Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT06568744
NCT06568744
Recruiting
Not Applicable

Fluid Intolerance Signals as Safety Limits to Prevent Fluid-induced Harm During Septic Shock Resuscitation

Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile3 sites in 1 country62 target enrollmentAugust 22, 2024
ConditionsSeptic Shock

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Septic Shock
Sponsor
Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
Enrollment
62
Locations
3
Primary Endpoint
Delta of PaO2: fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio between 0-6 hours
Status
Recruiting
Last Updated
last year

Overview

Brief Summary

The goal of this multicentric randomized controlled trial is to compare, in septic shock patients who require further fluid resuscitation, two strategies of administering fluids. The intervention group will integrate fluid intolerance signals to the decision making process, while the control group will follow standard of care, for a 6 hour study protocol. The main question it aims to answer is

  1. To compare the effect of both resuscitation strategies on fluid-induced harm, assessed by the change in pulmonary, cardiac, and renal function biomarkers during the study period.
  2. To assess the safety of both resuscitation strategies on hypoperfusion resolution, measured by the improvement of capillary refill time (CRT) and lactate during the study period.
  3. To determine the dynamics of the different fluid intolerance signals

Detailed Description

Fluids are the first-line hemodynamic therapy during septic shock resuscitation, restoring tissue perfusion by effectively increasing cardiac output and oxygen delivery. Nevertheless, resuscitation fluids can be seen as a double-edged sword since they have a narrow therapeutic index. In the one hand, insufficient fluid administration can perpetuate hypoperfusion, leading to irreversible tissue hypoxia, while excessive fluid administration can lead to fluid-induced harm. The extreme scenario of this condition, fluid overload, has been consistently associated with worse clinical outcomes, including increased risks of prolonged mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury and mortality. As an eminently retrospective diagnosis, it may underestimate the importance of timely recognition of fluid-induced harm during the resuscitation period and could shift clinicians' efforts to treatment rather than prevention. Thus, identifying organ-specific venous congestion signals early on during the resuscitation process is desirable and could avoid these adverse outcomes. Recent studies have shown that venous congestion signals are present even during the first day of ICU admission. The investigators hypothesized that in critically ill patients with septic shock, a fluid resuscitation strategy that integrates fluid intolerance signals as safety limits will prevent fluid-induced harm, without compromising hypoperfusion resolution, compared to a standard resuscitation strategy. To confirm this hypothesis, the investigators propose a multicenter prospective randomized controlled study in 62 critically ill patients with septic shock, comparing two strategies for conducting fluid resuscitation, aiming to decrease fluid-induced harm. One strategy will follow the standard of care, while the other will rest on real-time ultrasound-based monitoring of fluid intolerance signals. The latter approach will allow clinicians to limit fluid administration when potentially deleterious signals appear. The impact of both strategies on fluid-induced harm will be assessed by the evolution of key organ function biomarkers, namely lungs, heart, and kidneys during the 6-hour study period. Perfusion dynamics will be assessed by capillary refill time and arterial lactate kinetics during the study period. Patients will receive general monitoring and management according to ICU standards. Patients will be followed-up for 28 days for other relevant outcomes.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
August 22, 2024
End Date
July 2026
Last Updated
last year
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Parallel
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Sponsor

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Diagnosed or suspected septic shock
  • \< 24 hours since diagnosis
  • Hypoperfusion signal (altered arterial lactate or CRT) that requires further resuscitation
  • Mechanical ventilation
  • Positive fluid responsiveness status

Exclusion Criteria

  • Pregnancy
  • Do-not-resuscitate status
  • Acute coronary syndrome
  • Active bleeding
  • Severe concomitant acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (PaO2:FiO2 ratio \< 100)
  • Anticipated surgery, prone positioning, or renal replacement therapy in the next 6 hours
  • Refractory shock according to attending physician
  • Inadequate echocardiographic window

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Delta of PaO2: fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio between 0-6 hours

Time Frame: 6 hours

evolution of lung function during the study period (6h)

Secondary Outcomes

  • Delta of proBNP between 0-6 hours(6 hours)
  • Delta of creatinine between 0-6 hours(6 hours)
  • Delta of plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) between 0-6 hours(6 hours)
  • Delta of capillary refill time between 0-6 hours(6 hours)
  • Delta of arterial lactate between 0-6 hours(6 hours)

Study Sites (3)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials