Surgical Critical Care Initiative (SC2i) Tissue and Data Acquisition Protocol (TDAP) in Burn Patients Improving the Robustness and Generalizability of Post-burn Sepsis Prediction With the Post-Burn Sepsis Digital Twin. Group 1
NCT ID: NCT07249762
Last Updated: 2026-02-04
Study Results
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.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
40 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2026-05-15
2027-12-15
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
TDAP in Burn Patients (Group 2)
NCT07223684
Autologous Point-of-Care Adipose Therapy: Delayed Injury/Scar
NCT06857435
Autologous Point-of-Care Adipose Therapy: Recent Injury
NCT06857448
Chronology of Occult and Gross Coagulopathy in Burn Patients
NCT01638481
Hemofiltration in Burns: RESCUE (Randomized Controlled Evaluation of Hemofiltration in Adult Burn Patients With Septic Shock and Acute Renal Failure)
NCT01213914
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Eligible participants are males and females between 18 and 80 years old with burn injuries involving more than 10% of their total body surface area (TBSA) who require care in a critical care or emergency setting at an SC2i-member facility (e.g., Emory, Grady, USF, USAISR). All participants or their Legally Authorized Representatives (LARs) must provide informed consent. About 40 patients are expected to participate.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group 1 - Minimal Risk Burn Patient
The study includes adult patients (18 years and older) admitted with significant burn injuries involving more than 10% of their total body surface area (TBSA) who require surgical management and/or care within a surgical critical care setting. As part of their participation, small amounts of blood are collected at scheduled times during hospitalization, and small pieces of skin or tissue normally removed during burn surgery may also be saved. Medical information already recorded in the hospital chart-such as vital signs, lab results, surgeries, and complications-is also included in the study.
Observational Cohort (No Intervention)
This is not a treatment trial-no drugs, devices, or procedures are being tested. Participants receive standard burn care only. The research involves collecting blood and tissue samples (when clinically indicated) and reviewing medical record data.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Observational Cohort (No Intervention)
This is not a treatment trial-no drugs, devices, or procedures are being tested. Participants receive standard burn care only. The research involves collecting blood and tissue samples (when clinically indicated) and reviewing medical record data.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Male and female ages 18 years and older (maximum age of 80 years old) with burn injury or related illness requiring surgical care or treatment in a critical care or emergency setting who are being cared for at an SC2i-member clinical care facility (Emory/Grady, USF and USAISR) will be considered for study.
* Ability to understand the purposes and risks of the study and to provide informed consent, either through written documentation or in accordance with the IRB-approved Waiver of Documentation of Consent procedures. In the case of incapacitated patients, a willing Legally Authorized Representative (LAR) may provide informed consent in accordance with written documentation or under the provisions of the approved Waiver of Documentation of Consent.
Exclusion Criteria
* Pregnant patients
* Minors \< 18 years of age
* Prisoners
18 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
United States Department of Defense
FED
Emory University
OTHER
United States Army Institute of Surgical Research
FED
University of South Florida
OTHER
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
FED
Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of South Florida - Tampa General Hospital
Tampa, Florida, United States
Emory University-Grady Memorial Hospital
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
United States Army Institute of Surgical Research
Houston, Texas, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Yan J, Hill WF, Rehou S, Pinto R, Shahrokhi S, Jeschke MG. Sepsis criteria versus clinical diagnosis of sepsis in burn patients: A validation of current sepsis scores. Surgery. 2018 Dec;164(6):1241-1245. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.05.053. Epub 2018 Jul 23.
Boehm D, Menke H. Sepsis in Burns-Lessons Learnt from Developments in the Management of Septic Shock. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021 Dec 24;58(1):26. doi: 10.3390/medicina58010026.
Hampson P, Dinsdale RJ, Wearn CM, Bamford AL, Bishop JRB, Hazeldine J, Moiemen NS, Harrison P, Lord JM. Neutrophil Dysfunction, Immature Granulocytes, and Cell-free DNA are Early Biomarkers of Sepsis in Burn-injured Patients: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study. Ann Surg. 2017 Jun;265(6):1241-1249. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001807.
Moins-Teisserenc H, Cordeiro DJ, Audigier V, Ressaire Q, Benyamina M, Lambert J, Maki G, Homyrda L, Toubert A, Legrand M. Severe Altered Immune Status After Burn Injury Is Associated With Bacterial Infection and Septic Shock. Front Immunol. 2021 Mar 2;12:586195. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.586195. eCollection 2021.
Sadeq F, Poster J, Chu C, Weber J, Lydon M, Begis MD, Sheridan RL, Uygun K. Specific patterns of vital sign fluctuations predict infection and enable sepsis diagnosis in pediatric burn patients. PLoS One. 2022 Feb 7;17(2):e0263421. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263421. eCollection 2022.
Niggemann P, Rittirsch D, Buehler PK, Schweizer R, Giovanoli P, Reding T, Graf R, Plock JA, Klein HJ. Incidence and Time Point of Sepsis Detection as Related to Different Sepsis Definitions in Severely Burned Patients and Their Accompanying Time Course of Pro-Inflammatory Biomarkers. J Pers Med. 2021 Jul 23;11(8):701. doi: 10.3390/jpm11080701.
Adams R, Henry KE, Sridharan A, Soleimani H, Zhan A, Rawat N, Johnson L, Hager DN, Cosgrove SE, Markowski A, Klein EY, Chen ES, Saheed MO, Henley M, Miranda S, Houston K, Linton RC, Ahluwalia AR, Wu AW, Saria S. Prospective, multi-site study of patient outcomes after implementation of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system for sepsis. Nat Med. 2022 Jul;28(7):1455-1460. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-01894-0. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
Henry KE, Adams R, Parent C, Soleimani H, Sridharan A, Johnson L, Hager DN, Cosgrove SE, Markowski A, Klein EY, Chen ES, Saheed MO, Henley M, Miranda S, Houston K, Linton RC 2nd, Ahluwalia AR, Wu AW, Saria S. Factors driving provider adoption of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system and its effects on sepsis treatment timing. Nat Med. 2022 Jul;28(7):1447-1454. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-01895-z. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
Tran NK, Albahra S, Pham TN, Holmes JH 4th, Greenhalgh D, Palmieri TL, Wajda J, Rashidi HH. Novel application of an automated-machine learning development tool for predicting burn sepsis: proof of concept. Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 23;10(1):12354. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69433-w.
Rashidi HH, Sen S, Palmieri TL, Blackmon T, Wajda J, Tran NK. Early Recognition of Burn- and Trauma-Related Acute Kidney Injury: A Pilot Comparison of Machine Learning Techniques. Sci Rep. 2020 Jan 14;10(1):205. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-57083-6.
von Lilienfeld-Toal M, Dietrich MP, Glasmacher A, Lehmann L, Breig P, Hahn C, Schmidt-Wolf IG, Marklein G, Schroeder S, Stuber F. Markers of bacteremia in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies: procalcitonin and IL-6 are more reliable than C-reactive protein. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004 Jul;23(7):539-44. doi: 10.1007/s10096-004-1156-y. Epub 2004 Jun 22.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
HT94252320022
Identifier Type: OTHER_GRANT
Identifier Source: secondary_id
USUHS.2025-153
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.