Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Aug 5:14:39.
doi: 10.1186/s13017-019-0259-9. eCollection 2019.

Ethical considerations in conducting surgical research in severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Ethical considerations in conducting surgical research in severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis

Christopher J Doig et al. World J Emerg Surg. .

Erratum in

  • Correction to: Ethical considerations in conducting surgical research in severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis.
    Doig CJ, Page SA, McKee JL, Moore EE, Abu-Zidan FM, Carroll R, Marshall JC, Faris PD, Tolonen M, Catena F, Coccolini F, Sartelli M, Ansaloni L, Minor SF, Peirera BM, Diaz JJ, Kirkpatrick AW; Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) after Source Control for Severe Complicated Intra-Abdominal Sepsis Investigators. Doig CJ, et al. World J Emerg Surg. 2019 Oct 17;14:47. doi: 10.1186/s13017-019-0268-8. eCollection 2019. World J Emerg Surg. 2019. PMID: 31636693 Free PMC article.

Abstract

Background: Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has high mortality, thought due in part to progressive bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. Treatment includes early antibiotics and operative source control. At surgery, open abdomen management with negative-peritoneal-pressure therapy (NPPT) has been hypothesized to mitigate MOF and death, although clinical equipoise for this operative approach exists. The Closed or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) study (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095) will prospectively randomize eligible patients intra-operatively to formal abdominal closure or OA with NPTT. We review the ethical basis for conducting research in SCIAS.

Main body: Research in critically ill incapacitated patients is important to advance care. Conducting research among SCIAS is complicated due to the severity of illness including delirium, need for emergent interventions, diagnostic criteria confirmed only at laparotomy, and obtundation from anaesthesia. In other circumstances involving critically ill patients, clinical experts have worked closely with ethicists to apply principles that balance the rights of patients whilst simultaneously permitting inclusion in research. In Canada, the Tri-Council Policy Statement-2 (TCPS-2) describes six criteria that permit study enrollment and randomization in such situations: (a) serious threat to the prospective participant requires immediate intervention; (b) either no standard efficacious care exists or the research offers realistic possibility of direct benefit; (c) risks are not greater than that involved in standard care or are clearly justified by prospect for direct benefits; (d) prospective participant is unconscious or lacks capacity to understand the complexities of the research; (e) third-party authorization cannot be secured in sufficient time; and (f) no relevant prior directives are known to exist that preclude participation. TCPS-2 criteria are in principle not dissimilar to other (inter)national criteria. The COOL study will use waiver of consent to initiate enrollment and randomization, followed by surrogate or proxy consent, and finally delayed informed consent in subjects that survive and regain capacity.

Conclusions: A delayed consent mechanism is a practical and ethical solution to challenges in research in SCIAS. The ultimate goal of consent is to balance respect for patient participants and to permit participation in new trials with a reasonable opportunity for improved outcome and minimal risk of harm.

Keywords: Consent; Intra-peritoneal sepsis; Multiple organ dysfunction; Open-abdomen; Randomized controlled trial; Waiver.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsJLM is the Clinical Research Director for Innovative Trauma Care, San Antonio, Texas, and has consulted for the Canadian Forces, Acesco Company, Acelity Corporation, and SAM Medical Corporation. EEM reported consulting for Haemonetics, Instrumentation Laboratory, Stago, Humacyte, and Prytime, with all proceeds paid to the University of Colorado. AWK serves in the Canadian Forces Medical Services and has consulted for the Innovative Trauma Care and Acelity Corporations. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Operationalization of the COOL Trial Informed Consent Process

References

    1. Halpern NA, Pastores SM, Greenstein RJ. Critical care medicine in the United States 1985-2000: an analysis of bed numbers, use, and costs. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(6):1254–1259. - PubMed
    1. Halpern NA, Pastores SM. Critical care medicine in the United States 2000-2005: an analysis of bed numbers, occupancy rates, payer mix, and costs. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(1):65–71. - PubMed
    1. Jawad I, Luksic I, Rafnsson SB. Assessing available information on the burden of sepsis: global estimates of incidence, prevalence and mortality. J Glob Health. 2012;2(1):010404. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fleischmann C, Scherag A, Adhikari NK, Hartog CS, Tsaganos T, Schlattmann P, et al. Assessment of global incidence and mortality of hospital-treated sepsis. Current Estimates and Limitations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016;193(3):259–272. - PubMed
    1. Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcomes, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:1303–1310. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data