Purpose: We compared hemodynamic and biological effects of the Cascade system, which uses very high volume hemofiltration (HVHF) (120 mL kg(-1) h(-1)), with those of usual care in patients with septic shock.
Methods: Multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label trial in three intensive care units (ICU). Adults with septic shock with administration of epinephrine/norepinephrine were eligible. Patients were randomized to usual care plus HVHF (Cascade group), or usual care alone (control group). Primary end point was the number of catecholamine-free days up to 28 days after randomization. Secondary end points were number of days free of mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy (RRT) or ICU up to 90 days, and 7-, 28-, and 90-day mortality.
Results: We included 60 patients (29 Cascade, 31 usual care). Baseline characteristics were comparable. Median number of catecholamine-free days was 22 [IQR 11-23] vs 20 [0-25] for Cascade vs control; there was no significant difference even after adjustment. There was no significant difference in number of mechanical ventilation-free days or ICU requirement. Median number of RRT-free days was 85 [46-90] vs 74 [0-90] for Cascade vs control groups, p = 0.42. By multivariate analysis, the number of RRT-free days was significantly higher in the Cascade group (up to 25 days higher after adjustment). There was no difference in mortality at 7, 28, or 90 days.
Conclusion: Very HVHF using the Cascade system can safely be used in patients presenting with septic shock, but it was not associated with a reduction in the need for catecholamines during the first 28 days.
Keywords: Amino acids; Cytokines; Hemofiltration; Septic shock.