Norepinephrine weaning guided by the Hypotension Prediction Index in vasoplegic shock after cardiac surgery: protocol for a single-centre, open-label randomised controlled trial - the NORAHPI study.

INTRODUCTION: Norepinephrine (NE) is the first-line recommended vasopressor for restoring mean arterial pressure (MAP) in vasoplegic syndrome (vs) following cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. However, solely focusing on target MAP values can lead to acute hypotension episodes during NE weaning. The Hypotension Prediction Index (HPI) is a machine learning algorithm embedded in the Acumen IQ device, capable of detecting hypotensive episodes before their clinical manifestation. This study evaluates the clinical benefits of an NE weaning strategy guided by the HPI. MATERIAL AND ANALYSIS: The Norahpi trial is a prospective, open-label, single-centre study that randomises 142 patients. Inclusion criteria encompass adult patients scheduled for on-pump cardiac surgery with postsurgical NE administration for vs patient randomisation occurs once they achieve haemodynamic stability (MAP>65 mm Hg) for at least 4 hours on NE. Patients will be allocated to the intervention group (n=71) or the control group (n=71). In the intervention group, the NE weaning protocol is based on MAP>65 mmHg and HPI<80 and solely on MAP>65 mm Hg in the control group. Successful NE weaning is defined as achieving NE weaning within 72 hours of inclusion. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed. The primary endpoint will compare the duration of NE administration between the two groups. The secondary endpoints will include the prevalence, frequency and time of arterial hypotensive events monitored by the Acumen IQ device. Additionally, we will assess cumulative diuresis, the total dose of NE, and the number of protocol weaning failures. We also aim to evaluate the occurrence of postoperative complications, the length of stay and all-cause mortality at 30 days. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been secured from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University Hospital of Amiens (IRB-ID:2023-A01058-37). The findings will be shared through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05922982.

The REPERFUSE study protocol: The effects of vasopressor therapy on renal perfusion in patients with septic shock-A mechanistically focused randomised control trial.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of septic shock and together these conditions carry a high mortality risk. In septic patients who develop severe AKI, renal cortical perfusion is deficient despite normal macrovascular organ blood flow. This intra-renal perfusion abnormality may be amenable to pharmacological manipulation, which may offer mechanistic insight into the pathophysiology of septic AKI. The aim of the current study is to investigate the effects of vasopressin and angiotensin II on renal microcirculatory perfusion in a cohort of patients with septic shock. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this single centre, mechanistically focussed, randomised controlled study, 45 patients with septic shock will be randomly allocated to either of the study vasopressors (vasopressin or angiotensin II) or standard therapy (norepinephrine). Infusions will be titrated to maintain a mean arterial pressure (MAP) target set by the attending clinician. Renal microcirculatory assessment will be performed for the cortex and medulla using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and urinary oxygen tension (pO2), respectively. Renal macrovascular flow will be assessed via renal artery ultrasound. Measurement of systemic macrovascular flow will be performed through transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and microvascular flow via sublingual incident dark field (IDF) video microscopy. Measures will be taken at baseline, +1 and +24hrs following infusion of the study drug commencing. Blood and urine samples will also be collected at the measurement time points. Longitudinal data will be compared between groups and over time. DISCUSSION: Vasopressors are integral to the management of patients with septic shock. This study aims to further understanding of the relationship between this therapy, renal perfusion and the development of AKI. In addition, using CEUS and urinary pO2, we hope to build a more complete picture of renal perfusion in septic shock by interrogation of the constituent parts of the kidney. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at academic meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The REPERFUSE study was registered on Clinical Trials.gov (NCT06234592) on the 30th Jan 24.

Cardiogenic Shock: An Overview.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a complex and dreadful condition for which effective treatments remain unclear. The concerningly high mortality rate of CS emphasizes a need for developing effective therapies to reduce its mortality and reverse its detrimental course. This article aims to provide an updated and evidence-based review of the pathophysiology of CS and the related pharmacotherapeutics with a special focus on vasoactive and inotropic agents.

