• Tobias M Merz, Luca Cioccari, Pascal M Frey, Andreas Bloch, David Berger, Bjoern Zante, Stephan M Jakob, and Jukka Takala.
• Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland. TobiasM@adhb.govt.nz.
• Intensive Care Med. 2019 Aug 1; 45 (8): 1093-1102.

PurposeMortality in circulatory shock is high. Enhanced resolution of shock may improve outcomes. We aim to determine whether adding hemodynamic monitoring with continual transesophageal echocardiography (hTEE) to usual care accelerates resolution of hemodynamic instability.Methods550 patients with circulatory shock were randomly assigned to four groups stratified using hTEE (hTEE vs usual care) and assessment frequency (minimum every 4 h vs 8 h). Primary outcome was time to resolution of hemodynamic instability, analyzed as intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis at day 6 and in a predefined secondary analysis at days 3 and 28.ResultsOf 550 randomized patients, 271 with hTEE and 274 patients with usual care were eligible and included in the ITT analysis. Time to resolution of hemodynamic instability did not differ within the first 6 days [hTEE vs usual care adjusted sub-hazard ratio (SHR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-1.46, p = 0.067]. Time to resolution of hemodynamic instability during the 72 h of hTEE monitoring was shorter in patients with TEE (hTEE vs usual care SHR 1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.55, p = 0.034). Assessment frequency had no influence. Time to resolution of clinical signs of hypoperfusion, duration of organ support, length of stay and mortality in the intensive care unit and hospital, and mortality at 28 days did not differ between groups.ConclusionsIn critically ill patients with shock, hTEE monitoring or hemodynamic assessment frequency did not influence resolution of hemodynamic instability or mortality within the first 6 days.Trial Registration And Statistical Analysis PlanClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02048566.

24 keywords...

hide…