Conclusions
Therapeutic normothermia was feasible in patients with febrile septic shock but was not superior to standard fever control in terms of average body temperature and host defense function. Shivering was more frequent in the therapeutic normothermia group.
Methods
In this single-center, randomized, open-label trial, febrile patients with septic shock presenting to the emergency department were assigned to either a standard fever control or therapeutic normothermia group. Therapeutic normothermia involved intensive fever control in maintaining normothermia below 37°C. The primary outcome was the feasibility of fever control for 24 h. Secondary outcomes included changes in immunomodulatory biomarkers and adverse events.
Results
Fifteen patients were enrolled and analyzed. Fever control was comparable in both groups, but significantly more patients in the therapeutic normothermia group experienced shivering (p = 0.007). Both groups demonstrated increased C-reactive protein and unchanged neutrophil chemotaxis and CD11b expression. The therapeutic normothermia group revealed significant decreased IL-6 and IL-10. The standard fever control group significantly expressed increased monocytic human leukocyte antigen. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of immunomodulation. Conclusions: Therapeutic normothermia was feasible in patients with febrile septic shock but was not superior to standard fever control in terms of average body temperature and host defense function. Shivering was more frequent in the therapeutic normothermia group.
Trial registration
Thai Clinical Trials Registry number: TCTR20160321001.