Cargando…

Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Previous study drew different conclusions on significant differences between saline and balanced crystalloid solution infused in critical illness but both showed a statistical difference in the sepsis subgroup. Thus, we will specifically focus on septic patients in this study to compare...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Fang, Zhang, Jing, Zhu, Yuan, Su, Lianjiu, Li, Yiming, He, Li, Yu, Li, Peng, Zhiyong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7830046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33494795
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-05007-5
_version_ 1783641315493281792
author Liu, Fang
Zhang, Jing
Zhu, Yuan
Su, Lianjiu
Li, Yiming
He, Li
Yu, Li
Peng, Zhiyong
author_facet Liu, Fang
Zhang, Jing
Zhu, Yuan
Su, Lianjiu
Li, Yiming
He, Li
Yu, Li
Peng, Zhiyong
author_sort Liu, Fang
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Previous study drew different conclusions on significant differences between saline and balanced crystalloid solution infused in critical illness but both showed a statistical difference in the sepsis subgroup. Thus, we will specifically focus on septic patients in this study to compare the effects of saline and balanced solution. We hypothesize that effects of saline on renal outcomes are related to the underline acute kidney injury (AKI) severity and total volumes of infusion. METHODS/DESIGN: The investigators designed a pragmatic, multi-center parallel controlled trial recruiting 312 patients who are diagnosed with sepsis/septic shock in the intensive care unit (ICU) and will be assigned with either acetate Ringer’s solution or saline in the corresponding month. Patients with an end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or who need renal replacement therapy (RRT) prior to or at the time of enrolment are excluded. Enrolled patients will be regarded as with mild, moderate, or severe sepsis on the basis of the severity of their illness and will be divided into subgroups according to their initial renal function and various intravenous infusion volumes when being analyzed. The primary outcome is major adverse kidney events within 28 days (MAKE28), including the composite of in-hospital death, receipt of new renal replacement therapy, or persistent renal dysfunction. Secondary outcomes include 28-day mortality, internal environment disturbance, incidence and duration of vasoactive drug treatment, duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of RRT, and ICU and hospital length of stay. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this study will be the first to focus on septic patients and provide credible and evident data on the comparison of outcome between acetate Ringer’s solution and saline for intravenous infusion in adult septic patients on the basis of baseline renal function and infusion volumes taken into consideration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03685214. Registered on August 15, 2018 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-020-05007-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7830046
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78300462021-01-25 Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial Liu, Fang Zhang, Jing Zhu, Yuan Su, Lianjiu Li, Yiming He, Li Yu, Li Peng, Zhiyong Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Previous study drew different conclusions on significant differences between saline and balanced crystalloid solution infused in critical illness but both showed a statistical difference in the sepsis subgroup. Thus, we will specifically focus on septic patients in this study to compare the effects of saline and balanced solution. We hypothesize that effects of saline on renal outcomes are related to the underline acute kidney injury (AKI) severity and total volumes of infusion. METHODS/DESIGN: The investigators designed a pragmatic, multi-center parallel controlled trial recruiting 312 patients who are diagnosed with sepsis/septic shock in the intensive care unit (ICU) and will be assigned with either acetate Ringer’s solution or saline in the corresponding month. Patients with an end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or who need renal replacement therapy (RRT) prior to or at the time of enrolment are excluded. Enrolled patients will be regarded as with mild, moderate, or severe sepsis on the basis of the severity of their illness and will be divided into subgroups according to their initial renal function and various intravenous infusion volumes when being analyzed. The primary outcome is major adverse kidney events within 28 days (MAKE28), including the composite of in-hospital death, receipt of new renal replacement therapy, or persistent renal dysfunction. Secondary outcomes include 28-day mortality, internal environment disturbance, incidence and duration of vasoactive drug treatment, duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of RRT, and ICU and hospital length of stay. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this study will be the first to focus on septic patients and provide credible and evident data on the comparison of outcome between acetate Ringer’s solution and saline for intravenous infusion in adult septic patients on the basis of baseline renal function and infusion volumes taken into consideration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03685214. Registered on August 15, 2018 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-020-05007-5. BioMed Central 2021-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7830046/ /pubmed/33494795 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-05007-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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
Liu, Fang
Zhang, Jing
Zhu, Yuan
Su, Lianjiu
Li, Yiming
He, Li
Yu, Li
Peng, Zhiyong
Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
title Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
title_full Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
title_fullStr Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
title_short Acetate Ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
title_sort acetate ringer’s solution versus 0.9% saline for septic patients: study protocol for a multi-center parallel controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7830046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33494795
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-05007-5
work_keys_str_mv AT liufang acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT zhangjing acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT zhuyuan acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT sulianjiu acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT liyiming acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT heli acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT yuli acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial
AT pengzhiyong acetateringerssolutionversus09salineforsepticpatientsstudyprotocolforamulticenterparallelcontrolledtrial