Cargando…

Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)

BACKGROUND: Critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (CHD) are often prescribed stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding, despite the low incidence of stress ulcers and limited data on the safety and efficacy of SUP in infants. Recently, SUP has been asso...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mills, Kimberly I., Albert, Ben D., Bechard, Lori J., Duggan, Christopher P., Kaza, Aditya, Rakoff-Nahoum, Seth, Vlamakis, Hera, Sleeper, Lynn A., Newburger, Jane W., Priebe, Gregory P., Mehta, Nilesh M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7322718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32600393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04513-w
_version_ 1783551697267720192
author Mills, Kimberly I.
Albert, Ben D.
Bechard, Lori J.
Duggan, Christopher P.
Kaza, Aditya
Rakoff-Nahoum, Seth
Vlamakis, Hera
Sleeper, Lynn A.
Newburger, Jane W.
Priebe, Gregory P.
Mehta, Nilesh M.
author_facet Mills, Kimberly I.
Albert, Ben D.
Bechard, Lori J.
Duggan, Christopher P.
Kaza, Aditya
Rakoff-Nahoum, Seth
Vlamakis, Hera
Sleeper, Lynn A.
Newburger, Jane W.
Priebe, Gregory P.
Mehta, Nilesh M.
author_sort Mills, Kimberly I.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (CHD) are often prescribed stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding, despite the low incidence of stress ulcers and limited data on the safety and efficacy of SUP in infants. Recently, SUP has been associated with an increased incidence of hospital-acquired infections, community-acquired pneumonia, and necrotizing enterocolitis. The objective of this pilot study is to investigate the feasibility of performing a randomized controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of withholding SUP in infants with congenital heart disease admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit. METHODS: A single center, prospective, double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled pilot feasibility trial will be performed in infants with CHD admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit and anticipated to require respiratory support for > 24 h. Patients will be randomized to receive a histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or placebo until they are discontinued from respiratory support. Randomization will be performed within 2 strata defined by admission type (medical or surgical) and age (neonate, age < 30 days, or infant, 1 month to 1 year). Allocation will be a 1:1 ratio using permuted blocks to ensure balanced allocations across the two treatment groups within each stratum. The primary outcomes include feasibility of screening, consent, timely allocation of study drug, and protocol adherence. The primary safety outcome is the rate of clinically significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The secondary outcomes are the difference in the relative and absolute abundance of the gut microbiota and functional microbial profiles between the two study groups. We plan to enroll 100 patients in this pilot study. DISCUSSION: Routine use of SUP to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in infants is controversial due to a low incidence of bleeding events and concern for adverse effects. The role of SUP in infants with CHD has not been examined, and there is equipoise on the risks and benefits of withholding this therapy. In addition, this therapy has been discontinued in other neonatal populations due to the concern for hospital-acquired infections and necrotizing enterocolitis. Furthermore, exploring changes to the microbiome after exposure to SUP may highlight the mechanisms by which SUP impacts potential microbial dysbiosis of the gut and its association with hospital-acquired infections. Assessment of the feasibility of a trial of withholding SUP in critically ill infants with CHD will facilitate planning of a larger multicenter trial of safety and efficacy of SUP in this vulnerable population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03667703. Registered 12 September 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03667703?term=SUPPRESS+CHD&draw=2&rank=1. All WHO Trial Registration Data Set Criteria are met in this manuscript.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7322718
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73227182020-06-29 Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD) Mills, Kimberly I. Albert, Ben D. Bechard, Lori J. Duggan, Christopher P. Kaza, Aditya Rakoff-Nahoum, Seth Vlamakis, Hera Sleeper, Lynn A. Newburger, Jane W. Priebe, Gregory P. Mehta, Nilesh M. Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (CHD) are often prescribed stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding, despite the low incidence of stress ulcers and limited data on the safety and efficacy of SUP in infants. Recently, SUP has been associated with an increased incidence of hospital-acquired infections, community-acquired pneumonia, and necrotizing enterocolitis. The objective of this pilot study is to investigate the feasibility of performing a randomized controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of withholding SUP in infants with congenital heart disease admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit. METHODS: A single center, prospective, double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled pilot feasibility trial will be performed in infants with CHD admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit and anticipated to require respiratory support for > 24 h. Patients will be randomized to receive a histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or placebo until they are discontinued from respiratory support. Randomization will be performed within 2 strata defined by admission type (medical or surgical) and age (neonate, age < 30 days, or infant, 1 month to 1 year). Allocation will be a 1:1 ratio using permuted blocks to ensure balanced allocations across the two treatment groups within each stratum. The primary outcomes include feasibility of screening, consent, timely allocation of study drug, and protocol adherence. The primary safety outcome is the rate of clinically significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The secondary outcomes are the difference in the relative and absolute abundance of the gut microbiota and functional microbial profiles between the two study groups. We plan to enroll 100 patients in this pilot study. DISCUSSION: Routine use of SUP to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in infants is controversial due to a low incidence of bleeding events and concern for adverse effects. The role of SUP in infants with CHD has not been examined, and there is equipoise on the risks and benefits of withholding this therapy. In addition, this therapy has been discontinued in other neonatal populations due to the concern for hospital-acquired infections and necrotizing enterocolitis. Furthermore, exploring changes to the microbiome after exposure to SUP may highlight the mechanisms by which SUP impacts potential microbial dysbiosis of the gut and its association with hospital-acquired infections. Assessment of the feasibility of a trial of withholding SUP in critically ill infants with CHD will facilitate planning of a larger multicenter trial of safety and efficacy of SUP in this vulnerable population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03667703. Registered 12 September 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03667703?term=SUPPRESS+CHD&draw=2&rank=1. All WHO Trial Registration Data Set Criteria are met in this manuscript. BioMed Central 2020-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7322718/ /pubmed/32600393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04513-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Mills, Kimberly I.
Albert, Ben D.
Bechard, Lori J.
Duggan, Christopher P.
Kaza, Aditya
Rakoff-Nahoum, Seth
Vlamakis, Hera
Sleeper, Lynn A.
Newburger, Jane W.
Priebe, Gregory P.
Mehta, Nilesh M.
Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)
title Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)
title_full Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)
title_fullStr Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)
title_full_unstemmed Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)
title_short Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (SUPPRESS-CHD)
title_sort stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo—a blinded randomized control trial to evaluate the safety of two strategies in critically ill infants with congenital heart disease (suppress-chd)
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7322718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32600393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04513-w
work_keys_str_mv AT millskimberlyi stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT albertbend stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT bechardlorij stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT dugganchristopherp stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT kazaaditya stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT rakoffnahoumseth stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT vlamakishera stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT sleeperlynna stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT newburgerjanew stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT priebegregoryp stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd
AT mehtanileshm stressulcerprophylaxisversusplaceboablindedrandomizedcontroltrialtoevaluatethesafetyoftwostrategiesincriticallyillinfantswithcongenitalheartdiseasesuppresschd