IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal protamine dosing after cardiopulmonary bypass: The PRODOSE adaptive randomised controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Lachlan F Miles
  • Christiana Burt
  • Joseph Arrowsmith
  • Mikel A McKie
  • Sofia S Villar
  • Pooveshnie Govender
  • Ruth Shaylor
  • Zihui Tan
  • Ravi De Silva
  • Florian Falter

Abstract

Background: The dose of protamine required following cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is often determined by the dose of heparin required pre-CPB, expressed as a fixed ratio. Dosing based on mathematical models of heparin clearance is postulated to improve protamine dosing precision and coagulation. We hypothesised that protamine dosing based on a 2-compartment model would improve thromboelastography (TEG) parameters and reduce the dose of protamine administered, relative to a fixed ratio. Methods and findings: We undertook a 2-stage, adaptive randomised controlled trial, allocating 228 participants to receive protamine dosed according to a mathematical model of heparin clearance or a fixed ratio of 1 mg of protamine for every 100 IU of heparin required to establish anticoagulation pre-CPB. A planned, blinded interim analysis was undertaken after the recruitment of 50% of the study cohort. Following this, the randomisation ratio was adapted from 1:1 to 1:1.33 to increase recruitment to the superior arm while maintaining study power. At the conclusion of trial recruitment, we had randomised 121 patients to the intervention arm and 107 patients to the control arm. The primary endpoint was kaolin TEG r-time measured 3 minutes after protamine administration at the end of CPB. Secondary endpoints included ratio of kaolin TEG r-time pre-CPB to the same metric following protamine administration, requirement for allogeneic red cell transfusion, intercostal catheter drainage at 4 hours postoperatively, and the requirement for reoperation due to bleeding. The trial was listed on a clinical trial registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03532594). Conclusions: Using a mathematical model to guide protamine dosing in patients following CPB improved TEG r-time and reduced the dose administered relative to a fixed ratio. No differences were detected in postoperative mediastinal/pleural drainage or red blood cell transfusion requirement in our cohort of low-risk patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Unique identifier NCT03532594. Lachlan Miles and co-workers report on a randomized controlled trial seeking to optimise protamine dosing after cardiopulmonary bypass.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Lachlan F Miles & Christiana Burt & Joseph Arrowsmith & Mikel A McKie & Sofia S Villar & Pooveshnie Govender & Ruth Shaylor & Zihui Tan & Ravi De Silva & Florian Falter, 2021. "Optimal protamine dosing after cardiopulmonary bypass: The PRODOSE adaptive randomised controlled trial," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(6), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003658
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003658
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003658
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003658&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003658?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003658. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.