NCT04844801

Rate, Rhythm or Risk Control for New-onset Supraventricular Arrhythmia During Septic Shock: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of Three Care Strategies in Cases of New-onset Supraventricular Arrhythmia During Septic Shock : a Randomized Controlled Trial

• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 240 (estimated)
• Sponsor: Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

New-onset supraventricular arrhythmia (NOSVA) is reported in 40 % of patients with septic shock and is associated with hemodynamic alterations and mortality. The lack of consensus regarding best practices for the management of NOSVA in this setting has led to major variations in practice patterns. Observational studies reported three usual strategies: (i) heart rate control (hereafter rate control) with the use of antiarrhythmic drugs, essentially based on low dose of amiodarone, (ii) rhythm control with the use of antiarrhythmic drugs, essentially based on high dose of amiodarone, and electrical cardioversionand (iii) modifiable NOSVA risk factors control (hereafter risk control) without using antiarrhythmic drugs. Risk control would minimize adverse events of antiarrhythmic drugs. Rhythm control would rapidly improve haemodynamics via restoring diastole and decreasing cardiac metabolic demand, while minimizing exposure to anticoagulation. Heart-Rate control, would limit potential adverse events of high dose of amiodarone and of electrical cardioversion (only in patients intubated on mechanical ventilation), while controlling haemodynamics. Therefore, it seems important to compare these three strategies. Our hypothesis is dual: first, that heart-rate control and rhythm control each improve hemodynamics with in fine a decreased mortality, as compared to a risk control; second, that rhythm control outperforms rate control in this setting. This is a multicenter, parallel-group, open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial to compare the effectiveness and safety of these three strategies (risk control, rate control and rhythm control) for NOSVA during septic shock.

Detailed description

All consecutive adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit with NOSVA during septic shock will be included in the presence of inclusion criteria and in the absence of exclusion criteria. Randomization, performed immediately after the inclusion (Day-1), in 1:1:1 ratio will be stratified on center. Then the patient will receive the randomized strategy: risk control, rate control or rhythm control. Before inclusion, the informed consent will be proposed to the patient. If the patient is unable to give his/her consent, the informed consent of the next-of-kin will be sought by study investigator. In the case the next-of-kins are unidentified and/or unreachable, an emergency procedure will be applied. Patient consent will be sought as soon as their state of health allows it. According to clinical guidelines, patients in all groups will receive therapeutic anticoagulation if NOSVA \> 48 hours and in the absence of contraindication. In all groups, recommendations for the management of septic shock will be followed. After day-7 (or hospital discharge if before J7), NOSVA treatment will be left at the discretion of attending physicians. Evaluation criteria will be collected at day-2, day-3, day-7 (or at hospital discharge if before day-7), at the day of ICU discharge and at Day-28. If the patient has been discharged before Day-28, the vital status may be obtained by phone call at Day-28.

Conditions

• Supraventricular Arrhythmia
• Septic Shock

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	Risk control strategy	* Magnesium sulfate 2g intravenous bolus over 20 mn (if creatinine clearance \>30 mL/min) * Control of the modifiable NOSVA risk factors: hypovolemia, sepsis, metabolic disorders (e.g., hypokalemia, hyponatremia), acidosis, hypoxia, excess cardiac inotropism of vasopressors, central venous catheter malposition, hyperthermia.
PROCEDURE	Heart-Rate control strategy:	* Risk-control as described above * "Low dose" amiodarone: * Intravenous loading bolus (day-1): bolus of 4 mg/kg IV over 1hour (maximum 300 mg IV over 1 hour ) * Enteral maintenance dose (oral or via gastric tube) (day-1 to day-7) 200mg/24hour in a single dose for 7 days (150 mg intravenous over 1hour if enteral route is unavailable)
PROCEDURE	Rhythm control strategy:	* Risk control as described above * "High dose" amiodarone: * Intravenous loading dose (day-1): initial bolus 7 mg/kg over 1 hour (maximum 600 mg i.e. 4 IVL vials over 1 hour); followed by continuous intravenous maintenance: for a total of 1200 mg over the first 24 hours (infusion pump) * Enteral dose maintenance Day-2 and day-3: 1200 mg/ 24 hours in three doses for 48hours (720 mg continuous intravenous over 24 hours if enteral route is unavailable). Day-4 to day-7: 200 mg/24 hours once a day (150 mg intravenous over 1hourr if enteral route is unavailable) - Electrical cardioversion (only in patients intubated on mechanical ventilation) 1 to 3 external electric shocks starting at 200J if: * NOSVA persists after initial bolus of amiodarone AND norepinephrine base (or epinephrine base) doses \> 0.3 µg/kg/min; * NOSVA persists more than 6 hours after initial IV loading dose of amiodarone. NB: Beyond day 7 (or after discharge from intensive care if this occurs before da

Timeline

• Start date: 2021-11-09
• Primary completion: 2026-02-01
• Completion: 2026-03-01
• First posted: 2021-04-14
• Last updated: 2026-01-07

Locations

1 site across 1 country: France