Vasopressin vs Noradrenaline as Initial therapy in Septic Shock

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Vasopressin vs Noradrenaline as Initial therapy in Septic Shock

  • IRAS ID

    92122

  • Contact name

    Anthony Gordon

  • Sponsor organisation

    Imperial College London and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust

  • Eudract number

    2011-005363-24

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    N/A

  • Research summary

    Septic shock is a condition where blood pressure reduces in response to overwhelming infections. This results in poor blood flow to the kidney and other vital organs. It is a life-threatening condition and requires emergency treatment in an intensive care unit. Severe infections are becoming an increasing healthcare problem. It is the 10th most common cause of death in America and it is estimated that the UK spends about Å“700 million/year treating severe infections in patients in intensive care units. As well as antibiotics and intravenous fluids, adrenaline-type drugs are used to increase blood pressure. Although usually effective at restoring blood pressure, these drugs have important side effects. Vasopressin and steroids are both naturally produced hormones that are released during times of stress. However when blood pressure drops due to infection, these compensatory mechanisms often fail. Studies have shown that administering both of these drugs can help restore blood pressure and reduce the use of other adrenaline-type drugs. Recent studies found that vasopressin may be more effective if used earlier and for less severe drops in blood pressure. In this study, we plan to investigate if vasopressin is more effective in reducing kidney dysfunction when compared to noradrenaline when used as initial therapy in septic shock in adult patients. Also, we aim to study if there is any interaction between vasopressin and steroids in the management of septic shock.

  • REC name

    South Central - Oxford A Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    12/SC/0014

  • Date of REC Opinion

    30 Jan 2012

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion