- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04515511
Whether a Minimal Volume Could Predict Fluid Responsiveness Using Thermodilution by PAC in Septic Shock Patients
September 1, 2020 updated by: Peking Union Medical College Hospital
Medical Intensive Care Unit of PUMCH
Assessment of fluid responsiveness (FR) is to detect whether patient could benefit from fluid therapy.
Mini fluid challenge has been widely used in clinical practice to prevent patients from volume overload.
In clinical practice, 100 mL or 250 mL have been used most frequently and FR was defined as an increase in CO greater than 10% as much as the changes in CO after infusion of 500 mL.
While using a half of volume infusion and assessed by the traditional standard of FR, this might misclassify more patients as nonresponders.
In that it is imperative to test the predictive ability of mini fluid and find out the threshold of cutoff value.
Meanwhile, in almost mini-FC, cardiac output were measured by echocardiography(VTi) and pulse contour,None of the studies conducted cardiac output (CO)measurement by gold standard method of thermodilution by pulmonary artery catheter (PAC).
The correlation between new generated CO measurements and PAC varies in different studies as well.
It is imperative to investigate the reliability of mini-FC to predicting fluid responsiveness(FR).The investigator's study is to detect the predictive minimal volume using thermodilution by PAC in septic shock patient.
Study Overview
Status
Unknown
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Fluid therapy is the cornerstone of septic resuscitation.
In recent decade, a restrictive fluid strategy has been applied to shock resuscitation for fewer complications and shorter hospital stays compared with a liberal fluid strategy.
Therefore, it is a reasonable step to assess the patient's response to fluid infusion to avoid excessive fluid administration.Mini-fluid challenge allows the selection of fluid responders by inducible changes of hemodynamic parameters after changing the preload gaining popularity.
The mini fluid challenge was firstly described by Muller et al. in 2011.
They found an infusion of 100 mL colloid over 1 minute and the assessment by cardiac output using velocity time integral (VTi) at the aortic outflow tract could predict fluid responsiveness (FR).
Since then, a total of seven investigations have been published.
Although a mini-fluid challenge may help the decision-making process of fluid management, the investigation results differed from each other, especially in minimal volume and cut off value of hemodynamic parameters change.
Meanwhile, we noticed that when measuring CO, the method of thermodilution by pulmonary artery catheter (PAC), which is the gold standard of CO measurement, was not used in these studies.
Furthermore, the majority participants of the studies were perioperative patients in a stable hemodynamic state.Therefore, there are two question needed to be answered:what is the minimal infusion volume in effectively predicting fluid responsiveness, and whether mini-volume can perform a real change in septic shock patients.
Thus, it is necessary to explore the minimal volume in fluid challenge by PAC and test its reliability in detecting responders (R) and nonresponders (NR).
Study Type
Interventional
Enrollment (Anticipated)
50
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.
Study Locations
-
-
Beijing
-
Beijing, Beijing, China, 100102
- Recruiting
- Li Weng
-
-
Participation Criteria
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
18 years to 80 years (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Genders Eligible for Study
All
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients diagnosis of septic shock and is required fluid challenge in the presence of invasive hemodynamic monitoring.
- Patients with hypotension (SBP <90 mmHg or MAP <65 mmHg)
- Patients with evidences of tissue hypoperfusion (including but not limited to oliguria, skin mottling, altered mental status, cool peripheries, hyperlactatemia, et al).
Exclusion Criteria:
- Age less than 18yrs or greater than 80yrs
- Shock is diagnosed with other types of shock
- Known allergy to colloid fluids
- Pregnancy
- Recent participation in another biomedical study.
Study Plan
This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
- Allocation: NA
- Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
- Masking: NONE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
EXPERIMENTAL: standard care
ICU septic shock patients with refractory hypotension with indwelling pulmonary artery catheter received five sequential intravenous boluses of 100 mL 4% gelatin.
Cardiac output measured by thermodilution of PAC before fluid challenge (baseline) and three minutes after each bolus.
Fluid responsiveness (FR) was defined as an increase in CO greater than 10% after 500 mL fluid infusion.
The smallest volume which can perform an effective fluid challenge was analyzed.
|
Pulmonary artery catheter insertion is prepared before fluid challenge.
Baseline hemodynamic value and each time after 5 sequential intravenous boluses of 100 mL colloid are recorded.
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Cardiac output
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
Cardiac output measured by therm-dilution of pulmonary artery catheter.
An increase in cardiac output(CO) greater than 10% after a volume expansion of 500 mL is defined as fluid responsiveness(FR).
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Oxygen saturation
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
Oxygen saturation can be obtained directly from blood gas include which reflects extraction of oxygen and assess whether CO is sufficient enough to meet patient's enough.
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
|
Carbon dioxide partial pressure
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
PCO2 can be obtained directly from blood gas.
It is considered as alternative markers of tissue hypoperfusion and attempted to be used to guide treatment for shock.
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
|
Hemoglobin
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
Hemoglobin will be diluted during fluid challenge and it is also an important index to guide fluid resuscitation by improving extraction of oxygen and optimizing oxygen delivery.
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 3 minutes
|
|
Heart rate
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 1 minutes
|
Heart rate is monitored to assess the effect of the fluid challenge
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 1 minutes
|
|
Mean arterial pressure
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 1 minutes
|
Mean arterial pressure is monitored to assess the effect of the fluid challenge
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 1 minutes
|
|
Central venous pressure
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 1 minutes
|
Central venous pressure is monitored to assess the preload status and effect of the fluid challenge
|
Baseline and immediately after each bolus of 100 mL colloid, average 1 minutes
|
Collaborators and Investigators
This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.
Publications and helpful links
The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.
Study record dates
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.
Study Major Dates
Study Start (ACTUAL)
July 1, 2019
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
August 1, 2020
Study Completion (ANTICIPATED)
September 1, 2022
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
August 10, 2020
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
August 14, 2020
First Posted (ACTUAL)
August 17, 2020
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
September 3, 2020
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
September 1, 2020
Last Verified
August 1, 2020
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- PUMCH fc
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
NO
IPD Plan Description
In our department, we has done a serial clinical studies of fluid challenge, we will do retrospective study first.
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
No
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Septic Shock
-
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)University Hospital, BonnUnknownSevere Sepsis With Septic Shock | Severe Sepsis Without Septic ShockGermany
-
Laiba QamarRecruitingSeptic Shock | Fluid Refractory Septic ShockPakistan
-
University Medicine GreifswaldUnknownSepsis Septic ShockGermany
-
Indonesia UniversityCompletedSevere Sepsis With Septic Shock | Severe Sepsis Without Septic ShockIndonesia
-
National Taiwan University HospitalBaxter Healthcare CorporationRecruiting
-
Charite University, Berlin, GermanyCompleted
-
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire DijonCompleted
-
Mansoura UniversityCompleted
-
Artcline GmbHRecruitingSepsis | Septic Shock | Immunoparalysis in Septic ShockGermany
-
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisCompletedSeptic Shock HyperdynamicFrance
Clinical Trials on 4% gelatin
-
Shanghai Zhongshan HospitalB. Braun Medical International Trading Company Ltd.Recruiting
-
Nanjing Chia-tai Tianqing PharmaceuticalNot yet recruitingAcute Normovolemic Hemodilution
-
University of MiamiTerminated
-
Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical...CompletedThird Molar ExtractionChina
-
Merit Medical Systems, Inc.CompletedHemorrhage | Bleeding HemorrhageAustralia, France
-
Medical University of WarsawCompletedAcute GastroenteritisPoland
-
Nanjing Chia-tai Tianqing PharmaceuticalRecruitingAcute Normovolemic HemodilutionChina
-
Hopital FochTerminated
-
NIN InstituteCentro Medico IssemymActive, not recruitingDysbiosis Symptoms Linked to Pathology | Chronic Kidney Disease(CKD) | Probiotics SupplementMexico
-
Wageningen UniversityCompleted