Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the PREventing cardiovascular collaPse with Administration of fluid REsuscitation during Induction and Intubation (PREPARE II) randomised clinical trial

Effect of Fluid Bolus Administration on Cardiovascular Collapse Among Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Tracheal Intubation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Hypotension is common during tracheal intubation of critically ill adults and increases the risk of cardiac arrest and death. Whether administering an intravenous fluid bolus to critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation prevents severe hypotension, cardiac arrest, or death remains uncertain.

Objective

To determine the effect of fluid bolus administration on the incidence of severe hypotension, cardiac arrest, and death.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial enrolled 1067 critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation with sedation and positive pressure ventilation at 11 intensive care units in the US between February 1, 2019, and May 24, 2021. The date of final follow-up was June 21, 2021.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 500-mL intravenous fluid bolus (n = 538) or no fluid bolus (n = 527).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was cardiovascular collapse (defined as new or increased receipt of vasopressors or a systolic blood pressure <65 mm Hg between induction of anesthesia and 2 minutes after tracheal intubation, or cardiac arrest or death between induction of anesthesia and 1 hour after tracheal intubation). The secondary outcome was the incidence of death prior to day 28, which was censored at hospital discharge.

Results

Among 1067 patients randomized, 1065 (99.8%) completed the trial and were included in the primary analysis (median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-70 years]; 42.1% were women). Cardiovascular collapse occurred in 113 patients (21.0%) in the fluid bolus group and in 96 patients (18.2%) in the no fluid bolus group (absolute difference, 2.8% [95% CI, -2.2% to 7.7%]; P = .25). New or increased receipt of vasopressors occurred in 20.6% of patients in the fluid bolus group compared with 17.6% of patients in the no fluid bolus group, a systolic blood pressure of less than 65 mm Hg occurred in 3.9% vs 4.2%, respectively, cardiac arrest occurred in 1.7% vs 1.5%, and death occurred in 0.7% vs 0.6%. Death prior to day 28 (censored at hospital discharge) occurred in 218 patients (40.5%) in the fluid bolus group compared with 223 patients (42.3%) in the no fluid bolus group (absolute difference, -1.8% [95% CI, -7.9% to 4.3%]; P = .55).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, administration of an intravenous fluid bolus compared with no fluid bolus did not significantly decrease the incidence of cardiovascular collapse.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03787732.

Challenges and outcomes in airway management outside the operating room

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Airway management outside the operating room poses unique challenges that every clinician should recognize. These include anatomic, physiologic, and logistic challenges, each of which can contribute to complications and lead to poor outcomes. Recognizing these challenges and highlighting known outcome data may better prepare the team, making this otherwise daunting procedure safer and potentially improving patient outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newer intubating techniques and devices have made navigating anatomic airway challenges easier. However, physiological challenges during emergency airway management remain a cause of poor patient outcomes. Hemodynamic collapse has been identified as the most common peri-intubation adverse event and a leading cause of morbidity and mortality associated with the procedure.

SUMMARY

Emergency airway management outside the operating room remains a high-risk procedure, associated with poor outcomes. Pre-intubation hemodynamic optimization may mitigate some of the risks, and future research should focus on identification of best strategies for hemodynamic optimization prior to and during this procedure.

Effect of the use of an endotracheal tube and stylet versus an endotracheal tube alone on first-attempt intubation success: a multicentre, randomised clinical trial in 999 patients

Purpose

The effect of the routine use of a stylet during tracheal intubation on first-attempt intubation success is unclear. We hypothesised that the first-attempt intubation success rate would be higher with tracheal tube + stylet than with tracheal tube alone.

Methods

In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, conducted in 32 intensive care units, we randomly assigned patients to tracheal tube + stylet or tracheal tube alone (i.e. without stylet). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with first-attempt intubation success. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients with complications related to tracheal intubation. Serious adverse events, i.e., traumatic injuries related to tracheal intubation, were evaluated.

Results

A total of 999 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 501 (50%) to tracheal tube + stylet and 498 (50%) to tracheal tube alone. First-attempt intubation success occurred in 392 patients (78.2%) in the tracheal tube + stylet group and in 356 (71.5%) in the tracheal tube alone group (absolute risk difference, 6.7; 95%CI 1.4–12.1; relative risk, 1.10; 95%CI 1.02–1.18; P = 0.01). A total of 194 patients (38.7%) in the tracheal tube + stylet group had complications related to tracheal intubation, as compared with 200 patients (40.2%) in the tracheal tube alone group (absolute risk difference, − 1.5; 95%CI − 7.5 to 4.6; relative risk, 0.96; 95%CI 0.83–1.12; P = 0.64). The incidence of serious adverse events was 4.0% and 3.6%, respectively (absolute risk difference, 0.4; 95%CI, − 2.0 to 2.8; relative risk, 1.10; 95%CI 0.59–2.06. P = 0.76).

Conclusions

Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, using a stylet improves first-attempt intubation success.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-021-06417-y.