This site uses cookies and related technologies, as described in our privacy policy, for purposes that may include site operation, analytics, enhanced user experience, or advertising. You may choose to consent to our use of these technologies, or manage your own preferences.
Deferring Arterial Catheterization in Critically Ill Patients with Shock
Published October 29, 2025
N Engl J Med 2025;393:1875-1888
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2502136
Abstract
Background
In patients with shock, whether noninvasive blood-pressure monitoring is an effective alternative to the recommended use of an arterial catheter is uncertain.
Methods
In this multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients who had shock and had been admitted to an intensive care unit within the past 24 hours to receive early insertion (<4 hours after randomization) of an arterial catheter (invasive strategy) or to be monitored with an automated brachial cuff (noninvasive strategy). Insertion of an arterial catheter was allowed later in patients assigned to the noninvasive-strategy group who met prespecified safety criteria. The primary outcome was death from any cause at day 28 (noninferiority margin, 5 percentage points). Adverse events of special interest related to the blood-pressure–monitoring device that was used were recorded, as was patient-reported pain or discomfort related to the ongoing presence of the device.
Results
A total of 1010 patients underwent randomization; 504 patients assigned to the noninvasive-strategy group and 502 assigned to the invasive-strategy group were included in the analyses. A total of 74 patients (14.7%) in the noninvasive-strategy group and 493 (98.2%) in the invasive-strategy group underwent insertion of an arterial catheter. Death within 28 days occurred in 173 patients (34.3%) in the noninvasive-strategy group and 185 (36.9%) in the invasive-strategy group (adjusted risk difference, −3.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, −8.9 to 2.5; P=0.006 for noninferiority). Results of per-protocol analyses were similar in the two groups. A total of 66 patients (13.1%) in the noninvasive-strategy group and 45 (9.0%) in the invasive-strategy group had at least 1 day of pain or discomfort related to the ongoing presence of the blood-pressure–monitoring device. Hematoma or hemorrhage related to the arterial catheter occurred in 5 patients (1.0%) in the noninvasive-strategy group and 41 patients (8.2%) in the invasive-strategy group.
Conclusions
Among patients with shock, results for death from any cause at day 28 indicated that management without early arterial catheter insertion was noninferior to early catheter insertion. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03680963.)
Are you a member of an institution such as a university or hospital?Learn more about Institutional Access
Notes
This article was published on October 29, 2025, at NEJM.org.
A data sharing statement provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
Supported by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National 2017 of the French Ministry of Health (grant PHRC-17-0326).
Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
We thank all persons involved in the trial conduct and analysis; Marie Leclerc, M.Sc., who coordinated the national conduct of the trial, Elody Mureau, M.Sc., who conducted data management, and Pierre Asfar, M.D., Ph.D., and Stéphane Gaudry, M.D., Ph.D., for critical review of the manuscript before submission.
Supplementary Material
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 2025 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
For personal use only. Any commercial reuse of NEJM Group content requires permission.
History
Published online: October 29, 2025
Published in issue: November 13, 2025
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Altmetrics
Citations
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citation of this publication.
Cited by
- A Less Invasive Approach to Intensive Care, New England Journal of Medicine, 393, 19, (1953-1954), (2025)./doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2512006
Loading...