RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pediatric ARDS is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. High-quality data from clinical trials in children are limited due to numerous barriers to their design and execution. Here we describe the collaborative development of a master protocol as a tool to address some of these barriers and support the conduct of pediatric ARDS studies. METHODS: Using PubMed, we performed a literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric ARDS to characterize the current state and evaluate potential benefit of harmonized master protocols. We used a multi-stakeholder, collaborative, and team science-oriented process to develop a master protocol template with links to common data elements (CDEs) for pediatric ARDS trials. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs that enrolled between 14-200 total subjects per trial. Interventions included mechanical ventilation, prone positioning, corticosteroids, and surfactant. Studies displayed significant heterogeneity in ARDS definition, design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and reported outcomes. Mortality was reported in 91% of trials and ventilator-free days in 73%. The trial heterogeneity made pooled analysis unfeasible. These findings underscore the need for a method to facilitate combined analysis of future trials through standardization of trial elements. As a potential solution, we developed a master protocol, iteratively revised with input from a multidisciplinary panel of experts and organized into 3 categories: instructions and general information, templated language, and a series of text options of common pediatric ARDS trial scenarios. Finally, we linked master protocol sections to relevant CDEs previously defined for pediatric ARDS and captured in a series of electronic case report forms. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of pediatric ARDS trials identified were small and heterogeneous in study design and outcome reporting. Using a master protocol template for pediatric ARDS trials with CDEs would support combining and comparing pediatric ARDS trial findings and increase the knowledge base.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Test whether hyperglycemic critically ill children with cardiovascular and/or respiratory failure experience more ICU-free days when assigned to tight glycemic control with a normoglycemic versus hyperglycemic blood glucose target range. DESIGN: Multi-center randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Pediatric ICUs at 35 academic hospitals. PATIENTS: Children aged 2weeks to 17years receiving inotropic support and/or acute mechanical ventilation, excluding cardiac surgical patients. INTERVENTIONS: Patients receive intravenous insulin titrated to either 80-110mg/dL (4.4-6.1mmol/L) or 150-180mg/dL (8.3-10.0mmol/L). The intervention begins upon confirmed hyperglycemia and ends when the patient meets study-defined ICU discharge criteria or after 28days. Continuous glucose monitoring, a minimum glucose infusion, and an explicit insulin infusion algorithm are deployed to achieve the BG targets while minimizing hypoglycemia risk. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome is ICU-free days (equivalent to 28-day hospital mortality-adjusted ICU length of stay). Secondary outcomes include 90-day hospital mortality, organ dysfunction scores, ventilator-free days, nosocomial infection rate, neurodevelopmental outcomes, and nursing workload. To detect an increase of 1.25 ICU-free days (corresponding to a 20% relative reduction in 28-day hospital mortality and a one-day reduction in ICU length of stay), 1414 patients are needed for 80% power using a two-sided 0.05 level test. CONCLUSIONS: This trial tests whether hyperglycemic critically ill children randomized to 80-110mg/dL benefit more than those randomized to 150-180mg/dL. This study implements validated bedside support tools including continuous glucose monitoring and a computerized algorithm to enhance patient safety and ensure reproducible bedside decision-making in achieving glycemic control.