Impact of Blood Pressure Targets in Patients With Heart Failure Undergoing Postresuscitation Care: A Subgroup Analysis From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: To assess the effect of targeting higher or lower blood pressure during postresucitation intensive care among comatose patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with a history of heart failure. METHODS: The BOX trial (Blood Pressure and Oxygenation Targets After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) was a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, multicenter study comparing titration of vasopressors toward a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 63 versus 77 mm Hg during postresuscitation intensive care. Patients with a history of heart failure were included in this substudy. Pulmonary artery catheters were inserted shortly after admission. History of heart failure was assessed through chart review of all included patients. The primary outcome was cardiac index during the first 72 hours. Secondary outcomes were left ventricular ejection fraction, heart rate, stroke volume, renal replacement therapy and all-cause mortality at 365 days. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients (17% of the BOX cohort) had a history of heart failure (patients with left ventricular ejection fraction, ≤40%: 103 [77%]) of which 71 (53%) were allocated to a MAP of 77 mm Hg. Cardiac index at intensive care unit arrival was 1.77±0.11 L/min·m-2 in the MAP63-group and 1.78±0.17 L/min·m-2 in the MAP77, P=0.92. During the next 72 hours, the mean difference was 0.15 (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.35) L/min·m-2; Pgroup=0.22. Left ventricular ejection fraction and stroke volume was similar between the groups. Patients allocated to MAP77 had significantly elevated heart rate (mean difference 6 [1-12] beats/min, Pgroup=0.03). Vasopressor usage was also significantly increased (P=0.006). At 365 days, 69 (51%) of the patients had died. The adjusted hazard ratio for 365 day mortality was 1.38 (0.84-2.27), P=0.20 and adjusted odds ratio for renal replacement therapy was 2.73 (0.84-8.89; P=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: In resuscitated patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with a history of heart failure, allocation to a higher blood pressure target resulted in significantly increased heart rate in the higher blood pressure-target group. However, no certain differences was found for cardiac index, left ventricular ejection fraction or stroke volume. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03141099.

A Clinical Review of Vasopressors in Emergency Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Vasopressor medications raise blood pressure through vasoconstriction and are essential in reversing the hypotension seen in many critically ill patients. Previously, vasopressor administration was largely limited to continuous infusions through central venous access. OBJECTIVES OF THE REVIEW: This review addresses the clinical use of vasopressors in various shock states, including practical considerations and innovations in vasopressor administration. The focus is on the clinical administration of vasopressors across a range of shock states, including hypovolemic, distributive, cardiogenic, and obstructive shock. DISCUSSION: Criteria for starting vasopressors are not clearly defined, though early use may be beneficial. A number of physiologic factors affect the body's response to vasopressors, such as acidosis and adrenal insufficiency. Peripheral and push-dose administration of vasopressors are becoming more common. Distributive shock is characterized by inappropriate vasodilation and vasopressors play a crucial role in maintaining adequate blood pressure. The use of vasopressors is more controversial in hypovolemic shock, as the preferred treatment is correction of the volume deficit. Evidence for vasopressors is limited in cardiogenic shock. For obstructive shock, vasopressors can temporize a patient's blood pressure until definitive therapy can reverse the underlying cause. CONCLUSION: Across the categories of shock states, norepinephrine has wide applicability and is a reasonable first-line agent for shock of uncertain etiology. Keeping a broad differential when hypotension is refractory to vasopressors may help to identify adjunctive treatments in physiologic states that impair vasopressor effectiveness. Peripheral administration of vasopressors is safe and facilitates early administration, which may help to improve outcomes in some shock states.

Randomised, controlled, feasibility trial comparing vasopressor infusion administered via peripheral cannula versus central venous catheter for critically ill adults: A study protocol.

