It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
Endotoxin adsorption is a promising but controversial therapy in severe, refractory septic shock and conflicting results exist on the effective capacity of available devices to reduce circulating endotoxin and inflammatory cytokine levels.
Methods
Multiarm, randomized, controlled trial in two Swiss intensive care units, with a 1:1:1 randomization of patients suffering severe, refractory septic shock with high levels of endotoxemia, defined as an endotoxin activity ≥ 0.6, a vasopressor dependency index ≥ 3, volume resuscitation of at least 30 ml/kg/24 h and at least single organ failure, to a haemoadsorption (Toraymyxin), an enhanced adsorption haemofiltration (oXiris) or a control intervention. Primary endpoint was the difference in endotoxin activity at 72-h post-intervention to baseline. In addition, inflammatory cytokine, vasopressor dependency index and SOFA-Score dynamics over the initial 72 h were assessed inter alia.
Results
In the 30, out of 437 screened, randomized patients (10 Standard of care, 10 oXiris, 10 Toraymyxin), endotoxin reduction at 72-h post-intervention-start did not differ among interventions (Standard of Care: 12 [1–42]%, oXiris: 21 [10–51]%, Toraymyxin: 23 [10–36]%, p = 0.82). Furthermore, no difference between groups could be observed neither for reduction of inflammatory cytokine levels (p = 0.58), nor for vasopressor weaning (p = 0.95) or reversal of organ injury (p = 0.22).
Conclusions
In a highly endotoxemic, severe, refractory septic shock population neither the Toraymyxin adsorber nor the oXiris membrane could show a reduction in circulating endotoxin or cytokine levels over standard of care.
Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01948778. Registered August 30, 2013. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01948778
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 University Hospital Zurich, Institute of Intensive Care Medicine, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.412004.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 0478 9977)
2 Triemli Hospital, Institute of Anaesthesiology, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.414526.0) (ISNI:0000 0004 0518 665X)
3 University Hospital Zurich, Institute of Clinical Chemistry, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.412004.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 0478 9977)
4 Triemli Hospital, Institute of Intensive Care Medicine, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.414526.0) (ISNI:0000 0004 0518 665X)