Guiding Fluid Resuscitation in Septic Shock: Ultrasound vs. Noninvasive Cardiac Output Monitoring (NCT07162857) | Clinical Trial Compass
CompletedNot Applicable
Guiding Fluid Resuscitation in Septic Shock: Ultrasound vs. Noninvasive Cardiac Output Monitoring
China60 participantsStarted 2023-07-05
Plain-language summary
This randomized controlled study investigates the value of critical care ultrasound and non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in guiding fluid resuscitation for patients with septic shock in the emergency department. A total of 60 patients are randomly assigned to receive either ultrasound-guided or NICOM-guided fluid management, with both groups receiving standard sepsis care according to the 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines.
The study aims to evaluate whether these monitoring modalities can optimize hemodynamic management, improve prognosis, and support clinical decision-making in emergency settings. Primary and secondary outcomes include early resuscitation efficacy (time to achieve mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg and lactate clearance), total fluid volume within the first 6 hours, incidence of complications (pulmonary edema, renal injury, ARDS), length of stay in the emergency department and hospital, and 28-day mortality.
By comparing these two approaches, this study seeks to provide evidence for selecting appropriate monitoring tools to achieve precise and individualized fluid resuscitation in septic shock.
Who can participate
Age range
18 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion criteria
. diagnosis of septic shock in accordance with the Surviving Sepsis Campaign International ;
. receipt of initial fluid resuscitation in the emergency department with a hospital stay of at least 6 hours;
. inability to comply with treatment, such as patients with severe trauma, burns, cancer undergoing chemotherapy, pregnant or lactating women, and those with mental illness;
. withdrawal from treatment or transfer to another facility within 24 hours of admission.
Questions worth asking your doctor
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
Questions for the trial coordinator
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.