Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine as the Initial Vasoactive Agent in Pediatric Septic Shock: A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial for Recruitment Rates and Protocol Adherence, the Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine in Pediatric Septic Shock Trial.
Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine · 2025-09-01 · Randomised trial
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pediatric guidelines recommend initial resuscitation of septic shock using either epinephrine or norepinephrine as first-line support. However, there are no trials comparing these two agents. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial was to test the feasibility of a study protocol, specifically in terms of recruitment rates and protocol adherence, comparing epinephrine and norepinephrine as first-line vasoactive agents in pediatric septic shock. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A double-blinded, randomized controlled single-center study was conducted in the Emergency Medicine Department (ED) and pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) at a tertiary referral hospital in India. Thirty children aged between 1 month and 17 years with suspected septic shock, in whom signs of shock persisted after the initial fluid bolus, were recruited. PARTICIPANTS WERE RANDOMIZED: 1:1 to receive either epinephrine or norepinephrine (each 15), initiated at 0.05-0.1 µg/kg/min. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment rates, randomization to study-drug initiation time, and adherence to protocol. Exploratory clinical outcomes included proportion of shock resolution, adverse events, and hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 44 screened patients, 10 met exclusion criteria and 4 declined consents, with a recruitment rate of 3.2 patients/month. The median time to vasoactive initiation after randomization was 12 minutes (IQR 8-15). The median time for shock resolution was 31 hours (IQR 10.8-51.2) and 14 hours (IQR 11.5-16.5) in the epinephrine and norepinephrine groups, respectively. Adverse events meeting pre-determined stopping criteria occurred in 7/16 and 1/15 in the epinephrine and norepinephrine groups, respectively. One patient in each group died. CONCLUSIONS: A protocol randomizing children with septic shock to epinephrine vs norepinephrine was feasible in terms of protocol adherence and recruitment rates. These findings can inform the design of a definitive multicenter trial powered for patient-centered endpoints. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Nataraj R, Dalal P, Vijayaraghavan BKT, Venkatachalam P, Kumar V, Lakshmanan L, et al. Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine as the Initial Vasoactive Agent in Pediatric Septic Shock: A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial for Recruitment Rates and Protocol Adherence, the Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine in Pediatric Septic Shock Trial. Indian J Crit Care Med 2025;29(9):737-745.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Adrenaline · Cardiovascular drugs · Children · Vasopressors
Related articles
- OUTCOMES OF PEDIATRIC FLUID-REFRACTORY SEPTIC SHOCK ACCORDING TO DIFFERENT VASOACTIVE STRATEGIES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS. (Shock, 2024)
- Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Dopamine and Epinephrine in Pediatric Fluid-Refractory Hypotensive Septic Shock. (Pediatr Crit Care Med, 2016)
- Effect of a Mobile App on Medication Errors During Simulated Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: PEDIDOSIS App vs. Conventional Methods. A Multicenter Simulation-based Randomized Controlled Trial. (J Med Syst, 2026)
- Early inotropic support in pediatric shock: evidence and challenges in prehospital setting and interfacility transport. (Am J Emerg Med, 2026)
- The SQUEEZE pilot trial: a trial to determine whether septic shock reversal is quicker in pediatric patients randomized to an early goal directed fluid-sparing strategy vs. usual care. (Pilot Feasibility Stud, 2025)
- Addition of Intramuscular Epinephrine to Standard of Care by Paramedics to Decrease Time-to-Initial Epinephrine Dose in Pediatric Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Simulation Trial. (Prehosp Emerg Care, 2026)