Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/26739
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMiles, Lachlan F-
dc.contributor.authorBurt, Christiana-
dc.contributor.authorArrowsmith, Joseph-
dc.contributor.authorMcKie, Mikel A-
dc.contributor.authorVillar, Sofia S-
dc.contributor.authorGovender, Pooveshnie-
dc.contributor.authorShaylor, Ruth-
dc.contributor.authorTan, Zihui-
dc.contributor.authorDe Silva, Ravi-
dc.contributor.authorFalter, Florian-
dc.date2021-06-
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-14T23:57:22Z-
dc.date.available2021-06-14T23:57:22Z-
dc.date.issued2021-06-07-
dc.identifier.citationPLoS Medicine 2021; 18(6): e1003658en
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/26739-
dc.description.abstractThe dose of protamine required following cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is often determined by the dose of heparin required pre-CPB, expressed as a fixed ratio. Dosing based on mathematical models of heparin clearance is postulated to improve protamine dosing precision and coagulation. We hypothesised that protamine dosing based on a 2-compartment model would improve thromboelastography (TEG) parameters and reduce the dose of protamine administered, relative to a fixed ratio. We undertook a 2-stage, adaptive randomised controlled trial, allocating 228 participants to receive protamine dosed according to a mathematical model of heparin clearance or a fixed ratio of 1 mg of protamine for every 100 IU of heparin required to establish anticoagulation pre-CPB. A planned, blinded interim analysis was undertaken after the recruitment of 50% of the study cohort. Following this, the randomisation ratio was adapted from 1:1 to 1:1.33 to increase recruitment to the superior arm while maintaining study power. At the conclusion of trial recruitment, we had randomised 121 patients to the intervention arm and 107 patients to the control arm. The primary endpoint was kaolin TEG r-time measured 3 minutes after protamine administration at the end of CPB. Secondary endpoints included ratio of kaolin TEG r-time pre-CPB to the same metric following protamine administration, requirement for allogeneic red cell transfusion, intercostal catheter drainage at 4 hours postoperatively, and the requirement for reoperation due to bleeding. The trial was listed on a clinical trial registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03532594). Participants were recruited between April 2018 and August 2019. Those in the intervention/model group had a shorter mean kaolin r-time (6.58 [SD 2.50] vs. 8.08 [SD 3.98] minutes; p = 0.0016) post-CPB. The post-protamine thromboelastogram of the model group was closer to pre-CPB parameters (median pre-CPB to post-protamine kaolin r-time ratio 0.96 [IQR 0.78-1.14] vs. 0.75 [IQR 0.57-0.99]; p < 0.001). We found no evidence of a difference in median mediastinal/pleural drainage at 4 hours postoperatively (140 [IQR 75-245] vs. 135 [IQR 94-222] mL; p = 0.85) or requirement (as a binary outcome) for packed red blood cell transfusion at 24 hours postoperatively (19 [15.8%] vs. 14 [13.1%] p = 0.69). Those in the model group had a lower median protamine dose (180 [IQR 160-210] vs. 280 [IQR 250-300] mg; p < 0.001). Important limitations of this study include an unblinded design and lack of generalisability to certain populations deliberately excluded from the study (specifically children, patients with a total body weight >120 kg, and patients requiring therapeutic hypothermia to <28°C). Using a mathematical model to guide protamine dosing in patients following CPB improved TEG r-time and reduced the dose administered relative to a fixed ratio. No differences were detected in postoperative mediastinal/pleural drainage or red blood cell transfusion requirement in our cohort of low-risk patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Unique identifier NCT03532594.en
dc.language.isoeng
dc.titleOptimal protamine dosing after cardiopulmonary bypass: The PRODOSE adaptive randomised controlled trial.en
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.journaltitlePLoS Medicineen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Surgery, Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdomen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationAnaesthesiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdomen
dc.identifier.affiliationMRC Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdomen
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pmed.1003658en
dc.type.contentTexten
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-2044-5560en
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-1711-4034en
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-1948-9155en
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-5602-2231en
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-7870-1136en
dc.identifier.pubmedid34097705
local.name.researcherMiles, Lachlan F
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
crisitem.author.deptAnaesthesia-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

34
checked on Dec 21, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.