Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
COMPLETED
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
113 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2017-04-20
Study Completion Date
2018-03-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
IV fluid resuscitation has long been recognized to be an important treatment for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. While under-resuscitation is known to increase morbidity and mortality, contemporary data suggests that overly aggressive fluid resuscitation may also be harmful. Currently, following an initial IVF resuscitation of 30 ml/kg, there is no standard of care and a lack of evidence to support a fluid restrictive or more liberal strategy. The investigators seek to determine if a fluid restrictive strategy reduces morbidity and mortality among patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Hemodynamic Optimization By Non-Invasive Determination Of Cardiac Output In Critically Ill Patients
NCT01309724
Hypotension
COMPLETED
NA
Restricted or Liberal Fluid for Haemodynamic Resuscitation in Sepsis
NCT05453565
Septic Shock
Fluid Resuscitation
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
The Effect of Restrictive Fluid Management on Cardiac Function and Glycocalyx Degradation
NCT04282252
Septic Shock
COMPLETED
PHASE4
Fluid Balance in the ICU - Interventions to Minimize Fluids in Patients With Septic Shock
NCT02473718
Septic Shock
Fluid Therapy
Hypotension
COMPLETED
NA
Restrictive Fluid Administration vs. Standard of Care in Emergency Department Sepsis Patients
NCT05076435
Sepsis
COMPLETED
PHASE2
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Sepsis is one of the most common indications for intensive care unit admission world wide and the third leading cause of death in the United States. While IV fluid administration has been recognized as an important part of sepsis resuscitation for over 15 years, there is growing concern that overly aggressive IV fluid resuscitation may be harmful to patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
The current standard of care for initial resuscitation is outlined in the 2016 Surviving Sepsis guidelines which recommends a 30mL/kg bolus of IV fluid for septic patients with hypotension (mean arterial pressure \<65 mm Hg) or a lactic acid \>4mmol/L within the first 3 hours of presentation. This standard is affirmed by the 2015 Centers for Medicare \& Medicaid (CMS) SEP-1 guidelines. Afterwards, the guidelines advise the use of vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of \>65 mm Hg within the first 6 hours of patient care. Following the initial 30mL/kg bolus, there is no established standard of care for fluid administration; therefore there is significant variation in care between providers and institutions. Currently, there is no human data that indicates that larger volume (\>30mL/kg) resuscitation strategy improves blood pressure or end organ perfusion , yet it is not uncommon for patients to receive large volumes of IV fluid (5-10 liters) in the early stages of resuscitation.
When considering how much IV fluids are typically administered to patients with septic shock, examination of the large EGDT RCTs provides a more informed picture. In the original Rivers study patients received approximately 70 mL/kg of IVF in the first 6 hours and additional 125 ml/kg in hours 7 to 72.3 Notably, this large volume resuscitation did not produce increased rates of clinically important heart failure and intubation. In the contemporary EGDT validation trials, patients received 60-70 ml/kg of IVF in the first 6 hours and only 60-70 ml/kg from hours 7 to 72.6,7,8 The contemporary alternative approach being advocated among critical care practitioners is to use vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressures above 65 mm Hg following the initial 30 ml/kg bolus, thereby maintaining organ perfusion, while limiting further IV fluid administration.9 Without clear evidence to guide physicians under current usual care the amount of IV fluid administration varies widely between providers and institutions when resuscitating patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
The investigators hypothesize the use of a fluid restrictive strategy will result in a lower 28-day mortality, ICU length of stay and total number of ventilator days but will not reduce the number of patients who need hemodialysis or require intubation.
The primary outcome of the study is to assess if a restrictive IV fluid resuscitation strategy has a composite benefit of a reduced discharge mortality or Persistent Organ Dysfunction (POD) score compared to a usual care among patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. POD is defined by the ongoing need for vasopressor agents such as norepinephrine, epinephrine, vasopressin or dopamine for more than two hours in a given day; persistent renal failure as defined by the need for any ongoing renal replacement therapy; and persistent respiratory/neuromuscular failure as defined by the ongoing need for mechanical ventilation (not including non-invasive ventilation modalities).
