A Post Hoc Analysis of Osmotherapy Use in the Erythropoietin in Traumatic Brain Injury Study-Associations With Acute Kidney Injury and Mortality
Critical care medicine. 2021
OBJECTIVES Mannitol and hypertonic saline are used to treat raised intracerebral pressure in patients with traumatic brain injury, but their possible effects on kidney function and mortality are unknown. DESIGN A post hoc analysis of the erythropoietin trial in traumatic brain injury (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00987454) including daily data on mannitol and hypertonic saline use. SETTING Twenty-nine university-affiliated teaching hospitals in seven countries. PATIENTS A total of 568 patients treated in the ICU for 48 hours without acute kidney injury of whom 43 (7%) received mannitol and 170 (29%) hypertonic saline. INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS We categorized acute kidney injury stage according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome classification and defined acute kidney injury as any Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome stage-based changes from the admission creatinine. We tested associations between early (first 2 d) mannitol and hypertonic saline and time to acute kidney injury up to ICU discharge and death up to 180 days with Cox regression analysis. Subsequently, acute kidney injury developed more often in patients receiving mannitol (35% vs 10%; p < 0.001) and hypertonic saline (23% vs 10%; p < 0.001). On competing risk analysis including factors associated with acute kidney injury, mannitol (hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3; p = 0.01), but not hypertonic saline (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.9-2.8; p = 0.08), was independently associated with time to acute kidney injury. In a Cox model for predicting time to death, both the use of mannitol (hazard ratio, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.1; p = 0.03) and hypertonic saline (hazard ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.02-3.2; p = 0.04) were associated with time to death. CONCLUSIONS In this post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial, the early use of mannitol, but not hypertonic saline, was independently associated with an increase in acute kidney injury. Our findings suggest the need to further evaluate the use and choice of osmotherapy in traumatic brain injury.
Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in critically ill trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Annals of Surgery. 2016;265((1):):54-62
OBJECTIVE To perform a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in critically ill trauma patients. BACKGROUND ESAs have effects beyond erythropoiesis. The administration of the ESA epoetin alfa to critically ill trauma patients has been associated with a reduction in mortality. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. We searched Medline, Medline in Process, and other nonindexed citations, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database from inception until September 9, 2015, for randomized controlled trials comparing ESAs to placebo (or no ESA). RESULTS We identified 9 eligible studies that randomly assigned 2607 critically ill patients after trauma to an ESA or placebo (or no ESA). Compared with placebo (or no ESA), ESA therapy was associated with a substantial reduction in mortality [risk ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.79, P = 0.0001, I = 0%). In patients with traumatic brain injury, ESA therapy did not increase the number of patients surviving with moderate disability or good recovery (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88-1.15, P = 0.95, I = 0%). With the dosing regimens employed in the included studies, ESA therapy did not increase the risk of lower limb proximal deep venous thrombosis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72-1.29, P = 0.78, I = 0%). CONCLUSIONS The administration of ESAs to critically ill trauma patients is associated with a significant improvement in mortality without an increase in the rate of lower limb proximal deep venous thrombosis. Given the worldwide public health significance of these findings research to validate or refute them is required.
Erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Trials [Electronic Resource]. 2015;16((1):):528.
BACKGROUND Traumatic brain injury is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Laboratory and clinical studies demonstrate a possible beneficial effect of erythropoietin in improving outcomes in the traumatic brain injury cohort. However, there are concerns regarding the association of erythropoietin and thrombosis in the critically ill. A large-scale, multi-centre, blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, randomised trial is currently underway to address this hypothesis. METHODS/DESIGN The erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury trial is a stratified prospective, multi-centre, randomised, blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase III trial. It aims to determine whether the administration of erythropoietin compared to placebo improves neurological outcome in patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury at six months after injury. The trial is designed to recruit 606 patients between 15 and 65 years of age with severe (Glasgow Coma Score: 3 to 8) or moderate (Glasgow Coma Score: 9 to 12) traumatic brain injury in Australia, New Zealand, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, France, Finland, Germany and Ireland. Trial patients will receive either subcutaneous erythropoietin or placebo within 24 hours of injury, and weekly thereafter for up to three doses during the intensive care unit admission. The primary outcome will be the combined proportion of unfavourable neurological outcomes at six months: severe disability or death. Secondary outcomes will include the rate of proximal deep venous thrombosis detected by compression Doppler ultrasound, six-month mortality, the proportion of patients with composite vascular events (deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and cerebrovascular events) at six months and quality of life with health economic evaluations. DISCUSSION When completed, the trial aims to provide evidence on the efficacy and safety of erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury patients, and to provide clear guidance for clinicians in their management of this devastating condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials registry: ACTRN12609000827235 (registered on 22 September 2009). Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00987454 (registered on 29 September 2009). European Drug Regulatory Authorities Clinical Trials: 2011-005235-22 (registered on 18 January 2012).
Erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury (EPO-TBI): a double-blind randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND Erythropoietin might have neurocytoprotective effects. In this trial, we studied its effect on neurological recovery, mortality, and venous thrombotic events in patients with traumatic brain injury. METHODS Erythropoietin in Traumatic Brain Injury (EPO-TBI) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial undertaken in 29 centres (all university-affiliated teaching hospitals) in seven countries (Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Finland, Ireland, and Saudi Arabia). Within 24 h of brain injury, 606 patients were randomly assigned by a concealed web-based computer-generated randomisation schedule to erythropoietin (40,000 units subcutaneously) or placebo (09% sodium chloride subcutaneously) once per week for a maximum of three doses. Randomisation was stratified by severity of traumatic brain injury (moderate vs severe) and participating site. With the exception of designated site pharmacists, the site dosing nurses at all sites, and the pharmacists at the central pharmacy in France, all study personnel, patients, and patients' relatives were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome, assessed at 6 months by modified intention-to-treat analysis, was improvement in the patients' neurological status, summarised as a reduction in the proportion of patients with an Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS-E) of 1-4 (death, vegetative state, and severe disability). Two equally spaced preplanned interim analyses were done (after 202 and 404 participants were enrolled). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00987454. FINDINGS Between May 3, 2010, and Nov 1, 2014, 606 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to erythropoietin (n=308) or placebo (n=298). Ten of these patients (six in the erythropoietin group and four in the placebo group) were lost to follow up at 6 months; therefore, data for the primary outcome analysis was available for 596 patients (302 in the erythropoietin group and 294 in the placebo group). Compared with placebo, erythropoietin did not reduce the proportion of patients with a GOS-E level of 1-4 (134 [44%] of 302 patients in the erythropoietin group vs 132 [45%] of 294 in the placebo group; relative risk [RR] 099 [95% CI 083-118], p=090). In terms of safety, erythropoietin did not significantly affect 6-month mortality versus placebo (32 [11%] of 305 patients had died at 6 months in the erythropoietin group vs 46 [16%] of 297 [16%] in the placebo group; RR 068 [95% CI 044-103], p=007) or increase the occurrence of deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs (48 [16%] of 305 vs 54 [18%] of 298; RR 087 [95% CI 061-124], p=044). INTERPRETATION Following moderate or severe traumatic brain injury, erythropoietin did not reduce the number of patients with severe neurological dysfunction (GOS-E level 1-4) or increase the incidence of deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs. The effect of erythropoietin on mortality remains uncertain. FUNDING The National Health and Medical Research Council and the Transport Accident Commission.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A pilot feasibility trial of allocation of freshest available red blood cells versus standard care in critically ill patients
BACKGROUND Prolonged storage of red blood cells (RBCs) may increase posttransfusion adverse events in critically ill patients. We aimed to evaluate in intensive care unit (ICU) patients 1) the feasibility of allocating freshest available compatible RBCs versus standard care and 2) the suitability of this approach in the design of a large randomized controlled trial (RCT). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS Eligible patients from two adult ICUs were randomly assigned to receive either the freshest available compatible RBCs or the standard care (the oldest compatible available RBCs) for all transfusions during their ICU stay. Study group allocation was concealed from patients and bedside clinicians, but the transfusion service was unblinded. The study endpoints were the feasibility of the study procedures, including success of the ICU Web randomization, the ICU staff blinding, and the correct delivery of the RBC units by the transfusion service in accordance with the allocated study group. In addition, we measured the difference in age of RBC units between the two groups. RESULTS During a 3-month period, 177 RBC units were delivered to 51 patients. All study procedures, including randomization, blinding, and delivery of blood in accordance with the study group were successful. The mean (+/-SD) of the mean age of the RBC received by each patient was lower in the "fresher blood" group compared with the standard care group (12.1 [+/-3.8] days vs. 23 [+/-8.4] days; p<0.001). CONCLUSION Randomized delivery of the freshest available RBCs versus standard care to ICU patients who were prescribed transfusion for clinical reasons is feasible, with a clinically relevant degree of storage duration separation achievable between the two study groups. These findings support the feasibility of a future large pragmatic RCT. 2011 American Association of Blood Banks.