High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin versus albumin 4% in paediatric toxic shock syndrome: a randomised controlled feasibility study.

Purpose: Toxic shock syndrome (TSS) is a rare disease responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IG) therapy in paediatric TSS could improve shock and organ failure, but more consistent efficacy and safety data are needed. Our objective was to determine whether a randomised clinical trial (RCT) assessing intravenous IG in TSS in children is feasible.
Methods: We performed a multicentre, feasibility, double-blind RCT assessing efficacy of high-dose intravenous IG versus albumin 4% (control group) within the first 12 hours of shock onset. Included patients were aged above 1 month and below 18 years with suspected TSS and septic shock. Feasibility was assessed by measuring inclusion rate, protocol compliance and missing data regarding death and the Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction-2 (PELOD-2) Score. Other secondary clinical outcomes were evaluated during hospital stay, at 60 day and 1 year.
Results: 28 patients, admitted in 6 paediatric intensive care units during 36 consecutive months and followed for 1 year, received the allocated treatment: 13 in intravenous IG group, 15 in control group. The median age was 10.6 years and the sex ratio was 1. Inclusion rate was above 50%, protocol deviations were below 30% and missing data regarding death and PELOD-2 Score below 10%. No difference concerning secondary clinical outcomes between groups was observed, and more adverse events were reported in the control group.
Conclusion: It seems to be feasible to conduct an RCT assessing intravenous IG efficacy and safety in paediatric TSS but must be realised internationally, with choice of a clinically relevant endpoint and a specific design in order to be realistic.
Trial Registration Number: NCT02219165.
Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.
(© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)