Advertisement

Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 844–855 | Cite as

Vasopressin in septic shock: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

  • Myura Nagendran
  • James A. Russell
  • Keith R. Walley
  • Stephen J. Brett
  • Gavin D. Perkins
  • Ludhmila Hajjar
  • Alexina J. Mason
  • Deborah Ashby
  • Anthony C. GordonEmail author
Systematic Review

Abstract

Purpose

We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the possible benefits and harms of vasopressin therapy in adults with septic shock both overall and in pre-defined subgroups.

Methods

Our pre-specified study protocol is published on PROSPERO, CRD42017071698. We identified randomised clinical trials up to January 2019 investigating vasopressin therapy versus any other vasoactive comparator in adults with septic shock. Individual patient data from each trial were compiled. Conventional two-stage meta-analyses were performed as well as one-stage regression models with single treatment covariate interactions for subgroup analyses.

Results

Four trials were included with a total of 1453 patients. For the primary outcomes, there was no effect of vasopressin on 28-day mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.86–1.12] or serious adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82–1.26). Vasopressin led to more digital ischaemia [absolute risk difference (ARD) 1.7%, 95% CI 0.3%–3.2%] but fewer arrhythmias (ARD − 2.8%, 95% CI − 0.2% to − 5.3%). Mesenteric ischaemia and acute coronary syndrome events were similar between groups. Vasopressin reduced the requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT) (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74–0.99), but this finding was not robust to sensitivity analyses. There were no statistically significant interactions in the pre-defined subgroups (baseline kidney injury severity, baseline lactate, baseline norepinephrine requirement and time to study inclusion).

Conclusions

Vasopressin therapy in septic shock had no effect on 28-day mortality although the confidence intervals are wide. It appears safe but with a different side effect profile from norepinephrine. The finding on reduced RRT should be interpreted cautiously. Future trials should focus on long-term outcomes in select patient groups as well as incorporating cost effectiveness analyses regarding possible reduced RRT use.

Keywords

Vasopressin Septic shock Individual patient data Meta-analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the investigators and clinical trials groups of all the trials included in this study for providing access to their trial data.

Author contributions

ACG conceived the study. MN, JAR, KRW, SJB, GDP, AJM, DA and ACG designed the protocol. JAR, KRW, LH and ACG provided individual patient data for the analysis. MN performed the analysis and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content and approved the final version. MN and ACG are the guarantors.

Funding

ACG is funded by a UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Professor award (RP-2015-06-018). GDP is supported as an NIHR Senior Investigator. ACG and GDP are Directors of Research for the Intensive Care Foundation. The VANISH trial was funded by an NIHR Research Professor award (RP-2015-06-018). Infrastructure support was provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre. The VANCS II trial support was provided by the University of Sao Paulo. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR or the Department of Health.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

LH reports that outside of this work she has received speaker fees from Amomed Pharma. ACG reports that outside of this work he has received speaker fees from Orion Corporation Orion Pharma and Amomed Pharma. ACG has consulted for Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Tenax Therapeutics, Baxter Healthcare, Bristol-Myers Squibb and GSK and received grant support from Orion Corporation Orion Pharma, Tenax Therapeutics and HCA International with funds paid to his institution. JAR reports patents owned by the University of British Columbia (UBC) that are related to the use of PCSK9 inhibitor(s) in sepsis and related to the use of vasopressin in septic shock. JAR is an inventor on these patents. JAR was a founder, Director and shareholder in Cyon Therapeutics Inc. JAR is a shareholder in Molecular You Corp. JAR reports receiving consulting fees in the last 3 years from: Asahi Kesai Pharmaceuticals of America (AKPA) (developing recombinant thrombomodulin in sepsis), SIB Therapeutics LLC (developing a sepsis drug), Ferring Pharmaceuticals (manufactures vasopressin and developing selepressin). JAR is no longer actively consulting for the following: La Jolla Pharmaceuticals (developing angiotensin II; JAR chaired the DSMB of a trial of angiotensin II from 2015 to 2017), Cubist Pharmaceuticals (now owned by Merck; formerly was Trius Pharmaceuticals; developing antibiotics), Grifols (sells albumin), CytoVale Inc. (developing a sepsis diagnostic), PAR Pharma (sells prepared bags of vasopressin). JAR reports having received an investigator-initiated grant from Grifols (entitled “Is HBP a mechanism of albumin’s efficacy in human septic shock?”) that was provided to and administered by University of British Columbia.

