Search

BACKGROUND: Animal models of serious infection suggest that 24 h of induced hypothermia improves circulatory and respiratory function and reduces mortality. We tested the hypothesis that a reduction of core temperature to 32-34°C attenuates organ dysfunction and reduces mortality in ventilator-dependent patients with septic shock.METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, open-label trial, we recruited patients from ten intensive care units (ICUs) in three countries in Europe and North America. Inclusion criteria for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock were a mean arterial pressure of less than 70 mm Hg, mechanical ventilation in an ICU, age at least 50 years, predicted length of stay in the ICU at least 24 h, and recruitment into the study within 6 h of fulfilling inclusion criteria. Exclusion criteria were uncontrolled bleeding, clinically important bleeding disorder, recent open surgery, pregnancy or breastfeeding, or involuntary psychiatric admission. We randomly allocated patients 1:1 (with variable block sizes ranging from four to eight; stratified by predictors of mortality, age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, and study site) to routine thermal management or 24 h of induced hypothermia (target 32-34°C) followed by 48 h of normothermia (36-38°C). The primary endpoint was 30 day all-cause mortality in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly allocated patients except those for whom consent was withdrawn or who were discovered to meet an exclusion criterion after randomisation but before receiving the trial intervention). Patients and health-care professionals giving the intervention were not masked to treatment allocation, but assessors of the primary outcome were. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01455116.FINDINGS: Between Nov 1, 2011, and Nov 4, 2016, we screened 5695 patients. After recruitment of 436 of the planned 560 participants, the trial was terminated for futility (220 [50%] randomly allocated to hypothermia and 216 [50%] to routine thermal management). In the hypothermia group, 96 (44·2%) of 217 died within 30 days versus 77 (35·8%) of 215 in the routine thermal management group (difference 8·4% [95% CI -0·8 to 17·6]; relative risk 1·2 [1·0-1·6]; p=0·07]).INTERPRETATION: Among patients with septic shock and ventilator-dependent respiratory failure, induced hypothermia does not reduce mortality. Induced hypothermia should not be used in patients with septic shock.FUNDING: Trygfonden, Lundbeckfonden, and the Danish National Research Foundation.

Background Animal models of serious infection suggest that 24 hours of induced hypothermia improves circulatory and respiratory characteristics and enhances survival, but whether therapeutic mild hypothermia in such conditions is of clinical benefit remains unknown. We, therefore, tested whether reducing core temperature to 32–34oC in critically ill patients with septic shock and ventilator-demanding respiratory failure improves survival and reduces organ dysfunction. Methods In this multi-national trial, patients with septic shock were enrolled within 6 hours of onset of septic shock and ventilator-demanding respiratory failure and randomized 1:1, stratified by site (target sample = 560), to routine thermal management or 24 hours of induced hypothermia (target 32–34°C) followed by 48 hours of normothermia. Other aspects of care were per routine in each participating center. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. Results At the third ordinary interim analysis, after recruitment of 432 participants, the Data and Safety Monitoring Board recommended the trial be terminated for futility; the conditional power for rejection of the null hypothesis in favor of efficacy was null. In the induced hypothermia group, target temperature was reached within median 3.2 hours [IQR: 2.2, 4.8], and maintained for 24 hours [IQR: 24, 24] (Figure 1). There was no evidence for a difference in 30-day mortality risk in patients randomized to hypothermia (96/217) vs. routine thermal management (77/215): relative risk 1.24 [95% CI: 0.98, 1.56] (Figure 2). At the end of the temperature intervention (72 hours), more patients assigned to hypothermia were in continued shock (vasoactive medication 71% vs. 58%; P = 0.01), and fewer cooled patients had inflammatory control (32% vs. 47% had CRP decline of >30%, P = 0.005). More harm from cooling was seen in patients entering the trial with normal renal function and with normal platelet count (P for interaction Conclusion Among patients with septic shock and ventilator-demanding respiratory failure, induced hypothermia did not improve survival, but adversely affected the duration of shock, and inflammatory control. Induced hypothermia should not routinely be used in patients with septic shock. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.