for the BaSICS investigators and the BRICNet members IMPORTANCE Slower intravenous fluid infusion rates could reduce the formation of tissue edema and organ dysfunction in critically ill patients; however, there are no data to support different infusion rates during fluid challenges for important outcomes such as mortality.OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of a slower infusion rate vs control infusion rate on 90-day survival in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Unblinded randomized factorial clinical trial in 75 ICUs in Brazil, involving 11 052 patients requiring at least 1 fluid challenge and with 1 risk factor for worse outcomes were randomized from May 29, 2017, to March 2, 2020. Follow-up was concluded on October 29, 2020. Patients were randomized to 2 different infusion rates (reported in this article) and 2 different fluid types (balanced fluids or saline, reported separately).INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive fluid challenges at 2 different infusion rates; 5538 to the slower rate (333 mL/h) and 5514 to the control group (999 mL/h). Patients were also randomized to receive balanced solution or 0.9% saline using a factorial design.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was 90-day survival.RESULTS Of all randomized patients, 10 520 (95.2%) were analyzed (mean age, 61.1 years [SD, 17.0 years]; 44.2% were women) after excluding duplicates and consent withdrawals. Patients assigned to the slower rate received a mean of 1162 mL on the first day vs 1252 mL for the control group. By day 90, 1406 of 5276 patients (26.6%) in the slower rate group had died vs 1414 of 5244 (27.0%) in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96-1.11; P = .46). There was no significant interaction between fluid type and infusion rate (P = .98).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients in the intensive care unit requiring fluid challenges, infusing at a slower rate compared with a faster rate did not reduce 90-day mortality. These findings do not support the use of a slower infusion rate.
Objectives:
To assess whether an increase in mean arterial pressure in patients with septic shock and previous systemic arterial hypertension changes microcirculatory and systemic hemodynamic variables compared with patients without arterial hypertension (control).
Design:
Prospective, nonblinded, interventional study.
Setting:
Three ICUs in two teaching hospitals.
Patients:
After informed consent, we included patients older than 18 years with septic shock for at least 6 hours, sedated, and under mechanical ventilation. We paired patients with and without arterial hypertension by age.
Interventions:
After obtaining systemic and microcirculation baseline hemodynamic variables (time 0), we increased noradrenaline dose to elevate mean arterial pressure up to 85–90 mm Hg before collecting a new set of measurements (time 1).
Measurements and Main Results:
We included 40 patients (20 in each group). There was no significant difference in age between the groups. After the rise in mean arterial pressure, there was a significant increase in cardiac index and a slight but significant reduction in lactate in both groups. We observed a significant improvement in the proportion of perfused vessels (control: 57.2 ± 14% to 66 ± 14.8%; arterial hypertension: 61.4 ± 12.3% to 70.8 ± 7.1%; groups: p = 0.29; T0 and T1: p < 0.001; group and time interaction: p = 0.85); perfused vessels density (control: 15.6 ± 4 mm/mm2 to 18.6 ± 4.5 mm/mm2; arterial hypertension: 16.4 ± 3.5 mm/mm2 to 19.1 ± 3 mm/mm2; groups: p = 0.51; T0 and T1: p < 0.001; group and time interaction: p = 0.70), and microcirculatory flow index (control: 2.1 ± 0.6 to 2.4 ± 0.6; arterial hypertension: 2.1 ± 0.5 to 2.6 ± 0.2; groups: p = 0.71; T0 and T1: p = 0.002; group and time interaction: p = 0.45) in both groups.
Conclusions:
Increasing mean arterial pressure with noradrenaline in septic shock patients improves density and flow in small vessels of sublingual microcirculation. However, this improvement occurs both in patients with previous arterial hypertension and in those without arterial hypertension.
Overall, the microcirculation parameters did not significantly change after increasing the positive end-expiratory pressure. However, at individual level, such response was heterogeneous. The changes in the microcirculation parameters could be correlated with the baseline values and changes in the mean arterial pressure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.