reviewNew England Journal of MedicineMar 21, 2017BRONZE OA

Early, Goal-Directed Therapy for Septic Shock — A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis

TPThe PRISM Investigators

Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

Background

After a single-center trial and observational studies suggesting that early, goal-directed therapy (EGDT) reduced mortality from septic shock, three multicenter trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe) showed no benefit. This meta-analysis of individual patient data from the three recent trials was designed prospectively to improve statistical power and explore heterogeneity of treatment effect of EGDT.

Methods

We harmonized entry criteria, intervention protocols, outcomes, resource-use measures, and data collection across the trials and specified all analyses before unblinding. After completion of the trials, we pooled data, excluding the protocol-based standard-therapy group from the ProCESS trial, and resolved residual differences. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 1-year survival, organ support, and hospitalization costs. We tested for treatment-by-subgroup interactions for 16 patient characteristics and 6 care-delivery characteristics.

Citation impact

590
total citations
FWCI
49.87
Percentile
100%
References
20
Citations per year

Authors

1
  • TP
    The PRISM InvestigatorsCorresponding

    Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Early goal-directed therapy
  • Septic shock
  • Observational study
  • Meta-analysis
  • Medicine
  • Intensive care medicine
  • Shock (circulatory)
  • Clinical trial
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Good health and well-being
No related works found for this paper.

Funding