BACKGROUND: When clinicians need to administer a vasopressor infusion, they are faced with the choice of administration via either peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) or central venous catheter (CVC). Vasopressor infusions have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVC) rather than Peripheral Intra Venous Catheters (PIVC), primarily due to concerns of extravasation and resultant tissue injury. This practice is not guided by contemporary randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence. Observational data suggests safety of vasopressor infusion via PIVC. To address this evidence gap, we have designed the "Vasopressors Infused via Peripheral or Central Access" (VIPCA) RCT. METHODS: The VIPCA trial is a single-centre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT. Eligible critically ill patients requiring a vasopressor infusion will be identified by emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU) staff and randomised to receive vasopressor infusion via either PIVC or CVC. Primary outcome is feasibility, a composite of recruitment rate, proportion of eligible patients randomised, protocol fidelity, retention and missing data. Primary clinical outcome is days alive and out of hospital up to day-30. Secondary outcomes will include safety and other clinical outcomes, and process and cost measures. Specific aspects of safety related to vasopressor infusions such as extravasation, leakage, device failure, tissue injury and infection will be assessed. DISCUSSION: VIPCA is a feasibility RCT whose outcomes will inform the feasibility and design of a multicentre Phase-3 trial comparing routes of vasopressor delivery. The exploratory economic analysis will provide input data for the full health economic analysis which will accompany any future Phase-3 RCT.

Mortality, morbidity & clinical outcome with different types of vasopressors in out of hospital cardiac arrest patients- a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of various vasopressors in cardiac arrest patients in terms of clinical, morbidity, and mortality outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using online databases (MeSH terms: MEDLINE (Ovid), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from 1997 to 2023 for relevant English language studies. The primary outcomes of interest for this study included short-term survival leading to death, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, neurological outcomes, survival to hospital admission, myocardial infarction, and incidence of arrhythmias. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, 26 studies, including 16 RCTs and ten non-RCTs, were evaluated. The focus was on the efficacy of epinephrine, vasopressin, methylprednisolone, dopamine, and their combinations in medical emergencies. Epinephrine treatment was associated with better odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 1.52, 95%CI [1.20, 1.94]; p < 0.001) and achieving ROSC (OR = 3.60, 95% CI [3.45, 3.76], P < 0.00001)) over placebo but not in other outcomes of interest such as short-term survival/ death at 28-30 days, survival to hospital admission, or neurological function. In addition, our analysis indicates non-superiority of vasopressin or epinephrine vasopressin-plus-epinephrine therapy over epinephrine monotherapy except for survival to hospital admission where the combinatorial therapy was associated with better outcome (0.76, 95%CI [0.64, 0.92]; p = 0.004). Similarly, we noted the non-superiority of vasopressin-plus-methylprednisolone versus placebo. Finally, while higher odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 3.35, 95%CI [1.81, 6.2]; p < 0.001) and ROSC (OR = 2.87, 95%CI [1.97, 4.19]; p < 0.001) favoring placebo over VSE therapy were observed, the risk of lethal arrhythmia was not statistically significant. There was insufficient literature to assess the effects of dopamine versus other treatment modalities meta-analytically. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicated that only epinephrine yielded superior outcomes among vasopressors than placebo, albeit limited to survival to hospital discharge and ROSC. Additionally, we demonstrate the non-superiority of vasopressin over epinephrine, although vasopressin could not be compared to placebo due to the paucity of data. The addition of vasopressin to epinephrine treatment only improved survival to hospital admission.

When can we start early enteral nutrition safely in patients with shock on vasopressors?

Shock is a common critical illness characterized by microcirculatory disorders and insufficient tissue perfusion. Patients with shock and hemodynamic instability generally require vasopressors to maintain the target mean arterial pressure. Enteral nutrition (EN) is an important therapeutic intervention in critically ill patients and has unique benefits for intestinal recovery. However, the initiation of early EN in patients with shock receiving vasopressors remains controversial. Current guidelines make conservative and vague recommendations regarding early EN support in patients with shock. Increasing studies demonstrates that early EN delivery is safe and feasible in patients with shock receiving vasopressors; however, this evidence is based on observational studies. Changes in gastrointestinal blood flow vary by vasopressor and inotrope and are complex. The risk of gastrointestinal complications, especially the life-threatening complications of non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia and non-occlusive bowel necrosis, cannot be ignored in patients with shock during early EN support. It remains a therapeutic challenge in critical care nutrition therapy to determine the initiation time of EN in patients with shock receiving vasopressors and the safe threshold region for initiating EN with vasopressors. Therefore, the current review aimed to summarize the evidence on the optimal and safe timing of early EN initiation in patients with shock receiving vasopressors to improve clinical practice.

