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
. 2021 Sep 27;25(1):349.
doi: 10.1186/s13054-021-03774-4.

Effectiveness of anisodamine for the treatment of critically ill patients with septic shock: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effectiveness of anisodamine for the treatment of critically ill patients with septic shock: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Yuetian Yu et al. Crit Care. .

Abstract

Background: Septic shock is characterized by an uncontrolled inflammatory response and microcirculatory dysfunction. There is currently no specific agent for treating septic shock. Anisodamine is an agent extracted from traditional Chinese medicine with potent anti-inflammatory effects. However, its clinical effectiveness remains largely unknown.

Methods: In a multicentre, open-label trial, we randomly assigned adults with septic shock to receive either usual care or anisodamine (0.1-0.5 mg per kilogram of body weight per hour), with the anisodamine doses adjusted by clinicians in accordance with the patients' shock status. The primary end point was death on hospital discharge. The secondary end points were ventilator-free days at 28 days, vasopressor-free days at 28 days, serum lactate and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score from days 0 to 6. The differences in the primary and secondary outcomes were compared between the treatment and usual care groups with the χ2 test, Student's t test or rank-sum test, as appropriate. The false discovery rate was controlled for multiple testing.

Results: Of the 469 patients screened, 355 were assigned to receive the trial drug and were included in the analyses-181 patients received anisodamine, and 174 were in the usual care group. We found no difference between the usual care and anisodamine groups in hospital mortality (36% vs. 30%; p = 0.348), or ventilator-free days (median [Q1, Q3], 24.4 [5.9, 28] vs. 26.0 [8.5, 28]; p = 0.411). The serum lactate levels were significantly lower in the treated group than in the usual care group after day 3. Patients in the treated group were less likely to receive vasopressors than those in the usual care group (OR [95% CI] 0.84 [0.50, 0.93] for day 5 and 0.66 [0.37, 0.95] for day 6).

Conclusions: There is no evidence that anisodamine can reduce hospital mortality among critically ill adults with septic shock treated in the intensive care unit. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02442440 ; Registered on 13 April 2015).

Keywords: Anisodamine; Mechanical ventilation; Mortality; Randomized controlled trial; Septic shock.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Recruitment and randomization of the patients. Patients could meet more than one exclusion criteria. ICU intensive care unit
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Kaplan–Meier estimates of the probability of survival to day 30. p value for the log-rank test was 0.68
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Comparisons of SOFA scores between the treated and usual care groups from days 0 to 6. The p values were adjusted for the false discovery rate (FDR). SOFA sequential organ failure assessment
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Comparisons of lactate levels, CRP levels and vasopressor requirements between the treated and usual care groups. a Differences in lactate and CRP levels between the two groups over time; the error bar indicates the 95% confidence interval. b Percentage of patients requiring vasopressors. The error bar indicates the 95% confidence interval for the percentage. The p values were adjusted for a false discovery rate of 0.05. CRP C-reactive protein

Comment in

References

    1. Zhang Z, Ni H, Qian Z. Effectiveness of treatment based on PiCCO parameters in critically ill patients with septic shock and/or acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:444–451. doi: 10.1007/s00134-014-3638-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, Shackelford KA, Tsoi D, Rhodes Kievlan D, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Articles 200 www.thelancet.com. 2020;395. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dellinger RP, Levy M, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:580–637. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827e83af. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Prism Investigators Early, goal-directed therapy for septic shock—a patient-level meta-analysis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2223–2234. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1701380. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Liu F, Wang HM, Wang T, Zhang YM, Zhu X. The efficacy of thymosin α1 as immunomodulatory treatment for sepsis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16:1–12. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data