Log in | Register

Terlipressin versus norepinephrine as infusion in patients with septic shock: a multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial

Zi-Meng Liu| Juan Chen| Qiuye Kou| Qinhan Lin| Xiaobo Huang| Zhanhong Tang| Yan Kang| Ke Li| Lixin Zhou| Qing Song| Tongwen Sun| Ling Zhao| Xue Wang| Xiandi He| Chunting Wang| Benquan Wu| Jiandong Lin| Shiying Yuan| Qin Gu| Kejian Qian| Xianqing Shi| Yongwen Feng| Aihua Lin| Xiaoshun He| Xiang-Dong Guan
Original
Volume 44, Issue 11 / November , 2018

Pages 1816 - 1825

Abstract

Purpose

Recent clinical data suggest that terlipressin, a vasopressin analogue, may be more beneficial in septic shock patients than catecholamines. However, terlipressin’s effect on mortality is unknown. We set out to ascertain the efficacy and safety of continuous terlipressin infusion compared with norepinephrine (NE) in patients with septic shock.

Methods

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial, patients with septic shock recruited from 21 intensive care units in 11 provinces of China were randomised (1:1) to receive either terlipressin (20–160 µg/h with maximum infusion rate of 4 mg/day) or NE (4–30 µg/min) before open-label vasopressors. The primary endpoint was mortality 28 days after the start of infusion. Primary efficacy endpoint analysis and safety analysis were performed on the data from a modified intention-to-treat population.

Results

Between 1 January 2013 and 28 February 2016, 617 patients were randomised (312 to the terlipressin group, 305 to the NE group). The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 526 (85.3%) patients (260 in the terlipressin group and 266 in the NE group). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality rate between the terlipressin group (40%) and the NE group (38%) (odds ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.55–1.56]; p = 0.80). Change in SOFA score on day 7 was similar between the two groups: − 7 (IQR − 11 to 3) in the terlipressin group and − 6 (IQR − 10 to 5) in the NE group. There was no difference between the groups in the number of days alive and free of vasopressors. Overall, serious adverse events were more common in the terlipressin group than in the NE group (30% vs 12%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial, we observed no difference in mortality between terlipressin and NE infusion in patients with septic shock. Patients in the terlipressin group had a higher number of serious adverse events.

Trial registration

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: ID NCT01697410.

Keywords

References

  1. Annane D, Aegerter P, Jars-Guincestre MC, Guidet B (2003) Current epidemiology of septic shock: the CUB-Réa network. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 168:165–172
    • View reference on publisher's website
  2. Vincent JL, Sakr Y, Sprung CL (2006) Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study. Crit Care Med 34:344
    • View reference on publisher's website
  3. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW et al (2016) The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 315:801–810
    • View reference on publisher's website
  4. Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W et al (2017) Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med 43:304–377
  5. Mullner M, Urbanek B, Havel C, Losert H et al (2004) Vasopressors for shock. Cochrane Datab Syst Rev 3:CD3709
  6. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J et al (2008) Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 358:877–887
    • View reference on publisher's website
  7. Gordon AC, Mason AJ, Thirunavukkarasu N et al (2016) Effect of early vasopressin vs norepinephrine on kidney failure in patients with septic shock: the VANISH randomized clinical trial. JAMA 316:509–518
    • View reference on publisher's website
  8. Lange Matthias, Ertmer Christian, Westphal Martin (2009) Vasopressin vs. terlipressin in the treatment of cardiovascular failure in sepsis. Intensive Care Med 34:821–832
  9. Torgersen C, Dunser MW, Wenzel V et al (2010) Comparing two different arginine vasopressin doses in advanced vasodilatory shock: a randomized, controlled, open-label trial. Intensive Care Med 36:57
  10. Salazar M, Hu BB, Vazquez J et al (2015) Exogenous vasopressin-induced hyponatremia in patients with vasodilatory shock: two case reports and literature review. J Intensive Care Med 30:253
    • View reference on publisher's website
  11. Leone M, Albanèse J, Delmas A et al (2004) Terlipressin in catecholamine-resistant septic shock patients. Shock 22:314–319
    • View reference on publisher's website
  12. Morelli A, Ertmer C, Rehberg S et al (2009) Continuous terlipressin versus vasopressin infusion in septic shock (TERLIVAP): a randomized, controlled pilot study. Crit care 13:R130
    • View reference on publisher's website
  13. Sepra N, Nassar Junior AP, Cardoso SO et al (2012) Vasopressin and terlipressin in adult vasodilatory shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine randomized controlled trials. Crit Care 16:R154
    • View reference on publisher's website
  14. Polito Angelo, Parisini Emilio, Ricci Zaccaria et al (2012) Vasopressin for treatment of vasodilatory shock: an ESICM systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 38:9–19
  15. Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including The Pediatric Subgroup (2013) Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Intensive Care Med 39:165–228
  16. Gordon Lan KK, Demets DL (1983) Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika 70:659–663
    • View reference on publisher's website
  17. Fergusson D, Aaron SD, Guyatt G et al (2002) Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ 325:652–654
    • View reference on publisher's website
  18. SepNet Critical Care Trials Group (2016) Incidence of severe sepsis and septic shock in German intensive care units: the prospective, multicentre INSEP study. Intensive Care Med 42:1980–1989
  19. Vincent JL, de Mendonca A, Cantraine F et al (1998) Working Group on “Sepsis-Related Problems” of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care units: results of a multicenter, prospective study. Crit Care Med 26:1793–1800
    • View reference on publisher's website
  20. Levy MM, Macias WL, Vincent JL et al (2005) Early changes in organ function predict eventual survival in severe sepsis. Crit Care Med 33:2194–2201
    • View reference on publisher's website
  21. Ferreira FL, Bota DP, Bross A, Mélot C, Vincent JL (2001) Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. JAMA 286:1754–1758
    • View reference on publisher's website
  22. Lange M, Ertmer C, Rehberg S et al (2011) Effects of two different dosing regimens of terlipressin on organ functions in ovine endotoxemia. Inflamm Res 60:429–437
    • View reference on publisher's website
  23. Morelli Andrea, Rocco Monica, Conti Giorgio et al (2004) Effects of terlipressin on systemic and regional haemodynamics in catecholamine-treated hyperkinetic septic shock. Intensive Care Med 30:597–604
  24. Rehberg Sebastian, Ertmer Christian, Köhler Gabriele et al (2009) Role of arginine vasopressin and terlipressin as first-line vasopressor agents in fulminant ovine septic shock. Intensive Care Med 35:1286–1296
  25. Russell JA, Vincent JL, Kjølbye AL et al (2017) Selepressin, a novel selective vasopressin V1A agonist, is an effective substitute for norepinephrine in a phase IIa randomized, placebo-controlled trial in septic shock patients. Crit Care 21:213
    • View reference on publisher's website
  26. Ozel Coskun BD, Karaman A, Gorkem H et al (2014) Terlipressin-induced ischemic skin necrosis: a rare association. Am J Case Rep 15:476–479
    • View reference on publisher's website
  27. Albanèse J, Leone M, Delmas A, Martin C (2005) Terlipressin or norepinephrine in hyperdynamic septic shock: a prospective, randomized study. Crit Care Med 33:1897–1902
    • View reference on publisher's website
  28. Xiao X, Zhang J, Wang Y et al (2016) Effects of terlipressin on patients with sepsis via improving tissue blood flow. J Surg Res 200:274–282
    • View reference on publisher's website

Sign In

Connect with ICM

Top 5 Articles Editors Picks Supplement