Cargando…

Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION: Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) showed significant efficacy as a resuscitative agent in animal models of haemorrhagic shock. Its safety and tolerability were confirmed in healthy human volunteers. In this study, our primary objective was to determine the safety, and the secondary objective w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gulati, Anil, Jain, Dinesh, Agrawal, Nilesh Radheshyam, Rahate, Prashant, Choudhuri, Rajat, Das, Soumen, Dhibar, Deba Prasad, Prabhu, Madhav, Haveri, Sameer, Agarwal, Rohit, Lavhale, Manish S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8189997/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33970455
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01760-4
_version_ 1783705600106954752
author Gulati, Anil
Jain, Dinesh
Agrawal, Nilesh Radheshyam
Rahate, Prashant
Choudhuri, Rajat
Das, Soumen
Dhibar, Deba Prasad
Prabhu, Madhav
Haveri, Sameer
Agarwal, Rohit
Lavhale, Manish S.
author_facet Gulati, Anil
Jain, Dinesh
Agrawal, Nilesh Radheshyam
Rahate, Prashant
Choudhuri, Rajat
Das, Soumen
Dhibar, Deba Prasad
Prabhu, Madhav
Haveri, Sameer
Agarwal, Rohit
Lavhale, Manish S.
author_sort Gulati, Anil
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) showed significant efficacy as a resuscitative agent in animal models of haemorrhagic shock. Its safety and tolerability were confirmed in healthy human volunteers. In this study, our primary objective was to determine the safety, and the secondary objective was to assess the efficacy of centhaquine in patients with hypovolemic shock. METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, randomized phase II study was conducted in male and female patients aged 18–70 years with hypovolemic shock having systolic BP ≤ 90 mmHg. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the control or centhaquine group. The control group received 100 ml of normal saline infusion over 1 h, while the centhaquine group received 0.01 mg/kg of centhaquine in 100 ml normal saline infusion over 1 h. Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included, and 45 completed the trial: 22 in the control group and 23 in the centhaquine group. The demographics of patients in both groups were comparable. No adverse event related to centhaquine was recorded in the 28-day observation period. The baseline, Injury Scoring System score, haemoglobin, and haematocrit were similar in both groups. However, 91% of the patients in the centhaquine group needed major surgery, whereas only 68% in the control group (p = 0.0526). Twenty-eight-day all-cause mortality was 0/23 in the centhaquine group and 2/22 in the control group. The percent time in ICU and ventilator support was less in the centhaquine group than in the control group. The total amount of vasopressors needed in the first 48 h of resuscitation was lower in the centhaquine group than in the control group (3.12 ± 2.18 vs. 9.39 ± 4.28 mg). An increase in systolic and diastolic BP from baseline through 48 h was more marked in the centhaquine group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, blood lactate level was lower by 1.75 ± 1.07 mmol/l in the centhaquine group on day 3 of resuscitation. Improvements in base deficit, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) score and adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were greater in the centhaquine group than in the control group. CONCLUSION: When added to SOC, centhaquine is a well-tolerated and effective resuscitative agent. It improves the clinical outcome of patients with hypovolemic shock. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number: NCT04056065. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01760-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8189997
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81899972021-06-28 Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial Gulati, Anil Jain, Dinesh Agrawal, Nilesh Radheshyam Rahate, Prashant Choudhuri, Rajat Das, Soumen Dhibar, Deba Prasad Prabhu, Madhav Haveri, Sameer Agarwal, Rohit Lavhale, Manish S. Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) showed significant efficacy as a resuscitative agent in animal models of haemorrhagic shock. Its safety and tolerability were confirmed in healthy human volunteers. In this study, our primary objective was to determine the safety, and the secondary objective was to assess the efficacy of centhaquine in patients with hypovolemic shock. METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, randomized phase II study was conducted in male and female patients aged 18–70 years with hypovolemic shock having systolic BP ≤ 90 mmHg. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the control or centhaquine group. The control group received 100 ml of normal saline infusion over 1 h, while the centhaquine group received 0.01 mg/kg of centhaquine in 100 ml normal saline infusion over 1 h. Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included, and 45 completed the trial: 22 in the control group and 23 in the centhaquine group. The demographics of patients in both groups were comparable. No adverse event related to centhaquine was recorded in the 28-day observation period. The baseline, Injury Scoring System score, haemoglobin, and haematocrit were similar in both groups. However, 91% of the patients in the centhaquine group needed major surgery, whereas only 68% in the control group (p = 0.0526). Twenty-eight-day all-cause mortality was 0/23 in the centhaquine group and 2/22 in the control group. The percent time in ICU and ventilator support was less in the centhaquine group than in the control group. The total amount of vasopressors needed in the first 48 h of resuscitation was lower in the centhaquine group than in the control group (3.12 ± 2.18 vs. 9.39 ± 4.28 mg). An increase in systolic and diastolic BP from baseline through 48 h was more marked in the centhaquine group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, blood lactate level was lower by 1.75 ± 1.07 mmol/l in the centhaquine group on day 3 of resuscitation. Improvements in base deficit, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) score and adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were greater in the centhaquine group than in the control group. CONCLUSION: When added to SOC, centhaquine is a well-tolerated and effective resuscitative agent. It improves the clinical outcome of patients with hypovolemic shock. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number: NCT04056065. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01760-4. Springer Healthcare 2021-05-10 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8189997/ /pubmed/33970455 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01760-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial 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-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Gulati, Anil
Jain, Dinesh
Agrawal, Nilesh Radheshyam
Rahate, Prashant
Choudhuri, Rajat
Das, Soumen
Dhibar, Deba Prasad
Prabhu, Madhav
Haveri, Sameer
Agarwal, Rohit
Lavhale, Manish S.
Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial
title Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial
title_full Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial
title_short Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin(®)) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial
title_sort resuscitative effect of centhaquine (lyfaquin(®)) in hypovolemic shock patients: a randomized, multicentric, controlled trial
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8189997/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33970455
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01760-4
work_keys_str_mv AT gulatianil resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT jaindinesh resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT agrawalnileshradheshyam resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT rahateprashant resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT choudhurirajat resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT dassoumen resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT dhibardebaprasad resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT prabhumadhav resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT haverisameer resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT agarwalrohit resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial
AT lavhalemanishs resuscitativeeffectofcenthaquinelyfaquininhypovolemicshockpatientsarandomizedmulticentriccontrolledtrial