Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Cure My Disease

Don't miss your cure!

 Log in / Sign up

Which central line technique works best? new study aims to find out

NCT ID NCT05534971

Knowledge-focused Sponsor: Montefiore Medical Center Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now This study
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jun 24, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This study compares two techniques for inserting a central venous catheter in adult emergency department patients with shock. Researchers want to see which method leads to higher first-attempt success, fewer complications, and faster completion. 160 participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two techniques.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

What this could lead to
If one technique proves better, it could lead to safer and faster central line placement in emergencies.
What could go wrong
This is a small, single-center study comparing procedures, not testing a new drug or cure. Results may not apply to all hospitals or patients.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Phase

Phase 4

Runs after approval, following long-term safety and how well the treatment works in everyday use.

Participants

About 160 people

The number the study aims to enrol. It can still change while the study runs.

Started

Nov 2022

Expected to finish

Dec 2027

An estimate. End dates often move.

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Ages

18 years and older

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Not accepted

This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: Adult patients in the emergency department who require ultrasound guided central line placement are eligible for participation and will be referred for participation in the study by the clinical team. Exclusion Criteria: * Inherited, acquired, or medication related coagulopathy or thrombocytopenia (platelets \< 100,000). Patients will not be excluded for use of aspirin or other anti-platelet medication. * Previous central venous access at the same anatomical site. * Any indwelling catheter or wire that could potentially interfere with central line placement * Anterior border of the target vein deeper than 3.5cm Or for any clinical feature that would interfere with obtaining informed consent including dementia, delirium, or encephalopathy, as determined by the clinical attending physician.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Shock are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

Shock

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Shock

How to take part

Only the study team decides who joins. These are the ways to reach them.

  1. The places running it

    1 site. The list below names each one and where it is.

  2. The official record

    ClinicalTrials.gov lists the study team's own contact details, including names and phone numbers. We don't republish those.

    Open the record ↗

  3. A doctor treating you

    A doctor who knows your case can contact a study site on your behalf, and can tell you whether this study is worth pursuing at all.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • Montefiore

    RECRUITING

    The Bronx, New York, 10467, United States

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.