NCT01973907

Pilot Study for the SQUEEZE Trial

Pilot Study for the SQUEEZE Trial: a Trial to Determine Whether Septic Shock Reversal is Quicker in Pediatric Patients Randomized to an Early Goal Directed Fluid-sparing Strategy vs. Usual Care (SQUEEZE)

• Status: Completed
• Phase: Phase 3
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 53 (actual)
• Sponsor: McMaster Children's Hospital · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 29 Days – 17 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

The purpose of the SQUEEZE Trial is to determine which fluid resuscitation strategy results in the best outcomes for children treated for suspected or confirmed septic shock. In this study, eligible children will be randomized to either the 'Usual Care Arm' or the 'Fluid Sparing Arm'. Children will receive treatment according to current ACCM Septic Shock Resuscitation Guidelines, with the assigned resuscitation strategy used to guide administration of further fluid boluses as well as the timing of initiation and escalation of vasoactive medications to achieve ACCM recommended hemodynamic targets.

Detailed description

Current pediatric surviving sepsis guidelines from the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) emphasize an early and goal-directed approach to resuscitation. These guidelines suggest that fluid resuscitation should be aggressive with repeated intravenous (IV) fluid boluses of 20 mL/kg, such that some children may require as much as 200 mL/kg of fluid to achieve therapeutic endpoints. The guidelines also recommend the initiation of vasoactive agents at the stage of "fluid refractory shock", i.e. when there is persistent hypoperfusion despite at least 60 ml/kg IV fluid. Improvements in pediatric septic shock survival have been attributed to adherence to the first iteration of the ACCM septic shock guidelines, and the use of goal directed targets. However, the largest and most publicized pediatric trial of fluid resuscitation in children with suspected septic shock (FEAST Trial), published in NEJM in 2011, demonstrated an increased mortality among children treated with aggressive fluid resuscitation in comparison to the conservative fluid resuscitation arm. As a result, the pediatric critical care community clearly acknowledges that these results, while important, are not necessarily generalizable to developed countries such as Canada. Emerging publications in the ICU literature suggest that excessive compared to conservative fluid administration in adults with septic shock worsens outcomes such as duration of mechanical ventilation, complications related to the third-spacing of fluids, length of ICU stay, and mortality. A systematic review published in August 2012 reveals a paucity of randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence apart from the FEAST trial examining the impact of fluid resuscitation on mortality in children with septic shock. This raises the important question of whether children in developed countries would also benefit from a fluid sparing resuscitation strategy to achieve the ACCM goal-directed targets. Use of such a fluid sparing strategy would, by default, require earlier initiation and preferential escalation of vasoactive medications to meet ACCM hemodynamic goals. The optimal degree of fluid resuscitation and the timing of initiation of vasoactive support in order to achieve therapeutic targets in children with septic shock remains unanswered. This Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial constitutes the first step in answering our research question of whether, in pediatric patients with septic shock, use of a fluid sparing strategy to achieve ACCM therapeutic goals, results in improved clinical outcomes without an increased risk of adverse events, compared to the usual care of aggressive fluid resuscitation as currently recommended by the ACCM guidelines. The purpose of the pilot study is to determine feasibility and inform the appropriate methodological design of the larger multi-centre RCT to fully answer our research question. The hypothesis of the pilot study is that the SQUEEZE Trial is feasible to conduct.

Conditions

• Septic Shock

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
OTHER	Fluid Sparing Resuscitation Strategy	Tier 1: Initiate IV/IO vasoactive medication infusion support immediately. Further IV/IO isotonic fluid bolus therapy \[crystalloid (0.9% Normal Saline or Ringers Lactate) or colloid (5% Albumin)\] should be avoided; small volume isotonic fluid boluses \[5-10 mL/kg (250-500 mL for participants ≥ 50 kg)\] may be provided if required due to A. Clinically unacceptable delay in ability to initiate vasoactive medication infusion(s) and/or 2. Documented intravascular hypovolemia. Tier 2: Vasoactive medication(s) should be preferentially titrated/escalated to achieve recommended ACCM hemodynamic goals. Further IV/IO isotonic fluid bolus therapy \[crystalloid (0.9% Normal Saline or Ringers Lactate) or colloid (5% Albumin)\] should be avoided; small volume isotonic fluid boluses \[5-10 mL/kg (250-500 mL for participants ≥ 50 kg)\] may be provided if required due to A. Documented intravascular hypovolemia. Intervention end: Patient is free from vasoactive medication support and shock is reversed.

Timeline

• Start date: 2014-01-01
• Primary completion: 2016-06-01
• Completion: 2016-06-01
• First posted: 2013-11-01
• Last updated: 2016-08-18

Locations

1 site across 1 country: Canada