Hemodynamics, fluids & transfusion
Direct assessment of microcirculation in shock: a randomized-controlled multicenter study
An erratum to this article was published (Intensive Care Med, Oct 2023 ↗)
Authors' conclusion
Integrating sublingual microcirculatory perfusion variables in the therapy plan resulted in treatment changes that do not improve survival at all.
Study context
- Population
- Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with shock (arterial lactate >2 mmol/L, requiring vasopressors despite adequate fluid resuscitation), any cause
- Participants
- 141 patients
- Comparison
- Intervention vs Routine care
- Interventionn = 69
- Routine caren = 72reference
- Primary endpoint
- 30-day mortality
- Follow-up
- 30 days
Methodological detailsprospective, multicentre, Sublingual sidestream-dark field (SDF) measurements at ICU admission (± 4 h) and 24 (± 4) hours later, performed blinded to the treatment team
- Prospective
- Multicentre
- Sublingual SDF measurements at ICU admission (± 4 h) and 24 (± 4) hours later, performed blinded to the treatment team
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
- 30-day mortality did not differ
Secondary outcomes
Adjustment in vasoactive drugs or fluids within the next hour
P = 0.009
Microcirculatory values · 24 h after admission
- Did not differ between groups
Safety
Serious adverse events
- No serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred
Parts of this Brief are withheld: the automatic checks could not confirm them against the abstract.
Original publication
Direct assessment of microcirculation in shock: a randomized-controlled multicenter study. Intensive Care Med. Published 6 June 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →