Hemorrhagic ShockPhase 3PPOWERNCT03477006
Pragmatic Prehospital Group O Whole Blood Early Resuscitation Trial
A Phase 3 study testing Whole blood in people with Hemorrhagic Shock, run by Jason Sperry at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Despite advances in trauma resuscitation, a paucity of therapeutic interventions are available early enough to reduce the downstream morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhage, shock and coagulopathy. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 89 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Hemorrhagic Shock
- What is being tested?
- Whole blood
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 86 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 20 Nov 2018to 30 Oct 2020
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 89 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Injured patients being transport via an air medical service with hypotension (SBP =/< 90mmHg with tachycardia >108 OR SBP=/<70 without the tachycardia requirement)
Who cannot join
- Age < 18 or > 89 years
- Isolated fall from standing injury mechanism
- Brain matter exposed or penetrating brain injury (GSW)
- CPR > 5 mins with out ROSC
- Isolated burns without evidence of traumatic injury
- Isolated Drowning or Hanging
Show all 11Show fewer
- No Intravenous or Intraosseous access
- Known prisoner or known pregnancy
- Referral Hospital Admission
- Wearing No PPOWER bracelet
- Objection to study voiced by subject or family at scene
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15213
About this study
Official title: Pragmatic Prehospital Group O Whole Blood Early Resuscitation (PPOWER) Trial: A Prospective, Interventional,Randomized, 3 Year, Pilot Clinical Trial
Despite advances in trauma resuscitation, a paucity of therapeutic interventions are available early enough to reduce the downstream morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhage, shock and coagulopathy. Due to the time sensitive nature of the treatment of hemorrhage, the ideal resuscitation intervention would entail use of a blood product containing all essential hemostatic components, closest to time of injury, where prevention or reversal of the devastating downstream consequences of shock and coagulopathy can occur. This proposal will characterized the efficacy of whole blood resuscitation initiated in the prehospital setting to patients in hemorrhagic shock which represents this ideal intervention post-injury. These results will have great potential to dramatically change the way trauma resuscitation occurs today.
Read the detailed description
Traumatic injury represents an incredible health care burden in the United States and worldwide. Hemorrhage is estimated to be responsible for over 40% of all trauma-related deaths. Ongoing traumatic blood loss is complicated by the well-known 'lethal triad' of coagulopathy, hypothermia and acidosis which results in further unbridled hemorrhage. Uncontrolled bleeding, resultant shock and organ dysfunction remain the leading causes of early in-hospital mortality. Despite advances in trauma resuscitation, a paucity of therapeutic interventions are available early enough to reduce the downstream morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhage, shock and coagulopathy.
In-hospital resuscitation of traumatic hemorrhage has changed over the past decade. The underlying principle of current resuscitation practice focuses on preventing or reversing the effects of coagulopathy with the early use of a balanced component transfusion strategy (1:1:1 - plasma: packed red blood cells: platelets). This reconstituted strategy has also been coined 'whole blood-like' resuscitation despite being inferior compositionally to whole blood. The use of whole blood was historically the gold standard for treating hemorrhagic shock during World War I and II, prior to sweeping changes in blood banking practice. Whole blood use continues today and is thought to provide the bleeding patient the identical components they are losing with maximal resuscitative and hemostatic effects.
Recent military experiences continue to show the benefits of fresh whole blood resuscitation demonstrating significant survival and hemostatic advantages. Whole blood has also been postulated to improve microcirculatory hemodynamics, reduce the 'storage lesion' effect and minimize donor exposure risks. A recent civilian study has also demonstrated benefit using modified whole blood after arrival to the hospital where appropriate blood typing and cross matching was performed prior to transfusion. Due to the time sensitive nature of the treatment of hemorrhage, the ideal resuscitation intervention would entail use of a blood product containing all essential hemostatic components, closest to time of injury, where prevention or reversal of the devastating downstream consequences of shock and coagulopathy can occur.
Initiation of whole blood resuscitation in the prehospital setting and continued through the in-hospital phase of treatment to patients in hemorrhagic shock represents this ideal intervention post-injury. Essential to the prehospital initiation of whole blood resuscitation in the civilian population is need for it to be transfused without the need for blood typing or cross matching. Of similar importance is the need for cold storage and recycling of any unused whole blood product, allowing maximal utility of this precious resource.
Based upon the belief that early whole blood resuscitation represents the most efficacious hemostatic resuscitation product for the management of hemorrhage, the University of Pittsburgh is currently utilizing cold stored, low titer, platelet replete-leukocyte reduced, group O whole blood (LTLR-WB) for urgent release in the emergency department, without the need for blood typing or cross matching, for patients in hemorrhagic shock. The hypothesis is that the initiation of LTLR-WB resuscitation in the prehospital setting with continuation through the in-hospital acute resuscitation phase of care will significantly reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhagic shock post-injury as compared to standard prehospital and in-hospital resuscitation practice. Thus, a large pragmatic clinical trial is needed to definitively establish the efficacy and safety of whole blood resuscitation initiated in the prehospital setting. Only a high quality clinical trial will provide the essential evidence to justify and provide the impetus for the use of this precious blood banking resource early post-injury. Because of the challenges associated with execution of these types of large trials particularly in the prehospital setting, it is essential to establish feasibility of this approach in a pilot study and provide experience to inform a definitive large, multicenter whole blood trial. The University of Pittsburgh has a track record of prehospital interventional trials post-injury and the clinical research infrastructure to successfully execute the following this trial.
- Conditions
- Hemorrhagic Shock
- Being tested
- Whole blood
- Medical subject headings
- Shock, Hemorrhagic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Whole bloodBiological
Low titer, group O, leukocyte reduced, platelet replete, cold stored whole blood
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| LTLR-WB | Experimental | Receiving 2 units of low titer, leucocyte reduced, platelet replete whole blood initiated in the prehospital setting during air medical transport and continued (up to 6 units of whole blood followed by standard component resuscitation) thru the early in-hospital phase of care Receives: Biological: Whole blood |
| Standard Care | No intervention | Receiving standard prehospital air medical care and standard of care component (1:1:1) trauma resuscitation thru the early in-hospital phase of care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
28 Day All Cause Mortality
28 day all cause mortality
Measured: 28 days from admission
Secondary outcomes (2)
Incidence of Multiple Organ Failure
multiple organ failure using the Denver post-injury MOF score which is a summed score and when the score is 4 or greater from 4 organ system scores, MOF is designated; 4 organ systems (pulmonary [0-3], renal [0-3], hepatic [0-3], cardiovascular [0-3])
Measured: 28 days from admission
24 Hour Mortality
24 hour mortality
Measured: 24 hours from admission
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Mar 2018
- Study start20 Nov 2018
- Primary completion30 Oct 2020
- Study completion30 Oct 2020
Why it stopped: Slow enrollment, financial considerations and global pandemic
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Hemorrhagic ShockStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 86 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Jason Sperry
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Jason Sperry, University of Pittsburgh
- Investigators
- Jason Sperry, MD, Principal investigator, University of Pittsburgh
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03477006
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R34HL135224
- Other IDs
- R34HL135224
- Acronym
- PPOWER
- Status last verified
- Sep 2021
- First submitted
- 19 Mar 2018
- Last updated
- 6 Oct 2021
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- Yes
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Lorence JM, Donohue JK, Iyanna N, Guyette FX, Gimbel E, Brown JB, Daley BJ, Eastridge BJ, Miller RS, Nirula R, Harbrecht BG, Claridge JA, Phelan HA, Vercruysse G, O'Keeffe T, Joseph B, Neal MD, Sperry JL. Characterization of adverse events in injured patients at risk of hemorrhagic shock: a secondary analysis of three harmonized prehospital randomized clinical trials. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2024 Jun 25;9(1):e001465. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2024-001465. eCollection 2024.
PubMed 38933603Guyette FX, Zenati M, Triulzi DJ, Yazer MH, Skroczky H, Early BJ, Adams PW, Brown JB, Alarcon L, Neal MD, Forsythe RM, Zuckerbraun BS, Peitzman AB, Billiar TR, Sperry JL. Prehospital low titer group O whole blood is feasible and safe: Results of a prospective randomized pilot trial. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2022 May 1;92(5):839-847. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003551. Epub 2022 Jan 25.
PubMed 35081595
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Oct 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Pragmatic Prehospital Group O Whole Blood Early Resuscitation (PPOWER) Trial: A Prospective, Interventional,Randomized, 3 Year, Pilot Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03477006
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PPOWER / R34HL135224
- Conditions
- Hemorrhagic Shock
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Slow enrollment, financial considerations and global pandemic
- Enrolment
- 86 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Jason SperryUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
- Study start
- 20 Nov 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Oct 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 6 Oct 2021
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Despite advances in trauma resuscitation, a paucity of therapeutic interventions are available early enough to reduce the downstream morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhage, shock and coagulopathy. Due to the time sensitive nature of the treatment of hemorrhage, the ideal resuscitation intervention would entail use of a blood product containing all essential hemostatic components, closest to time of injury, where prevention or reversal of the devastating downstream consequences of shock and coagulopathy can occur. This proposal will characterized the efficacy of whole blood resuscitation initiated in the prehospital setting to patients in hemorrhagic shock which represents this ideal intervention post-injury. These results will have great potential to dramatically change the way trauma resuscitation occurs today.
Detailed description
Traumatic injury represents an incredible health care burden in the United States and worldwide. Hemorrhage is estimated to be responsible for over 40% of all trauma-related deaths. Ongoing traumatic blood loss is complicated by the well-known 'lethal triad' of coagulopathy, hypothermia and acidosis which results in further unbridled hemorrhage. Uncontrolled bleeding, resultant shock and organ dysfunction remain the leading causes of early in-hospital mortality. Despite advances in trauma resuscitation, a paucity of therapeutic interventions are available early enough to reduce the downstream morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhage, shock and coagulopathy.
In-hospital resuscitation of traumatic hemorrhage has changed over the past decade. The underlying principle of current resuscitation practice focuses on preventing or reversing the effects of coagulopathy with the early use of a balanced component transfusion strategy (1:1:1 - plasma: packed red blood cells: platelets). This reconstituted strategy has also been coined 'whole blood-like' resuscitation despite being inferior compositionally to whole blood. The use of whole blood was historically the gold standard for treating hemorrhagic shock during World War I and II, prior to sweeping changes in blood banking practice. Whole blood use continues today and is thought to provide the bleeding patient the identical components they are losing with maximal resuscitative and hemostatic effects.
Recent military experiences continue to show the benefits of fresh whole blood resuscitation demonstrating significant survival and hemostatic advantages. Whole blood has also been postulated to improve microcirculatory hemodynamics, reduce the 'storage lesion' effect and minimize donor exposure risks. A recent civilian study has also demonstrated benefit using modified whole blood after arrival to the hospital where appropriate blood typing and cross matching was performed prior to transfusion. Due to the time sensitive nature of the treatment of hemorrhage, the ideal resuscitation intervention would entail use of a blood product containing all essential hemostatic components, closest to time of injury, where prevention or reversal of the devastating downstream consequences of shock and coagulopathy can occur.
Initiation of whole blood resuscitation in the prehospital setting and continued through the in-hospital phase of treatment to patients in hemorrhagic shock represents this ideal intervention post-injury. Essential to the prehospital initiation of whole blood resuscitation in the civilian population is need for it to be transfused without the need for blood typing or cross matching. Of similar importance is the need for cold storage and recycling of any unused whole blood product, allowing maximal utility of this precious resource.
Based upon the belief that early whole blood resuscitation represents the most efficacious hemostatic resuscitation product for the management of hemorrhage, the University of Pittsburgh is currently utilizing cold stored, low titer, platelet replete-leukocyte reduced, group O whole blood (LTLR-WB) for urgent release in the emergency department, without the need for blood typing or cross matching, for patients in hemorrhagic shock. The hypothesis is that the initiation of LTLR-WB resuscitation in the prehospital setting with continuation through the in-hospital acute resuscitation phase of care will significantly reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to hemorrhagic shock post-injury as compared to standard prehospital and in-hospital resuscitation practice. Thus, a large pragmatic clinical trial is needed to definitively establish the efficacy and safety of whole blood resuscitation initiated in the prehospital setting. Only a high quality clinical trial will provide the essential evidence to justify and provide the impetus for the use of this precious blood banking resource early post-injury. Because of the challenges associated with execution of these types of large trials particularly in the prehospital setting, it is essential to establish feasibility of this approach in a pilot study and provide experience to inform a definitive large, multicenter whole blood trial. The University of Pittsburgh has a track record of prehospital interventional trials post-injury and the clinical research infrastructure to successfully execute the following this trial.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| LTLR-WB | Experimental | Biological: Whole bloodReceiving 2 units of low titer, leucocyte reduced, platelet replete whole blood initiated in the prehospital setting during air medical transport and continued (up to 6 units of whole blood followed by standard component resuscitation) thru the early in-hospital phase of care |
| Standard Care | No intervention | –Receiving standard prehospital air medical care and standard of care component (1:1:1) trauma resuscitation thru the early in-hospital phase of care |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 89 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Injured patients being transport via an air medical service with hypotension (SBP =/< 90mmHg with tachycardia >108 OR SBP=/<70 without the tachycardia requirement)
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Age < 18 or > 89 years
- Isolated fall from standing injury mechanism
- Brain matter exposed or penetrating brain injury (GSW)
- CPR > 5 mins with out ROSC
- Isolated burns without evidence of traumatic injury
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Whole bloodLow titer, group O, leukocyte reduced, platelet replete, cold stored whole blood | Biological | LTLR-WB |
Primary outcome
28 Day All Cause Mortality
Time frame: 28 days from admission
28 day all cause mortality
2 secondary outcomes
Incidence of Multiple Organ Failure
Time frame: 28 days from admission
24 Hour Mortality
Time frame: 24 hours from admission
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Oct 2021.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38933603Lorence JM, Donohue JK, Iyanna N, Guyette FX, Gimbel E, Brown JB, Daley BJ, Eastridge BJ, Miller RS, Nirula R, Harbrecht BG, Claridge JA, Phelan HA, Vercruysse G, O'Keeffe T, Joseph B, Neal MD, Sperry JL. Characterization of adverse events in injured patients at risk of hemorrhagic shock: a secondary analysis of three harmonized prehospital randomized clinical trials. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2024 Jun 25;9(1):e001465. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2024-001465. eCollection 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35081595Guyette FX, Zenati M, Triulzi DJ, Yazer MH, Skroczky H, Early BJ, Adams PW, Brown JB, Alarcon L, Neal MD, Forsythe RM, Zuckerbraun BS, Peitzman AB, Billiar TR, Sperry JL. Prehospital low titer group O whole blood is feasible and safe: Results of a prospective randomized pilot trial. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2022 May 1;92(5):839-847. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003551. Epub 2022 Jan 25.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Hemorrhagic Shock
RecruitingPhase 2
CAlcium and VAsopressin Following Injury Early Resuscitation (CAVALIER) Trial
Trauma, Hemorrhage
RecruitingPhase 4
Adult Outpatient Linvoseltamab With Tocilizumab Prophylaxis to Mitigate the Risk of Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS)
Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Cryo-FIRST: Effectiveness of INTERCEPT Fibrinogen Complex (IFC) for Trauma-Associated Hemorrhage
Hypofibrinogenemia, Hemorrhage
RecruitingPhase 4
The Safety of Simplified Tranexamic Acid Regimen
Trauma Coagulopathy, Hemorrhage
RecruitingPhase 2
Infliximab for Cytokine Release Syndrome Prophylaxis During Teclistamab or Talquetamab Therapy in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Myeloma
Cytokine Release Syndrome, Recurrent Multiple Myeloma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jason Sperry, MD principal investigator
University of Pittsburgh
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Whole blood in people with Hemorrhagic Shock, run by Jason Sperry at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 11 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Oct 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 6 Oct 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
28 Day All Cause Mortality (time frame: 28 days from admission). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03477006, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 6 Oct 2021.