Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39633467›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2024

Midodrine for the early liberation from vasopressor support in the ICU (LIBERATE): a feasibility study.

Sebastian J Kilcommons, Fadi Hammal, Dawn L Opgenorth, Kirsten M Fiest, Constantine J Karvellas, Vincent I Lau, Erika MacIntyre, Janek Senaratne, Jocelyn Slemko, Wendy Sligl and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04489589 (Midodrine for the Early Liberation of Vasopressor Support in the ICU - The LIBERATE Pilot Study), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04489589 phase4completednot on this map

Midodrine for the Early Liberation of Vasopressor Support in the ICU - The LIBERATE Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of AlbertaRan2021 to 2022Enrolled20ConditionsCritical Illness, ShockArmsMidodrine, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Sebastian J KilcommonsUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Fadi HammalUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Dawn L OpgenorthUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Kirsten M FiestDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Constantine J KarvellasUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Vincent I LauUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Erika MacIntyreUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Janek SenaratneUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Jocelyn SlemkoUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Wendy SliglUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Fernando ZampieriUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
D 'Arcy DuquetteDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Lily T GuanUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Nadia BaigUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Sean M BagshawUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Oleksa G RewaUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. rewa@ualberta.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8718-0547

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntravenous (IV) vasopressors are the mainstay of physiological support for hemodynamically unstable patients. However, the role of oral vasopressors remains unclear. The objective of our study was to evaluate the feasibility of evaluating midodrine for critically ill patients with IV vasopressor-dependent shock.

methodsWe conducted a single-center, concealed-allocation, parallel-group, blinded feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effect of oral midodrine versus placebo on IV vasopressor-dependent shock in the intensive care unit (ICU). The study was performed in a medical-surgical ICU at the University of Alberta Hospital from April 2021 to July 2022. We included patients aged 18 years or older admitted to the ICU with ongoing vasopressor support with decreasing vasopressor dose(s). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to midodrine or a placebo for the duration of their IV vasopressor therapy. The primary outcome was study feasibility and secondary outcomes included patient-centered outcomes. Feasibility was assessed through rate of recruitment, adherence to study protocol, and patient safety.

resultsTwenty patients were enrolled in the study and underwent randomization (n = 11 midodrine, n = 9 control). Recruitment was recorded at 1.2 participants per month, protocol adherence was 90%, and allocation remained concealed. No adverse events were reported in either group. Sepsis was the most common cause of shock in both groups. The midodrine group had a shorter length of ICU stay of 9.6 (SD 8.7) vs 10.4 (SD 14.5) days. Hospital mortality was lower for the midodrine group (n = 2, 18.2% vs n = 4, 37.5%). Vasopressor re-initiation after 24 h was more frequent in the midodrine group (n = 4, 36.4% vs n = 2, 25%). There were no readmissions to the ICU following discharge in either group.

conclusionsThe evaluation of midodrine for patients in the ICU is feasible and safe. This trial will inform future large-scale RCTs regarding the utility of midodrine in critically ill patients with IV vasopressor-dependent shock.

trial registrationThis pilot RCT was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04489589). Registered July 27, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04489589.

Indexed as

Critical careIntensive care unitMidodrineShockVasopressors

Identifiers

PMID39633467
PMCPMC11616185

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.