Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine as the Initial Vasoactive Agent in Pediatric Septic Shock: A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial for Recruitment Rates and Protocol Adherence, the Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine in Pediatric Septic Shock Trial.

Background and aims: Pediatric guidelines recommend initial resuscitation of septic shock using either epinephrine or norepinephrine as first-line support. However, there are no trials comparing these two agents. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial was to test the feasibility of a st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine Vol. 29; no. 9; pp. 738 - 747
Autores principales: Nataraj, Rajeshwari, Dalal, Parth, Vijayaraghavan, Bharath K. T., Venkatachalam, Priyavarthini, Kumar, Vasanth, Lakshmanan, Chidambaram, Schlapbach, Luregn J., Kissoon, Niranjan, Ranjit, Suchitra
Formato: research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers Private Limited Sep2025
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=188661690&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 188661690
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09725229
        SV5
      jtl: Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine
      issn: 09725229
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Sep2025
      vid: 29
      iid: 9
      pid: 50372
      pub: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers Private Limited
    artinfo:
      ui:
        188661690
        188661690
        188661690
        10.5005/jp-journals-10071-25043
        188661690
      ppf: 738
      ppct: 9
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine as the Initial Vasoactive Agent in Pediatric Septic Shock: A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial for Recruitment Rates and Protocol Adherence, the Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine in Pediatric Septic Shock Trial.
      aug:
        au:
          Nataraj, Rajeshwari
          Dalal, Parth
          Vijayaraghavan, Bharath K. T.
          Venkatachalam, Priyavarthini
          Kumar, Vasanth
          Lakshmanan, Chidambaram
          Schlapbach, Luregn J.
          Kissoon, Niranjan
          Ranjit, Suchitra
        affil: Department of Paediatric Intensive Care, Apollo Children's Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
      sug:
        subj:
          Shock, Septic Drug Therapy
          Norepinephrine Therapeutic Use
          Epinephrine Therapeutic Use
          Resuscitation
          Guideline Adherence
          Research Subject Recruitment
          Research Protocols
          Human India
          Funding Source
          Randomized Controlled Trials
          Random Assignment
          Pilot Studies
          Double-Blind Studies
          Descriptive Statistics
          Intensive Care Units, Pediatric
          India
          Exploratory Research
          Male
          Female
          Infant, Newborn
          Infant
          Child, Preschool
          Child
          Adolescence
          Data Analysis Software
          Checklists
          Adverse Drug Event
          Infant, Newborn: birth-1 month
          Infant: 1-23 months
          Child, Preschool: 2-5 years
          Child: 6-12 years
          Adolescent: 13-18 years
          Male
          Female
      ab: Background and aims: Pediatric guidelines recommend initial resuscitation of septic shock using either epinephrine or norepinephrine as first-line support. However, there are no trials comparing these two agents. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial was to test the feasibility of a study protocol, specifically in terms of recruitment rates and protocol adherence, comparing epinephrine and norepinephrine as first-line vasoactive agents in pediatric septic shock. Patients and methods: A double-blinded, randomized controlled single-center study was conducted in the Emergency Medicine Department (ED) and pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) at a tertiary referral hospital in India. Thirty children aged between 1 month and 17 years with suspected septic shock, in whom signs of shock persisted after the initial fluid bolus, were recruited. Participants were randomized: 1:1 to receive either epinephrine or norepinephrine (each 15), initiated at 0.05-0.1 µg/kg/min. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment rates, randomization to study-drug initiation time, and adherence to protocol. Exploratory clinical outcomes included proportion of shock resolution, adverse events, and hospital mortality. Results: Of 44 screened patients, 10 met exclusion criteria and 4 declined consents, with a recruitment rate of 3.2 patients/month. The median time to vasoactive initiation after randomization was 12 minutes (IQR 8-15). The median time for shock resolution was 31 hours (IQR 10.8-51.2) and 14 hours (IQR 11.5-16.5) in the epinephrine and norepinephrine groups, respectively. Adverse events meeting pre-determined stopping criteria occurred in 7/16 and 1/15 in the epinephrine and norepinephrine groups, respectively. One patient in each group died. Conclusions: A protocol randomizing children with septic shock to epinephrine vs norepinephrine was feasible in terms of protocol adherence and recruitment rates. These findings can inform the design of a definitive multicenter trial powered for patient-centered endpoints.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        randomized controlled trial
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N