BACKGROUNDIntravenous fluids are recommended for the treatment of patients who are in septic shock, but higher fluid volumes have been associated with harm in patients who are in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODSIn this international, randomized trial, we assigned patients with septic shock in the ICU who had received at least 1 liter of intravenous fluid to receive restricted intravenous fluid or standard intravenous fluid therapy; patients were included if the onset of shock had been within 12 hours before screening. The primary outcome was death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. RESULTSWe enrolled 1554 patients; 770 were assigned to the restrictive-fluid group and 784 to the standard-fluid group. Primary outcome data were available for 1545 patients (99.4%). In the ICU, the restrictive-fluid group received a median of 1798 ml of intravenous fluid (interquartile range, 500 to 4366); the standard-fluid group received a median of 3811 ml (interquartile range, 1861 to 6762). At 90 days, death had occurred in 323 of 764 patients (42.3%) in the restrictive-fluid group, as compared with 329 of 781 patients (42.1%) in the standard-fluid group (adjusted absolute difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −4.7 to 4.9; P = 0.96). In the ICU, serious adverse events occurred at least once in 221 of 751 patients (29.4%) in the restrictive-fluid group and in 238 of 772 patients (30.8%) in the standard-fluid group (adjusted absolute difference, −1.7 percentage points; 99% CI, −7.7 to 4.3). At 90 days after randomization, the numbers of days alive without life support and days alive and out of the hospital were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONSAmong adult patients with septic shock in the ICU, intravenous fluid restriction did not result in fewer deaths at 90 days than standard intravenous fluid therapy. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and others; CLASSIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03668236.

Exercise testing is recommended as a first-line diagnostic test in patients with suspected SAP, 9 although the limited sensitivity and specificity have been criticized. 10 Thus, it would be encouraging if 2DSE performed at rest could improve the diagnostic accuracy of the exercise test because both an Background-Two-dimensional strain echocardiography detects early signs of left ventricular dysfunction; however, it is unknown whether myocardial strain analysis at rest in patients with suspected stable angina pectoris predicts the presence of coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods and Results-In total, 296 consecutive patients with clinically suspected stable angina pectoris, no previous cardiac history, and normal left ventricular ejection fraction were included. All patients were examined by 2-dimensional strain echocardiography, exercise ECG, and coronary angiography. Two-dimensional strain echocardiography was performed in the 3 apical projections. Peak regional longitudinal systolic strain was measured in 18 myocardial sites and averaged to provide global longitudinal peak systolic strain. Duke score, including ST-segment depression, chest pain, and exercise capacity, was used as the outcome of the exercise test. Patients with an area stenosis ≥70% in ≥1 epicardial coronary artery were categorized as having significant CAD (n=107). Global longitudinal peak systolic strain was significantly lower in patients with CAD compared with patients without (17.1±2.5% versus 18.8±2.6%; P<0.001) and remained an independent predictor of CAD after multivariable adjustment for baseline data, exercise test, and conventional echocardiography (odds ratio, 1.25 [P=0.016] per 1% decrease). Area under receiver operating characteristic curve for exercise test and global longitudinal peak systolic strain in combination was significantly higher than that for exercise test alone (0.84 versus 0.78; P=0.007). Furthermore, impaired regional longitudinal systolic strain identifies which coronary artery is stenotic. Conclusions-In patients with suspected stable angina pectoris, global longitudinal peak systolic strain assessed at rest is an independent predictor of significant CAD and significantly improves the diagnostic performance of exercise test. Furthermore, 2-dimensional strain echocardiography seems capable of identifying high-risk patients. (Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:58-65.)Key Words: coronary artery disease ◼ diagnostic performance ◼ myocardial ischemia ◼ stable angina pectoris ◼ two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography ◼ two-dimensional strain echocardiography

Introduction Intravenous (IV) fluid is a key intervention in the management of septic shock. The benefits and harms of lower versus higher fluid volumes are unknown and clinical equipoise exists. We describe the protocol and detailed statistical analysis plan for the Conservative versus Liberal Approach to fluid therapy of Septic Shock in the Intensive Care (CLASSIC) trial. The aim of the CLASSIC trial is to assess benefits and harms of IV fluid restriction versus standard care in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with septic shock. Methods CLASSIC trial is an investigator-initiated, international, randomised, stratified, and analystblinded trial. We will allocate 1554 adult patients with septic shock, who are planned to be or are admitted to an ICU, to IV fluid restriction versus standard care. The primary outcome is mortality at day 90. Secondary outcomes are serious adverse events, serious adverse reactions, days alive at day 90 without life support, days alive and out of hospital at day 90, and mortality, health-related quality of life, and cognitive function at 1 year. We will conduct the statistical analyses according to a pre-defined statistical analysis plan, including three interim analyses. For the primary analysis we will use logistic regression adjusted for the stratification variables comparing the two interventions in the intention-to-treat population. Discussion The CLASSIC trial results will provide important evidence to guide clinicians' choice regarding IV fluid therapy in adults with septic shock.