Veno-arterial Carbon Dioxide Partial Pressure Difference (CO2gap) for Early Resuscitation of Septic Shock (CARBON)

June 12, 2026 updated by: University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

Veno-arterial Carbon Dioxide Partial Pressure Difference (CO2gap) for Early Resuscitation of Septic Shock: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial (CARBON)

Sepsis is a dysregulated host response to infection that leads to life-threatening organ dysfunction and represents a major healthcare problem. Septic shock is the most severe form, characterized by increased capillary permeability and vasodilation, resulting in hypotension and tissue hypoxia. Early identification and treatment of tissue hypoperfusion are pivotal components of initial resuscitation to limit progression to multiple organ dysfunction and death. The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Guidelines recommend guiding initial resuscitation by targeting decreases in serum lactate levels in patients with elevated lactate. However, although elevated lactate levels may reflect tissue hypoxia, serum lactate is not a direct marker of tissue perfusion. Hyperlactatemia may be attributable to mechanisms other than tissue hypoperfusion, such as accelerated aerobic glycolysis driven by excessive β-adrenergic stimulation or impaired clearance (e.g., in liver failure).

The venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure difference (CO₂ gap), which is inversely related to cardiac output, has been shown to reflect the adequacy of venous blood flow to remove CO₂ from tissues. The CO₂ gap is closely linked to microcirculatory blood flow during the early resuscitation phase of septic shock and may effectively identify persistent tissue hypoperfusion in shock states. A persistently high CO₂ gap during early resuscitation has been associated with significantly higher 28-day mortality and increased Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores. Moreover, the CO₂ gap has been shown to respond to changes in cardiac output during inotrope infusion in patients with low blood flow, suggesting that its assessment could be useful for therapeutic adjustments. Therefore, there are compelling arguments to evaluate the usefulness of the CO₂ gap in guiding early resuscitation in patients with septic shock.

The investigators postulated that CO₂ gap-guided early resuscitation may be more effective in improving outcomes than lactate-guided resuscitation.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Main objective: The aim of the CARBON trial is to compare a veno-arterial CO2 difference-guided resuscitation strategy (CO2gap-guided strategy) with a lactate level-guided resuscitation on mortality in adults intensive care unit (ICU) patients fulfilling the SEPSIS-3 criteria consensus definition.

HYPOTHESIS: The investigators hypothesized that a CO2gap-guided resuscitation strategy during early septic shock would reduce mortality compared with a lactate level-guided resuscitation.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

750

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 Contact

Study Locations

      • Angers, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • CHU Angers
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Sigismond Lasocki
      • Aurillac, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • CH Aurillac
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Emanuele TURBIL
      • Bayonne, France
        • Recruiting
        • CH de la cote basque
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Hadrien ROZE
      • Bordeaux, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Bordeaux Hôpital Haut Lévèque
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Antoine DEWITTE
      • Bordeaux, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Bordeaux Pellegrin Hospital
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Matthieu BIAIS
      • Clermont-Ferrand, France
      • Clermont-Ferrand, France
      • Dijon, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Dijon
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Grégoire GUINOT
      • Grenoble, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • CHU Grenoble
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Marie Christine HERAULT
      • Le Puy-en-Velay, France
        • Recruiting
        • CH Le puy en Velay
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Rémi ESPENEL
      • Lyon, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • HCL - Lyon Sud
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Romain FORT
      • Lyon, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • HCL Hôpital Edouard Herriot
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Anne Claire LUKASZEWICZ
      • Marseille, France
        • Recruiting
        • AP HM Hôpital la Timone
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Pierre SIMEONE
      • Montpellier, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Montpellier
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Samir JABER
      • Moulins, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • CH Moulins-Yzeure
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Pierre-antoine PIOCHE
      • Nantes, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Nantes
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Paul ROOZE
      • Nîmes, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • CHU Nîmes
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Claire Roger
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • APHP Bicêtre
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Benjamin BERGIS
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • APHP Lariboisière
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Maxime COUTROT
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • APHP Beaujon
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Emmanuel WEISS
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • APHP La pitié Salpêtrière - Anesthésie et soin intensif
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Fanny VARDON
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU la pitié slapêtrière - Anesthésie Réanimation
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Constantin Jean Michel
      • Poitiers, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Poitiers
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Quentin SAINT GENIS
      • Rennes, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Rennes
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Yoann LAUNEY
      • Strasbourg, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHRU Strasbourg - Service d'anesthésie-Réanimation médicale
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Olivier COLLANGE
      • Strasbourg, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Strasbourg Service d'Anesthésie-Réanimation chirurgicale
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Julien POTTERCHER
      • Toulouse, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Toulouse
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Fanny VARDON
      • Vichy, France
        • Not yet recruiting
        • CH Vichy
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Loic DOPEUX

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

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients aged 18 years or older AND
  • Acutely admitted to a study ICU AND
  • Primary diagnosis of septic shock according to the Sepsis-3 criteria and defined as:

    • A suspected or documented site of infection or positive blood culture AND
    • Acute increase of at least 2 points in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score consequent to the infection AND
    • Having a serum lactate level >2 mmol/l AND
    • Requirement of vasopressors (any dose of norepinephrine) to maintain mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg despite adequate fluid resuscitation (at least 1L of IV fluid in the last 24 hours prior to screening)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Septic shock for more than 12 hours at the time of screening
  • Primary cause of hypotension not due to sepsis (e.g., acute bleeding)
  • Decision not to resuscitate (or to limit full care) or not to intubate taken before obtaining consent
  • Death is deemed to be imminent or inevitable or patients with an underlying disease process with a life expectancy of less than 3 months
  • Anticipated surgery during the first 24 hours after randomization
  • Patient or their relatives' refusal to participate
  • Patients participating in another RCT with interventions possibly compromising the primary outcome
  • Prior enrollment in the CARBON trial
  • Known to be pregnant.
  • Legal protection (i.e., incompetence to provide consent and no guardian or incarceration)
  • No affiliation with the French health care system

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: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: CO2gap-guided resuscitation strategy
CO2gap-guided resuscitation strategy aimed at maintaining central venous-to-arterial CO2 partial pressure difference (CO2gap) lower than 6 mmHg, using a sequential approach through a dedicated hemodynamic algorithm. Arterial and central venous blood samples will be drawn simultaneously and reassessed at 2 to 4-hour intervals

For patients assigned to the interventional arm, adherence to the algorithm will complement clinical practices in the following areas:

  • Blood sampling for venous blood gas analysis. Blood samples will be taken from an existing central venous catheter; central venous access is common clinical practice in critically ill patients.
  • The use of dobutamine and blood transfusions in patients showing signs of oxygen deficiency (both will be carried out in accordance with the intended use and conditions of current practice).
No Intervention: Lactate level-guided resuscitation strategy
Lactate level-guided resuscitation strategy aimed at normalizing or decreasing lactate levels by 20% at 2 to 4-hour intervals, as per the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
The primary end point is all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Every day until Day 28

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Key secondary endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Duration of septic shock (i.e., vasopressor use) up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Key secondary endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 90
All-cause mortality at Day 90
Every day until Day 90
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Renal replacement therapy-free days (excluding patients on renal replacement therapy at time of randomization) up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Mechanical ventilation-free days up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Duration of renal replacement therapy (excluding patients on renal replacement therapy at time of randomization) up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Duration of mechanical ventilation up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 7
Incidence of new organ dysfunction (based on the SOFA score) up to Day 7
Every day until Day 7
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
ICU-free days up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
ICU length of stay up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Hospital length of stay up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Safety Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Incidence of adverse events with specific emphasis on the incidence of ischemic (e.g., myocardial, stroke, intestinal, limb ischemia) and arrhythmia (excluding sinus tachycardia or sinus arrhythmia) events reported as having a reasonable possibility of a causal relationship with the study procedures
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: Every day until Day 28
Vasopressor-free and inotrope-free days up to Day 28
Every day until Day 28
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
Time Frame: At Day 90 after randomization

EuroQol 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) :a measure of health-related quality of life at Day 90:

The EQ-5D-5L score is analyzed using the utility value (global index score).

In France, the score ranges from about -0.53 (health states considered worse than death) to 1.00 (full health).

0.00 corresponds to a health state equivalent to death.

At Day 90 after randomization

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.

General Publications

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)

March 29, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

November 30, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 11, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 11, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

September 17, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 15, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 12, 2026

Last Verified

June 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

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

Clinical Trials on CO2gap-guided resuscitation strategy

Subscribe