The current standard of care for initial resuscitation is outlined in the 2016 Surviving Sepsis guidelines which recommends a 30mL/kg bolus of IV fluid for septic patients with hypotension (mean arterial pressure \<65 mm Hg) or a lactic acid \>4mmol/L within the first 3 hours of presentation. This standard is affirmed by the 2015 Centers for Medicare \& Medicaid (CMS) SEP-1 guidelines. Afterwards, the guidelines advise the use of vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of \>65 mm Hg within the first 6 hours of patient care. Following the initial 30mL/kg bolus, there is no established standard of care for fluid administration; therefore there is significant variation in care between providers and institutions. Currently, there is no human data that indicates that larger volume (\>30mL/kg) resuscitation strategy improves blood pressure or end organ perfusion , yet it is not uncommon for patients to receive large volumes of IV fluid (5-10 liters) in the early stages of resuscitation.
When considering how much IV fluids are typically administered to patients with septic shock, examination of the large EGDT RCTs provides a more informed picture. In the original Rivers study patients received approximately 70 mL/kg of IVF in the first 6 hours and additional 125 ml/kg in hours 7 to 72.3 Notably, this large volume resuscitation did not produce increased rates of clinically important heart failure and intubation. In the contemporary EGDT validation trials, patients received 60-70 ml/kg of IVF in the first 6 hours and only 60-70 ml/kg from hours 7 to 72.6,7,8 The contemporary alternative approach being advocated among critical care practitioners is to use vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressures above 65 mm Hg following the initial 30 ml/kg bolus, thereby maintaining organ perfusion, while limiting further IV fluid administration.9 Without clear evidence to guide physicians under current usual care the amount of IV fluid administration varies widely between providers and institutions when resuscitating patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
The investigators hypothesize the use of a fluid restrictive strategy will result in a lower 28-day mortality, ICU length of stay and total number of ventilator days but will not reduce the number of patients who need hemodialysis or require intubation.
The primary outcome of the study is to assess if a restrictive IV fluid resuscitation strategy has a composite benefit of a reduced discharge mortality or Persistent Organ Dysfunction (POD) score compared to a usual care among patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. POD is defined by the ongoing need for vasopressor agents such as norepinephrine, epinephrine, vasopressin or dopamine for more than two hours in a given day; persistent renal failure as defined by the need for any ongoing renal replacement therapy; and persistent respiratory/neuromuscular failure as defined by the ongoing need for mechanical ventilation (not including non-invasive ventilation modalities).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Septic Shock
Severe Sepsis
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Allocation Method
RANDOMIZED
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Randomized Trial
Primary Study Purpose
TREATMENT
Blinding Strategy
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Usual Care
Participants randomized to the usual care resuscitation strategy will receive an initial 30 ml/kg bolus and then IV fluids as needed and without limit as well as IV vasopressors to maintain a MAP\>65, determined by the primary care team for the duration of the study.
Group Type
NO_INTERVENTION
No interventions assigned to this group
Restrictive Care
Participants randomized to the restrictive fluid resuscitation strategy will be LIMITED to 60 ml/kg (up to 6000 ml) of IV fluids as initial resuscitation followed by administration of IV vasopressors to maintain a MAP\>65 mm Hg for the first 72 hours of care. The intervention is defined as capping the total allowed IVF administered. After 72 hours the participants are eligible for IV fluids as determined by the primary care team.
Group Type
EXPERIMENTAL
Intravenous Fluid Cap
Intervention Type
OTHER
Normal Saline or Ringers Lactate limited to 60ml/kg for first 72 hours
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Intravenous Fluid Cap
Normal Saline or Ringers Lactate limited to 60ml/kg for first 72 hours
Intervention Type
OTHER
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
1. The patients must be suspected by the treating physician to have sepsis causing their acute illness as exhibited by 2 or more of the following Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria was well as a known or suspected infection at the time of screening:
1. Temperature of \> 38 C or \< 36 C
2. Heart rate of \> 90/min
3. Respiratory rate of \> 20/min or PaCO2 \< 32 mm Hg
4. White blood cell count \> 12000/mm3 or \< 4000/mm3 or \>10% immature bands.
2. Since approximately 12% of patients ultimately diagnosed with sepsis do not meet SIRS criteria , SIRS negative patients will be eligible for the study if the treating physician makes a clinical diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock.
3. Patients must be suspected of having severe sepsis or septic shock defined as refractory hypotension or a lactic acid\>4 at the time of enrollment. Refractory hypotension is defined as having a SBP \<90 or MAP \<65, for 15 minutes, following 1000 mL of IV fluid or a blood pressure maintained by vasopressor administration.
4. Patients must have received less than 60ml/kg of intravenous fluid at time of study enrollment.
1. Temperature of \> 38 C or \< 36 C
2. Heart rate of \> 90/min
3. Respiratory rate of \> 20/min or PaCO2 \< 32 mm Hg
4. White blood cell count \> 12000/mm3 or \< 4000/mm3 or \>10% immature bands.
2. Since approximately 12% of patients ultimately diagnosed with sepsis do not meet SIRS criteria , SIRS negative patients will be eligible for the study if the treating physician makes a clinical diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock.
3. Patients must be suspected of having severe sepsis or septic shock defined as refractory hypotension or a lactic acid\>4 at the time of enrollment. Refractory hypotension is defined as having a SBP \<90 or MAP \<65, for 15 minutes, following 1000 mL of IV fluid or a blood pressure maintained by vasopressor administration.
4. Patients must have received less than 60ml/kg of intravenous fluid at time of study enrollment.
Exclusion Criteria
1. Patients with a PRIMARY diagnosis of acute cerebral vascular event, acute coronary syndrome, acute pulmonary edema, status asthmaticus, active gastrointestinal bleeding, seizure, drug overdose, burn, trauma, requirement for immediate surgery, or undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
2. Patients who have a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock and additionally have an active fluid wasting process such as extensive diarrhea, diabetes insipidus, cerebral salt wasting, or an osmotic diuresis.
3. Patients who have a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock who have a concurrent diagnosis of diabetic ketoacidosis, hyperosmolar non-ketotic hyperglycemia, or rhabdomyolysis.
4. Patients who have received \>60 ml/kg of IVF resuscitation.
5. Patient who are \<18 years old, pregnant, or incarcerated.
2. Patients who have a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock and additionally have an active fluid wasting process such as extensive diarrhea, diabetes insipidus, cerebral salt wasting, or an osmotic diuresis.
3. Patients who have a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock who have a concurrent diagnosis of diabetic ketoacidosis, hyperosmolar non-ketotic hyperglycemia, or rhabdomyolysis.
4. Patients who have received \>60 ml/kg of IVF resuscitation.
5. Patient who are \<18 years old, pregnant, or incarcerated.
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Rhode Island Hospital
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Responsibility Role
SPONSOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Keith Corl, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Department of Pulmonary Critical Care Brown University
Mitchell Levy, MD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Department of Pulmonary Critical Care Brown University
Amy Palmisciano, RN, BSN
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Department of Pulmonary Critical Care Brown University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Rhode Island Hosptial
Providence, Rhode Island, United States
Site Status
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
United States
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001 Jul;29(7):1303-10. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200107000-00002.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Vincent JL, Sakr Y, Sprung CL, Ranieri VM, Reinhart K, Gerlach H, Moreno R, Carlet J, Le Gall JR, Payen D; Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients Investigators. Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study. Crit Care Med. 2006 Feb;34(2):344-53. doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000194725.48928.3a.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M; Early Goal-Directed Therapy Collaborative Group. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001 Nov 8;345(19):1368-77. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa010307.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Johansson PI, Aneman A, Vang ML, Winding R, Nebrich L, Nibro HL, Rasmussen BS, Lauridsen JR, Nielsen JS, Oldner A, Pettila V, Cronhjort MB, Andersen LH, Pedersen UG, Reiter N, Wiis J, White JO, Russell L, Thornberg KJ, Hjortrup PB, Muller RG, Moller MH, Steensen M, Tjader I, Kilsand K, Odeberg-Wernerman S, Sjobo B, Bundgaard H, Thyo MA, Lodahl D, Maerkedahl R, Albeck C, Illum D, Kruse M, Winkel P, Perner A; TRISS Trial Group; Scandinavian Critical Care Trials Group. Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 9;371(15):1381-91. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1406617. Epub 2014 Oct 1.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Jones AE, Shapiro NI, Trzeciak S, Arnold RC, Claremont HA, Kline JA; Emergency Medicine Shock Research Network (EMShockNet) Investigators. Lactate clearance vs central venous oxygen saturation as goals of early sepsis therapy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2010 Feb 24;303(8):739-46. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.158.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