Comparative efficacy of volume expansion, inotropes and vasopressors in preterm neonates with probable transitional circulatory instability in the first week of life: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There exists limited agreement on the recommendations for the treatment of transitional circulatory instability (TCI) in preterm neonates OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of various interventions used to treat TCI METHODS: Medline and Embase were searched from inception to 21st July 2023. Two authors extracted the data independently. A Bayesian random effects network meta-analysis was used. Recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. INTERVENTIONS: Dopamine, dobutamine, epinephrine, hydrocortisone, vasopressin, milrinone, volume and placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality, major brain injury (MBI) (intraventricular haemorrhage > grade 2 or cystic periventricular leukomalacia), necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) ≥stage 2 and treatment response (as defined by the author). RESULTS: 15 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included from the 1365 titles and abstracts screened. Clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the critical outcome of mortality. For the outcome of MBI, epinephrine possibly decreased the risk when compared to dobutamine and milrinone (very low certainty). Epinephrine was possibly associated with a lesser risk of NEC when compared with dopamine, dobutamine, hydrocortisone and milrinone (very low certainty). Dopamine was possibly associated with a lesser risk of NEC when compared with dobutamine (very low certainty). Vasopressin possibly decreased the risk of NEC compared with dopamine, dobutamine, hydrocortisone and milrinone (very low certainty). Clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the outcome response to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Epinephrine may be used as the first-line drug in preterm neonates with TCI, the evidence certainty being very low. We suggest future trials evaluating the management of TCI with an emphasis on objective criteria to define it.

Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1: Diagnosis and Treatment.

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a feared complication in patients with advanced cirrhosis and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While recognized as a distinct physiologic condition for well over one hundred years, a lack of objective diagnostic tests has made the diagnosis one of exclusion. Since 1979, multiple sets of diagnostic criteria have been proposed. Though varying in detail, the principal intent of these criteria is to identify patients with severe, functional acute kidney injury that is unresponsive to volume resuscitation and exclude those with structural injury. However, accurate differential diagnosis remains challenging. Recently, multiple urinary biomarkers of kidney injury, including neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, have been studied as a means of objectively phenotyping etiologies of acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis. Along with markers reflecting tubular functional integrity, including the fractional excretion of sodium, injury markers will likely be incorporated into future diagnostic criteria. Making an accurate diagnosis is critical, as therapeutic options exist for HRS but must be given in a timely manner and only to those patients likely to benefit. Terlipressin, an analog of vasopressin, is the first line of therapy for HRS in much of the world and has recently been approved for use in the United States. Significant questions remain regarding the optimal dosing strategy, metrics for titration, and the potential role of point-of-care ultrasound to help guide concurrent albumin administration.

A retrospective, multi-agency 'target trial emulation' for the comparison of post-resuscitation epinephrine to norepinephrine.

INTRODUCTION: Epinephrine and norepinephrine are the two most commonly used prehospital vasopressors in the United States. Prior studies have suggested that use of a post-ROSC epinephrine infusion may be associated with increased rearrest and mortality in comparison to use of norepinephrine. We used target trial emulation methodology to compare the rates of rearrest and mortality between the groups of OHCA patients receiving these vasopressors in the prehospital setting. METHODS: Adult (18-80 years of age) non-traumatic OHCA patients in the 2018-2022 ESO Data Collaborative datasets with a documented post-ROSC norepinephrine or epinephrine infusion were included in this study. Logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate the association between vasopressor agent and outcome using two sets of covariables. The first set of covariables included standard Utstein factors, the dispatch to ROSC interval, the ROSC to vasopressor interval, and the follow-up interval. The second set added prehospital systolic blood pressure and SpO2 values. Kaplan-Meier time-to-event analysis was also conducted and the vasopressor groups were compared using a multivariable Cox regression model. RESULTS: Overall, 1,893 patients treated by 309 EMS agencies were eligible for analysis. 1,010 (53.4%) received an epinephrine infusion and 883 (46.7%) received a norepinephrine infusion as their initial vasopressor. Adjusted analyses did not discover an association between vasopressor agent and rearrest (aOR: 0.93 [0.72, 1.21]) or mortality (aOR: 1.00 [0.59, 1.69]). CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-agency target trial emulation, the use of a post-resuscitation epinephrine infusion was not associated with increased odds of rearrest in comparison to the use of a norepinephrine infusion.

