Pilot Study for the SQUEEZE Trial

NCT ID: NCT01973907

Last Updated: 2016-08-18

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

53 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2014-01-31

Study Completion Date

2016-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

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

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

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

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Septic Shock

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Usual Care Resuscitation Strategy

Decisions regarding the IV/IO administration of isotonic fluid boluses and/or the initiation and escalation of vasoactive medication infusions are left to the discretion of the treating physician and medical team. We ask that vasoactive medications not be initiated until at least 60 mL/kg (3 litres for children ≥ 50 kg) of isotonic fluid bolus therapy has been administered. The treating physician and medical team are advised to follow ACCM guidelines for the resuscitation of neonatal and pediatric septic shock and to target ACCM recommended therapeutic endpoints.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Fluid Sparing Resuscitation Strategy

The treating physician and medical team are advised to follow the assigned Fluid Sparing Resuscitation Strategy to guide decisions regarding the IV/IO administration of further isotonic fluid boluses, and the timing of initiation and escalation of vasoactive medication infusions to target the therapeutic endpoints recommended in the ACCM guidelines for the resuscitation of neonatal and pediatric septic shock.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Fluid Sparing Resuscitation Strategy

Intervention Type OTHER

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.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

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.

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1\. Age 29 days to less than 18 years of age

2a) Patient has Persistent Signs of Shock including one or more of the following: i) Vasoactive Medication Dependence ii) Hypotension (Systolic Blood Pressure and/or Mean Blood Pressure less than the 5th percentile for age) iii) Abnormal Perfusion (2 or more of: abnormal capillary refill, tachycardia, decreased level of consciousness, decreased urine output)

2b) Suspected or Confirmed Septic Shock (Shock due to Suspected or Confirmed Infectious Cause)

2c) Patient has received initial fluid resuscitation of: Minimum of 40 mL/kg of isotonic crystalloid (0.9% Normal Saline and/or Ringer's Lactate) and/or colloid (5% albumin) as fluid boluses within the previous 6 hours for patients weighing less than 50 kg, OR Minimum of 2 litres (2000 mL) of isotonic crystalloid (0.9% Normal Saline and/or Ringer's Lactate) and/or colloid (5% albumin) as fluid boluses within the previous 6 hours for patients weighing 50 kg or more

3\. Patient has Fluid Refractory Septic Shock as defined by the Presence of all of 2a, 2b, and 2c.

Exclusion Criteria

* Patient admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU)
* Patient requiring resuscitation in the Operating Room (OR) or Post-Anesthetic Care Unit (PACU)
* Full active resuscitative treatment not within the goals of care
* Shock Secondary to Cause other than Sepsis (i.e. obvious signs of cardiogenic shock, anaphylactic shock, hemorrhagic shock, spinal shock)
* Previous enrolment in this trial, where known by the research team
Minimum Eligible Age

29 Days

Maximum Eligible Age

17 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

McMaster University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Canadian Critical Care Trials Group

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

McMaster Children's Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Melissa J Parker, MD, MSc

Associate Professor of Pediatrics, McMaster University; Staff Physician, McMaster Children's Hospital

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Melissa J Parker, MD, MSc

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

McMaster University and McMaster Children's Hospital

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

McMaster Children's Hospital

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Parker MJ, Foster G, Fox-Robichaud A, Choong K, Mbuagbaw L, Thabane L; With the SQUEEZE Trial Steering Committee and on behalf of the SQUEEZE Trial Investigators, the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group, Pediatric Emergency Research Canada, and the Canadian Critical Care Translational Biology Group. Statistical analysis plan 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). Crit Care Resusc. 2024 Jun 22;26(2):123-134. doi: 10.1016/j.ccrj.2024.02.002. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 39072232 (View on PubMed)

Parker MJ, Thabane L, Fox-Robichaud A, Liaw P, Choong K; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group and the Canadian Critical Care Translational Biology Group. A trial to determine whether septic shock-reversal is quicker in pediatric patients randomized to an early goal-directed fluid-sparing strategy versus usual care (SQUEEZE): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2016 Nov 22;17(1):556. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1689-2.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 27876084 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

13-295

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Fluid Resuscitation in Early Septic Shock
NCT00819416 COMPLETED PHASE2
Septic Shock em Steroids
NCT01047670 UNKNOWN PHASE2/PHASE3
Lactate Kinetics in Septic Shock
NCT05349370 RECRUITING NA