ProCESS Investigators; Yealy DM, Kellum JA, Huang DT, Barnato AE, Weissfeld LA, Pike F, Terndrup T, Wang HE, Hou PC, LoVecchio F, Filbin MR, Shapiro NI, Angus DC. A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014 May 1;370(18):1683-93. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1401602. Epub 2014 Mar 18.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Mouncey PR, Osborn TM, Power GS, Harrison DA, Sadique MZ, Grieve RD, Jahan R, Harvey SE, Bell D, Bion JF, Coats TJ, Singer M, Young JD, Rowan KM; ProMISe Trial Investigators. Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 2;372(14):1301-11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1500896. Epub 2015 Mar 17.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
ARISE Investigators; ANZICS Clinical Trials Group; Peake SL, Delaney A, Bailey M, Bellomo R, Cameron PA, Cooper DJ, Higgins AM, Holdgate A, Howe BD, Webb SA, Williams P. Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 16;371(16):1496-506. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1404380. Epub 2014 Oct 1.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Marik PE. Early management of severe sepsis: concepts and controversies. Chest. 2014 Jun;145(6):1407-1418. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-2104.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Rubenfeld GD, Webb S, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R; Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including The Pediatric Subgroup. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med. 2013 Feb;39(2):165-228. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8. Epub 2013 Jan 30.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Hilton AK, Bellomo R. A critique of fluid bolus resuscitation in severe sepsis. Crit Care. 2012 Jan 25;16(1):302. doi: 10.1186/cc11154.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Hilton AK, Bellomo R. Totem and taboo: fluids in sepsis. Crit Care. 2011;15(3):164. doi: 10.1186/cc10247. Epub 2011 Jun 10.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Landry DW, Oliver JA. The pathogenesis of vasodilatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2001 Aug 23;345(8):588-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra002709. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Ueda S, Nishio K, Akai Y, Fukushima H, Ueyama T, Kawai Y, Masui K, Yoshioka A, Okuchi K. Prognostic value of increased plasma levels of brain natriuretic peptide in patients with septic shock. Shock. 2006 Aug;26(2):134-9. doi: 10.1097/01.shk.0000226266.99960.d0.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Zhang Z, Zhang Z, Xue Y, Xu X, Ni H. Prognostic value of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and its potential role in guiding fluid therapy in critically ill septic patients. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2012 Dec 31;20:86. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-20-86.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Bruegger D, Jacob M, Rehm M, Loetsch M, Welsch U, Conzen P, Becker BF. Atrial natriuretic peptide induces shedding of endothelial glycocalyx in coronary vascular bed of guinea pig hearts. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2005 Nov;289(5):H1993-9. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00218.2005. Epub 2005 Jun 17.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Bruegger D, Schwartz L, Chappell D, Jacob M, Rehm M, Vogeser M, Christ F, Reichart B, Becker BF. Release of atrial natriuretic peptide precedes shedding of the endothelial glycocalyx equally in patients undergoing on- and off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. Basic Res Cardiol. 2011 Nov;106(6):1111-21. doi: 10.1007/s00395-011-0203-y. Epub 2011 Jul 19.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Alphonsus CS, Rodseth RN. The endothelial glycocalyx: a review of the vascular barrier. Anaesthesia. 2014 Jul;69(7):777-84. doi: 10.1111/anae.12661. Epub 2014 Apr 28.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Bark BP, Persson J, Grande PO. Importance of the infusion rate for the plasma expanding effect of 5% albumin, 6% HES 130/0.4, 4% gelatin, and 0.9% NaCl in the septic rat. Crit Care Med. 2013 Mar;41(3):857-66. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318274157e.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Micek ST, McEvoy C, McKenzie M, Hampton N, Doherty JA, Kollef MH. Fluid balance and cardiac function in septic shock as predictors of hospital mortality. Crit Care. 2013 Oct 20;17(5):R246. doi: 10.1186/cc13072.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada TA, Walley KR, Russell JA. Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: a positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressure are associated with increased mortality. Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb;39(2):259-65. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181feeb15.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kelm DJ, Perrin JT, Cartin-Ceba R, Gajic O, Schenck L, Kennedy CC. Fluid overload in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock treated with early goal-directed therapy is associated with increased acute need for fluid-related medical interventions and hospital death. Shock. 2015 Jan;43(1):68-73. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000268.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Maitland K, Kiguli S, Opoka RO, Engoru C, Olupot-Olupot P, Akech SO, Nyeko R, Mtove G, Reyburn H, Lang T, Brent B, Evans JA, Tibenderana JK, Crawley J, Russell EC, Levin M, Babiker AG, Gibb DM; FEAST Trial Group. Mortality after fluid bolus in African children with severe infection. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2483-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1101549. Epub 2011 May 26.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kaukonen KM, Bailey M, Pilcher D, Cooper DJ, Bellomo R. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria in defining severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 23;372(17):1629-38. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1415236. Epub 2015 Mar 17.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Heyland DK, Muscedere J, Drover J, Jiang X, Day AG; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Persistent organ dysfunction plus death: a novel, composite outcome measure for critical care trials. Crit Care. 2011;15(2):R98. doi: 10.1186/cc10110. Epub 2011 Mar 18.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
409916
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Impact of Amount of Fluid for Circulatory Resuscitation on Renal Function in Patients in Shock
NCT02666404
TERMINATED
NA
Fluids in Sepsis and Septic Shock
NCT02748382
COMPLETED
PHASE2/PHASE3
Low-chlorine Vs High-chlorine Crystalloids in Septic Shock Adults
NCT04365010
UNKNOWN
PHASE4
Intravenous AII for the Treatment of Severe Hypotension in High Output Shock: A Pilot Study
NCT01393782
COMPLETED
PHASE1
Novel Device for Rapid Fluid Administration
NCT03074682
COMPLETED
NA
Precision Resuscitation With Crystalloids in Sepsis
NCT06253585
RECRUITING
NA
Fluid Responsiveness Evaluation in Sepsis-associated Hypotension
NCT02837731
COMPLETED
NA
Field Trial of Hypotensive Versus Standard Resuscitation for Hemorrhagic Shock After Trauma
NCT01411852
COMPLETED
PHASE2
Controlled Fluid Removal in Critical Ill Patients With Fluid Overload in the Intensive Care Unit.
NCT04180397
RECRUITING
PHASE4
Variation in Fluids Administered in Shock
NCT03190408
COMPLETED
Non-interventional Follow-up Versus Fluid Bolus in RESPONSE to Oliguria in the Critically Ill
NCT02860572
COMPLETED
NA
PPV to Guide Fluid Management in the PICU
NCT02308371
COMPLETED
NA
Effect of Giving Reduced Fluid in Children After Trauma
NCT04201704
RECRUITING
NA
A Simple Clinical Tool to Help Assess Patient Volume (Fluid) Status
NCT00599794
COMPLETED
Prospective Cohort Study of Intravenous Lipid Emulsion for Resuscitating Critically-ill Poisoned Patients
NCT03107689
COMPLETED
Peripheral Perfusion Targeted Fluid Management
NCT01397474
UNKNOWN
PHASE4
Use of a Mini-fluid Bolus to Identify Fluid Responsiveness
NCT03058653
WITHDRAWN
NA
0.9% NaCl/Dextrose 5% vs 0.45% NaCl/Dextrose 5% as Maintenance Intravenous Fluids in Critically Ill Children
NCT01301274
COMPLETED
NA
Bicarbonated Ringer's Solution Versus Lactated Ringer's Solution in Patients With Septic Shock
NCT04449757
UNKNOWN
NA
The Effect of Fluid Resuscitation With 0.9% Sodium Chloride Versus Balanced Crystalloid Solution on Renal Function of Sepsis Patients
NCT03277677
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Intra-Abdominal Sepsis and Relationship Between Cumulative Fluid Balance and Serum Sodium and Chloride Levels and In-Hospital Mortality
NCT06838585
COMPLETED
A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Conservative Fluid Balance Strategy for Patients With Sepsis and Cardiopulmonary Dysfunction (BALANCE Study)
NCT02159079
COMPLETED
NA
Effects of IV Chloride Content on Outcomes
NCT02083198
COMPLETED
SOFI: A Quality Improvement Project to Standardize Use of Intravenous Fluids in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients
NCT03924674
COMPLETED
NA
Hypertonic Saline With Dextran for Treating Hypovolemic Shock and Severe Brain Injury
NCT00113685
COMPLETED
NA