VASOPRESSOR REDUCTION EFFECT OF POLYMYXIN B HEMOPERFUSION IN PATIENTS WITH PERITONITIS-INDUCED SEPTIC SHOCK: A PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED ANALYSIS.

ABSTRACT: Background : This study aimed to evaluate the effect of polymyxin B hemoperfusion (PMX-HP) in patients with peritonitis-induced septic shock who still required high-dose vasopressors after surgical source control. Methods : This retrospective study included adult patients admitted to the surgical intensive care unit (ICU) at Seoul National University Hospital between July 2014 and February 2021 who underwent major abdominal surgery to control the source of sepsis. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether PMX-HP was applied after surgery or not. The primary and secondary endpoints were the vasopressor reduction effect, and in-ICU mortality, respectively. Propensity score matching was performed to compare the vasopressor reduction effect. Results : A total of 338 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 23 patients underwent PMX-HP postoperatively, whereas 315 patients did not during the study period. Serum norepinephrine concentration decreased over time regardless of whether PMX-HP was applied. However, it decreased more rapidly in the PMX-HP(+) group than in the PMX-HP(-) group. There were no significant differences in demographics including age, sex, body mass index, and most underlying comorbidities between the two groups. Risk factors for in-ICU mortality were identified by comparing patient characteristics and perioperative factors between the two groups using multivariate analysis. Conclusion : For patients with peritonitis-induced septic shock, PMX-HP rapidly reduces the requirement of vasopressors immediately after surgery but does not reduce in-ICU mortality. This effect could potentially accelerate recovery from shock, reduce sequelae from vasopressors, and ultimately improve quality of life after discharge.

Outcomes of Vasopressin-Receptor Agonists Versus Norepinephrine in Adults With Perioperative Hypotension: A Systematic Review.

Consensus statements recommend the use of norepinephrine and/or vasopressin for hypotension in cardiac surgery. However, there is a paucity of data among other surgical subgroups and vasopressin analogs. Therefore, the authors conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare vasopressin-receptor agonists with norepinephrine for hypotension among those undergoing surgery with general anesthesia. This review was registered prospectively (CRD42022316328). Literature searches were conducted by a medical librarian to November 28, 2023, across MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science. The authors included RCTs enrolling adults (≥18 years of age) undergoing any surgery under general anesthesia who developed perioperative hypotension and comparing vasopressin receptor agonists with norepinephrine. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2). Thirteen (N = 719) RCTs were included, of which 8 (n = 585) enrolled patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Five trials compared norepinephrine with vasopressin, 4 trials with terlipressin, 1 trial with ornipressin, and the other 3 trials used vasopressin as adjuvant therapy. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality. Among patients with vasoplegic shock after cardiac surgery, vasopressin was associated with significantly lower intensive care unit (N = 385; 2 trials; mean 100.8 v 175.2 hours, p < 0.005; median 120 [IQR 96-168] v 144 [96-216] hours, p = 0.007) and hospital lengths of stay, as well as fewer cases of acute kidney injury and atrial fibrillation compared with norepinephrine. One trial also found that terlipressin was associated with a significantly lower incidence of acute kidney injury versus norepinephrine overall. Vasopressin and norepinephrine restored mean arterial blood pressure with no significant differences; however, the use of vasopressin with norepinephrine was associated with significantly higher mean arterial blood pressure versus norepinephrine alone. Further high-quality trials are needed to determine pooled treatment effects, especially among noncardiac surgical patients and those treated with vasopressin analogs.

Understanding How Clinicians Personalize Fluid and Vasopressor Decisions in Early Sepsis Management.