Supplementary material

134_2019_5620_MOESM1_ESM.docx (277 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 277 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Vincent JL, De Backer D (2013) Circulatory shock. N Engl J Med 369:1726–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, Madl C, Chochrad D, Aldecoa C, Brasseur A, Defrance P, Gottignies P, Vincent JL (2010) Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med 362:779–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Callaghan DJ, Gordon AC (2015) What’s new in vasopressin? Intensive Care Med 41:2177–2179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Landry DW, Levin HR, Gallant EM, Ashton RC Jr, Seo S, D’Alessandro D, Oz MC, Oliver JA (1997) Vasopressin deficiency contributes to the vasodilation of septic shock. Circulation 95:1122–1125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Annane D, Ouanes-Besbes L, de Backer D, Du B, Gordon AC, Hernandez G, Olsen KM, Osborn TM, Peake S, Russell JA, Cavazzoni SZ (2018) A global perspective on vasoactive agents in shock. Intensive Care Med 44:833–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, Gordon AC, Hebert PC, Cooper DJ, Holmes CL, Mehta S, Granton JT, Storms MM, Cook DJ, Presneill JJ, Ayers D (2008) Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 358:877–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gordon AC, Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, Ayers D, Storms MM, Holmes CL, Hebert PC, Cooper DJ, Mehta S, Granton JT, Cook DJ, Presneill JJ (2010) The effects of vasopressin on acute kidney injury in septic shock. Intensive Care Med 36:83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lauzier F, Levy B, Lamarre P, Lesur O (2006) Vasopressin or norepinephrine in early hyperdynamic septic shock: a randomized clinical trial. Intensive Care Med 32:1782–1789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Torgersen C, Dunser MW, Wenzel V, Jochberger S, Mayr V, Schmittinger CA, Lorenz I, Schmid S, Westphal M, Grander W, Luckner G (2010) Comparing two different arginine vasopressin doses in advanced vasodilatory shock: a randomized, controlled, open-label trial. Intensive Care Med 36:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gordon AC, Mason AJ, Perkins GD, Stotz M, Terblanche M, Ashby D, Brett SJ (2014) The interaction of vasopressin and corticosteroids in septic shock: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med 42:1325–1333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Russell JA, Walley KR, Gordon AC, Cooper DJ, Hebert PC, Singer J, Holmes CL, Mehta S, Granton JT, Storms MM, Cook DJ, Presneill JJ (2009) Interaction of vasopressin infusion, corticosteroid treatment, and mortality of septic shock. Crit Care Med 37:811–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gordon AC, Mason AJ, Thirunavukkarasu N, Perkins GD, Cecconi M, Cepkova M, Pogson DG, Aya HD, Anjum A, Frazier GJ, Santhakumaran S, Ashby D, Brett SJ (2016) Effect of early vasopressin vs norepinephrine on kidney failure in patients with septic shock: the VANISH randomized clinical trial. JAMA 316:509–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, Kumar A, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Nunnally ME, Rochwerg B, Rubenfeld GD, Angus DC, Annane D, Beale RJ, Bellinghan GJ, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith C, De Backer DP, French CJ, Fujishima S, Gerlach H, Hidalgo JL, Hollenberg SM, Jones AE, Karnad DR, Kleinpell RM, Koh Y, Lisboa TC, Machado FR, Marini JJ, Marshall JC, Mazuski JE, McIntyre LA, McLean AS, Mehta S, Moreno RP, Myburgh J, Navalesi P, Nishida O, Osborn TM, Perner A, Plunkett CM, Ranieri M, Schorr CA, Seckel MA, Seymour CW, Shieh L, Shukri KA, Simpson SQ, Singer M, Thompson BT, Townsend SR, Van der Poll T, Vincent JL, Wiersinga WJ, Zimmerman JL, Dellinger RP (2017) Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med 43:304–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G (2010) Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. BMJ 340:c221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fisher DJ, Copas AJ, Tierney JF, Parmar MK (2011) A critical review of methods for the assessment of patient-level interactions in individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials, and guidance for practitioners. J Clin Epidemiol 64:949–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stewart LA, Clarke M, Rovers M, Riley RD, Simmonds M, Stewart G, Tierney JF (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD statement. JAMA 313:1657–1665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA (2011) The cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available from http://www.handbook.cochrane.org
  19. 19.
    Mehta RL, Kellum JA, Shah SV, Molitoris BA, Ronco C, Warnock DG, Levin A (2007) Acute kidney injury network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit Care 11:R31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bellomo R, Ronco C, Kellum JA, Mehta RL, Palevsky P (2004) Acute renal failure—definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the second international consensus conference of the acute dialysis quality initiative (ADQI) group. Crit Care 8:R204–R212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stewart GB, Altman DG, Askie LM, Duley L, Simmonds MC, Stewart LA (2012) Statistical analysis of individual participant data meta-analyses: a comparison of methods and recommendations for practice. PLoS One 7:e46042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dunser MW, Hasibeder WR, Wenzel V, Schwarz S, Ulmer H, Knotzer H, Pajk W, Friesenecker BE, Mayr AJ (2004) Endocrinologic response to vasopressin infusion in advanced vasodilatory shock. Crit Care Med 32:1266–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Patel BM, Chittock DR, Russell JA, Walley KR (2002) Beneficial effects of short-term vasopressin infusion during severe septic shock. Anesthesiology 96:576–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Capoletto C, Almeida J, Ferreira G, Fukushima J, Nakamura R, Risk S, Osawa E, Park C, Oliveira G, Galas F, Franco R, Hajjar L (2017) Vasopressin versus norepinephrine for the management of septic shock in cancer patients (vancs ii). Crit Care 21:P168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dunser MW, Mayr AJ, Ulmer H, Knotzer H, Sumann G, Pajk W, Friesenecker B, Hasibeder WR (2003) Arginine vasopressin in advanced vasodilatory shock: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Circulation 107:2313–2319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barzegar E, Nouri M, Mousavi S, Ahmadi A, Mojtahedzadeh M (2017) Vasopressin in septic shock; assessment of sepsis biomarkers: a randomized, controlled trial. Indian J Crit Care Med 21:578–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Elmenesy TM, Nassar Y (2008) A randomized double-blind comparative study between short-term norepinephrine and vasopressin infusion in septic shock. Egypt J Anaesth 24:355–362Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morelli A, Ertmer C, Rehberg S, Lange M, Orecchioni A, Cecchini V, Bachetoni A, D’Alessandro M, Van Aken H, Pietropaoli P, Westphal M (2009) Continuous terlipressin versus vasopressin infusion in septic shock (TERLIVAP): a randomized, controlled pilot study. Crit Care 13:R130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Oliveira S, Dessa F, Rocha C, Oliveira F (2014) Early vasopressin application in shock study. Crit Care 18:S56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, Bellomo R, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith CM, Hotchkiss RS, Levy MM, Marshall JC, Martin GS, Opal SM, Rubenfeld GD, van der Poll T, Vincent JL, Angus DC (2016) The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA 315:801–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McIntyre WF, Um KJ, Alhazzani W, Lengyel AP, Hajjar L, Gordon AC, Lamontagne F, Healey JS, Whitlock RP, Belley-Cote EP (2018) Association of vasopressin plus catecholamine vasopressors vs catecholamines alone with atrial fibrillation in patients with distributive shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 319:1889–1900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nedel WL, Rech TH, Ribeiro RA, Pellegrini JAS, Moraes RB (2018) Renal outcomes of vasopressin and its analogs in distributive shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Crit Care Med 47:e44–e51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    de Grooth HJ, Postema J, Loer SA, Parienti JJ, Oudemans-van Straaten HM, Girbes AR (2018) Unexplained mortality differences between septic shock trials: a systematic analysis of population characteristics and control-group mortality rates. Intensive Care Med 44:311–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Russell JA, Lee T, Singer J, Boyd JH, Walley KR (2017) The septic shock 3.0 definition and trials: a vasopressin and septic shock trial experience. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 45:940–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bhatraju PK, Zelnick LR, Herting J, Katz R, Mikacenic C, Kosamo S, Morrell ED, Robinson-Cohen C, Calfee CS, Christie JD, Liu KD, Matthay MA, Hahn WO, Dmyterko V, Slivinski NSJ, Russell JA, Walley KR, Christiani DC, Liles WC, Himmelfarb J, Wurfel MM (2018) Identification of acute kidney injury sub-phenotypes with differing molecular signatures and response to vasopressin therapy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 199:863–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Antcliffe DB, Burnham KL, Al-Beidh F, Santhakumaran S, Brett SJ, Hinds CJ, Ashby D, Knight JC (2018) Transcriptomic signatures in sepsis and a differential response to steroids: from the VANISH randomized trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 199:980–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Srisawat N, Lawsin L, Uchino S, Bellomo R, Kellum JA (2010) Cost of acute renal replacement therapy in the intensive care unit: results from the beginning and ending supportive therapy for the kidney (BEST Kidney) study. Crit Care 14:R46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Farkas J (2016) Pulmcrit—renoresuscitation, vasopressin, vepinephrine, and VANISH. Pulmcrit. http://emcrit.org/pulmcrit/vanish-renoresuscitation-vasopressin-vepinephrine/. Accessed 27 Jan 2019
  39. 39.
    Linder A, Fjell C, Levin A, Walley KR, Russell JA, Boyd JH (2014) Small acute increases in serum creatinine are associated with decreased long-term survival in the critically ill. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 189:1075–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kadri SS, Rhee C, Strich JR, Morales MK, Hohmann S, Menchaca J, Suffredini AF, Danner RL, Klompas M (2017) Estimating 10-year trends in septic shock incidence and mortality in United States academic medical centers using clinical data. Chest 151:278–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rowan KM, Angus DC, Bailey M, Barnato AE, Bellomo R, Canter RR, Coats TJ, Delaney A, Gimbel E, Grieve RD, Harrison DA, Higgins AM, Howe B, Huang DT, Kellum JA, Mouncey PR, Music E, Peake SL, Pike F, Reade MC, Sadique MZ, Singer M, Yealy DM (2017) Early, goal-directed therapy for septic shock—a patient-level meta-analysis. N Engl J Med 376:2223–2234CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Myura Nagendran
    • 1
  • James A. Russell
    • 2
  • Keith R. Walley
    • 2
  • Stephen J. Brett
    • 1
    • 3
  • Gavin D. Perkins
    • 4
  • Ludhmila Hajjar
    • 5
  • Alexina J. Mason
    • 6
  • Deborah Ashby
    • 7
  • Anthony C. Gordon
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Section of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and CancerImperial College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, St. Paul’s HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Centre for Perioperative and Critical Care ResearchImperial College Healthcare NHS TrustLondonUK
  4. 4.Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK
  5. 5.Instituto do CoracaoHospital das Clinicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Sao PauloSao PauloBrazil
  6. 6.Department of Health Services Research and PolicyLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineLondonUK
  7. 7.Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public HealthImperial College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations