Protocol implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences from a randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many intensive care units (ICUs) halted research to focus on COVID-19-specific studies.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the conduct of an international randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU [REVISE]) during the pandemic, addressing enrolment patterns, center engagement, informed consent processes, data collection, a COVID-specific substudy, patient transfers, and data monitoring.

METHODS

REVISE is a randomized trial among mechanically ventilated patients, comparing pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. We documented protocol implementation status from March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022.

RESULTS

The Steering Committee did not change the scientific protocol. From the first enrolment on July 9th 2019 to March 10th 2020 (8 months preceding the pandemic), 267 patients were enrolled in 18 centers. From March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022 (30 months thereafter), 41 new centers joined; 59 were participating by August 30th 2022 which enrolled 2961 patients. During a total of 1235 enrolment-months in the pandemic phase, enrolment paused for 106 (8.6%) months in aggregate (median 3 months, interquartile range 2;6). Protocol implementation involved a shift from the a priori consent model pre-pandemic (188, 58.8%) to the consent to continue model (1615, 54.1%, p < 0.01). In one new center, an opt-out model was approved. The informed consent rate increased slightly (80.7% to 85.0%, p = 0.05). Telephone consent encounters increased (16.6% to 68.2%, p < 0.001). Surge capacity necessitated intra-institutional transfers; receiving centers continued protocol implementation whenever possible. We developed a nested COVID-19 substudy. The Methods Centers continued central statistical monitoring of trial metrics. Site monitoring was initially remote, then in-person when restrictions lifted.

CONCLUSION

Protocol implementation adaptations during the pandemic included a shift in the consent model, a sustained high consent rate, and launch of a COVID-19 substudy. Recruitment increased as new centers joined, patient transfers were optimized, and monitoring methods were adapted.

REVISE: re-evaluating the inhibition of stress erosions in the ICU-statistical analysis plan for a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The REVISE (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU) trial will evaluate the impact of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole compared to placebo in invasively ventilated critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE

To outline the statistical analysis plan for the REVISE trial.

METHODS

REVISE is a randomized clinical trial ongoing in intensive care units (ICUs) internationally. Patients ≥ 18 years old, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and expected to remain ventilated beyond the calendar day after randomization are allocated to either 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously or placebo while mechanically ventilated.

RESULTS

The primary efficacy outcome is clinically important upper GI bleeding; the primary safety outcome is 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes are ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, new renal replacement therapy, ICU and hospital mortality, and patient-important GI bleeding. Tertiary outcomes are total red blood cells transfused, peak serum creatinine concentration, and duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU, and hospital length of stay. Following an interim analysis of results from 2400 patients (50% of 4800 target sample size), the data monitoring committee recommended continuing enrolment.

CONCLUSIONS

This statistical analysis plan outlines the statistical analyses of all outcomes, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses. REVISE will inform clinical practice and guidelines worldwide.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov NCT03374800. November 21, 2017.

Proton pump inhibitors in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: protocol for a substudy of the Re-EValuating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients commonly receive proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding from stress-induced ulceration. Despite widespread use in the intensive care unit (ICU), observational data suggest that PPIs may be associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infection. This preplanned study is nested within a large randomized trial evaluating pantoprazole versus placebo in invasively ventilated patients. The 3 objectives are as follows: (1) to describe the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in terms of demographics, biomarkers, venous thromboembolism, tracheostomy incidence and timing, and other clinical outcomes; (2) to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 infection on clinically important GI bleeding, 90-day mortality, and other outcomes compared to a propensity-matched non-infected cohort; and (3) to explore whether pantoprazole has a differential treatment effect on clinically important GI bleeding, 90-day mortality, and other outcomes in patients with and without COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

The ongoing trial Re-EValuating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) compares pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important GI bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. The protocol described in this report is for a substudy focused on patients with COVID-19 infection that was not in the original pre-pandemic trial protocol. We developed a one-page case report form to characterize these patients including data related to biomarkers, venous thromboembolism, COVID-19 therapies, tracheostomy incidence and timing, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU and hospital stay. Our analysis will describe the trajectory of patients with COVID-19 infection, a propensity-matched analysis of infected and non-infected patients, and an extended subgroup analysis comparing the effect of PPI among patients with and without COVID-19 infection.

DISCUSSION

Prophylactic acid suppression in invasively ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection has unknown consequences. The results of these investigations will inform practice, guidelines, and future research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

REVISE Trial [NCT03374800 December 15, 2017], COVID-19 Cohort Study [NCT05715567 February 8, 2023].

Surgical Critical Care: Gastrointestinal Complications

Critical illness and injury affect the gastrointestinal tract almost uniformly. Complications include the sequelae of direct intestinal injury and repair, impaired motility, intra-abdominal hypertension, and ulceration, among others. Contemporary clinical practice has incorporated many advances in the prevention and treatment of gastrointestinal complications during critical illness. This article discusses the epidemiology, risk factors, means of diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of some of these compilations.

Combined application of nasogastric tubes and nasointestinal tubes in neurosurgical intensive care patients with stress ulceration: a novel solution to treatment and early enteral nutrition

Objective

Stress ulcers occur frequently in neurosurgical intensive care patients and can pose serious risks. We summarized the clinical experience of the combined application of nasointestinal tubes for early restoration of enteral nutrition and of nasogastric (NG) tubes for stress ulceration treatment in patients hospitalized in a neurosurgical intensive care unit.

Methods

From January 2011 to June 2011, a series of 67 patients with stress ulceration hospitalized in a neurosurgical intensive care unit were randomized to two groups. The control group (33 patients) received treatment with NG tube decompression and drainage according to international guidelines, and parenteral nutrition was changed to enteral feeding until there was no grossly visible blood in the NG tube. The nasointestinal tube group (34 patients) received treatment combining application of NG tubes and nasointestinal tubes. Drainage was performed with NG tubes as in the control group, with concurrent placement of nasointestinal tubes. Duration until resolution of stress ulceration and days until start of enteral nutrition were compared between the two groups.

Results

Duration until resolution of stress ulceration was 4.5 days in the control group and 4.3 days in the nasointestinal tube group. There was no difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). Duration until start of enteral nutrition was 4.5 days in the control group and 1 day in the nasointestinal tube group. There was an obvious difference between the two groups (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

The combined application of NG tubes and nasointestinal tubes in neurosurgical intensive care patients with stress ulceration is an effective means of treating stress ulceration and restoring early enteral nutrition.