Importance: Recent sepsis trials suggest that fluid-liberal vs fluid-restrictive resuscitation has similar outcomes. These trials used generalized approaches to resuscitation, and little is known about how clinicians personalize fluid and vasopressor administration in practice. Objective: To understand how clinicians personalize decisions about resuscitation in practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study of US clinicians in the Society of Critical Care Medicine membership roster was conducted from November 2022 to January 2023. Surveys contained 10 vignettes of patients with sepsis where pertinent clinical factors (eg, fluid received and volume status) were randomized. Respondents selected the next steps in management. Data analysis was conducted from February to September 2023. Exposure: Online Qualtrics clinical vignette survey. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using multivariable logistic regression, the associations of clinical factors with decisions about fluid administration, vasopressor initiation, and vasopressor route were tested. Results are presented as adjusted proportions with 95% CIs. Results: Among 11 203 invited clinicians, 550 (4.9%; 261 men [47.5%] and 192 women [34.9%]; 173 with >15 years of practice [31.5%]) completed at least 1 vignette and were included. A majority were physicians (337 respondents [61.3%]) and critical care trained (369 respondents [67.1%]). Fluid volume already received by a patient was associated with resuscitation decisions. After 1 L of fluid, an adjusted 82.5% (95% CI, 80.2%-84.8%) of respondents prescribed additional fluid and an adjusted 55.0% (95% CI, 51.9%-58.1%) initiated vasopressors. After 5 L of fluid, an adjusted 17.5% (95% CI, 15.1%-19.9%) of respondents prescribed more fluid while an adjusted 92.7% (95% CI, 91.1%-94.3%) initiated vasopressors. More respondents prescribed fluid when the patient examination found dry vs wet (ie, overloaded) volume status (adjusted proportion, 66.9% [95% CI, 62.5%-71.2%] vs adjusted proportion, 26.5% [95% CI, 22.3%-30.6%]). Medical history, respiratory status, lactate trend, and acute kidney injury had small associations with fluid and vasopressor decisions. In 1023 of 1127 vignettes (90.8%) where the patient did not have central access, respondents were willing to start vasopressors through a peripheral intravenous catheter. In cases where patients were already receiving peripheral norepinephrine, respondents were more likely to place a central line at higher norepinephrine doses of 0.5 µg/kg/min (adjusted proportion, 78.0%; 95% CI, 74.7%-81.2%) vs 0.08 µg/kg/min (adjusted proportion, 25.2%; 95% CI, 21.8%-28.5%) and after 24 hours (adjusted proportion, 59.5%; 95% CI, 56.6%-62.5%) vs 8 hours (adjusted proportion, 47.1%; 95% CI, 44.0%-50.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that fluid volume received is the predominant factor associated with ongoing fluid and vasopressor decisions, outweighing many other clinical factors. Peripheral vasopressor use is common. Future studies aimed at personalizing resuscitation must account for fluid volumes and should incorporate specific tools to help clinicians personalize resuscitation.

Evaluation of the early use of norepinephrine in major abdominal surgery on medical and surgical postoperative complications: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (EPON STUDY).

BACKGROUND: Post-induction anaesthesia often promotes intraoperative hypotension (IOH) that can worsen postoperative outcomes. This study aims to assess the benefit of norepinephrine versus ephedrine at the induction of anaesthesia to prevent postoperative complications following major abdominal surgery by preventing IOH. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The EPON STUDY is a prospective single-centre randomised controlled trial with the planned inclusion of 500 patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery at the Amiens University Hospital. The inclusion criteria are patients aged over 50 years weighing more than 50 kg with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score of ≥2 undergoing major abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia. Patients are allocated either to the intervention group (n=250) or the standard group (n=250). In the intervention group, the prevention of post-induction IOH is performed with norepinephrine (dilution to 0.016 mg/mL) using an electric syringe pump at a rate of 0.48 mg/h (30 mL/h) from the start of anaesthesia and then titrated to achieve the haemodynamic target. In the control group, the prevention of post-induction IOH is performed with manual titration of ephedrine, with a maximal dose of 30 mg, followed by perfusion with norepinephrine. In both groups, the haemodynamic target to maintain is a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mm Hg or 70 mm Hg for patients with a medical history of hypertension. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed. The primary outcome is the Clavien-Dindo score assessed up to 30 days postoperatively. The secondary endpoints are the length of hospital stay and length of stay in an intensive care unit/postoperative care unit; postoperative renal function; postoperative cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, haematological and infectious complications at 1 month; and volume of intraoperative vascular filling and mortality at 1 month. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the committee of protection of the persons of Ile de France in May 2021 (number 21 05 41). The authors will be involved in disseminating the research findings (through attending conferences and co-authoring papers). The results of the study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05276596.