on the PPV protocol (cc/kg/day), days mechanically ventilated, hours on vasopressors, any echocardiograms, age, weight at admission, daily weights, sex, diagnosis will be recorded in the patient's medical record. All data will be collected from patient's record by the primary investigator.
Data Analysis: Continuous baseline variables will have descriptions with means and standard deviations, and categorical baseline variables will be described with frequency distributions. A two-sided t-test and corresponding confidence interval will be used to compare matched historic controls to prospectively recruited test group subjects for total amount of fluid in 48 hours (cc/kg/day). Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests for time-to-event data will be applied to time on ventilator (days), time in the PICU (days), and time on vasopressors (hours), together with Kaplan-Meyer curves for descriptive purposes.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Prospective | Experimental | Device: Automated Pulse Pressure VariationPatients in this arm will have fluid given based on standard clinical data (blood pressure, heart rate, lactate level, urine output) in addition to information provided by automated pulse pressure variation (PPV). PPV will be followed for first 48 hours after recruitment to the study. Fluid (normal saline, albumin 5%, hetastarch per the clinician preference) will be given in 5cc/kg increments for PPV> 13 (in addition to standard clinical data) until PPV < 13. |
| Retrospective | No intervention | –Patients in this arm were previously admitted to the PICU and were given fluid based on standard clinical data. PPV was not used to guide therapy in this group of patients. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- Up to 17 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Admission to the University of North Carolina pediatric critical care unit, includes all patients admitted to the pediatric critical care service as well as all post-operative patients.
- No limitations for age or gender.
- Patient requires standard mechanical ventilation.
- Patient has an arterial line in place.
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Patient not mechanically ventilated.
- Patient does not have arterial line placed.
- Patient requires extracorporeal life support.
- Patient requires placement on high frequency oscillatory ventilation.
- Pulse pressure variation unable to be obtained on monitor.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Automated Pulse Pressure VariationAlso: Realtime automated pulse pressure variation algorithm, Philips MX800 monitorBased on standard of care, the physician will give fluid as needed based on standard clinical data (heart rate, central venous pressure if available, blood pressure, urine output, physical exam, lactate level) and pulse pressure variation. PPV should be elevated consistently greater than 15 minutes before giving fluid without other symptoms of patient instability (low blood pressure, elevated lactate, tachycardia). Pulse pressure variation will be followed for 48 hours. | Device | Prospective |
Primary outcome
Total Fluid (ml/kg/Day) Given
Time frame: First 48 hours after enrollment
Total fluid (ml/kg/day) given during the first 48 hours of enrollment
Total Fluid Bolused
Time frame: 48 hours after enrollment
Total fluid bolused within 48 hours after enrollment.
3 secondary outcomes
Number of Hours on Vasopressors
Time frame: From pediatric ICU admission to pediatric ICU discharge (up to 149 days)
Number of Days on Ventilatory Support
Time frame: From pediatric ICU admission to pediatric ICU discharge (up to 149 days)
Number of Days in the PICU
Time frame: From pediatric ICU admission to pediatric ICU discharge (up to 149 days)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 2 Jan 2017.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 19325359Brierley J, Carcillo JA, Choong K, Cornell T, Decaen A, Deymann A, Doctor A, Davis A, Duff J, Dugas MA, Duncan A, Evans B, Feldman J, Felmet K, Fisher G, Frankel L, Jeffries H, Greenwald B, Gutierrez J, Hall M, Han YY, Hanson J, Hazelzet J, Hernan L, Kiff J, Kissoon N, Kon A, Irazuzta J, Lin J, Lorts A, Mariscalco M, Mehta R, Nadel S, Nguyen T, Nicholson C, Peters M, Okhuysen-Cawley R, Poulton T, Relves M, Rodriguez A, Rozenfeld R, Schnitzler E, Shanley T, Kache S, Skippen P, Torres A, von Dessauer B, Weingarten J, Yeh T, Zaritsky A, Stojadinovic B, Zimmerman J, Zuckerberg A. Clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock: 2007 update from the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med. 2009 Feb;37(2):666-88. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819323c6.
- Background: PubMed 11794169Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M; Early Goal-Directed Therapy Collaborative Group. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001 Nov 8;345(19):1368-77. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa010307.
- Background: PubMed 20975548Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada TA, Walley KR, Russell JA. Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: a positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressure are associated with increased mortality. Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb;39(2):259-65. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181feeb15.
- Background: PubMed 19103612Rosenberg AL, Dechert RE, Park PK, Bartlett RH; NIH NHLBI ARDS Network. Review of a large clinical series: association of cumulative fluid balance on outcome in acute lung injury: a retrospective review of the ARDSnet tidal volume study cohort. J Intensive Care Med. 2009 Jan-Feb;24(1):35-46. doi: 10.1177/0885066608329850. Epub 2008 Dec 22.
- Background: PubMed 21615299Maitland K, Kiguli S, Opoka RO, Engoru C, Olupot-Olupot P, Akech SO, Nyeko R, Mtove G, Reyburn H, Lang T, Brent B, Evans JA, Tibenderana JK, Crawley J, Russell EC, Levin M, Babiker AG, Gibb DM; FEAST Trial Group. Mortality after fluid bolus in African children with severe infection. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2483-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1101549. Epub 2011 May 26.
- Background: PubMed 23774337Marik PE, Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med. 2013 Jul;41(7):1774-81. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31828a25fd.
- Background: PubMed 9496187Tibby SM, Hatherill M, Marsh MJ, Murdoch IA. Clinicians' abilities to estimate cardiac index in ventilated children and infants. Arch Dis Child. 1997 Dec;77(6):516-8. doi: 10.1136/adc.77.6.516.
- Background: PubMed 15711976Egan JR, Festa M, Cole AD, Nunn GR, Gillis J, Winlaw DS. Clinical assessment of cardiac performance in infants and children following cardiac surgery. Intensive Care Med. 2005 Apr;31(4):568-73. doi: 10.1007/s00134-005-2569-5. Epub 2005 Feb 15.
- Background: PubMed 24737260Perel A, Pizov R, Cotev S. Respiratory variations in the arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation reflect volume status and fluid responsiveness. Intensive Care Med. 2014 Jun;40(6):798-807. doi: 10.1007/s00134-014-3285-9. Epub 2014 Apr 16.
- Background: PubMed 19602972Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med. 2009 Sep;37(9):2642-7. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a590da.
- Background: PubMed 21036528Hadian M, Severyn DA, Pinsky MR. The effects of vasoactive drugs on pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in postoperative ventilated patients. J Crit Care. 2011 Jun;26(3):328.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.08.018. Epub 2010 Oct 30.
- Background: PubMed 16286349Preisman S, Kogan S, Berkenstadt H, Perel A. Predicting fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: functional haemodynamic parameters including the Respiratory Systolic Variation Test and static preload indicators. Br J Anaesth. 2005 Dec;95(6):746-55. doi: 10.1093/bja/aei262.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Sepsis
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Serum GDF-15 and LGALS3BP as Prognostic Biomarkers in Sepsis
Sepsis, Septic Shock
RecruitingPhase 3
A Trial of Adjunctive Fludrocortisone (50mcg, 100mcg or Placebo) in Critically Ill Patients With Septic Shock Receiving Hydrocortisone, Evaluating Survival and Functional Recovery and the Influence of Transcriptomic Response
Septic Shock
RecruitingObservational study
Middle East Study of Infections in Patients With Hematological Malignancies
Hematological Malignancy, Hematopoetic Stem Cell Transplantation
RecruitingObservational study
Early Detection and Kinetics of Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy in Severe Burn Patients
Peer Bullying Intervention, Vodcast
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Comparative Study of the Genomic Characteristics of Uropathogenic Escherichia Coli According to the Severity of Community-Acquired Urinary Tract Infections in Guadeloupe (COLIGENURI)
Urinary Tract Infections
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Melissa R Hines, MD principal investigator
University of North Carolina
Umesh Joashi, MD study director
University of North Carolina
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Automated Pulse Pressure Variation in people with Sepsis and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, run by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Jan 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 2 Jan 2017). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Total Fluid (ml/kg/Day) Given (time frame: First 48 hours after enrollment). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02308371, which also lists 30 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Jan 2017.