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

Ultrasound showdown: which method best guides fluid resuscitation in septic shock?

NCT ID NCT07550400

Knowledge-focused Sponsor: Ain Shams University 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 Results may not be published yet.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This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.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 25, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This study looks at two different ultrasound techniques to help doctors decide how much fluid to give patients with septic shock. One method measures the heart's left ventricle, while the other checks blood flow in the carotid artery. The goal is to see which is more accurate at predicting whether a patient will benefit from more fluids. The study will involve 40 adults with septic shock in the ICU.

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 successful, this could help doctors give fluids more precisely to septic shock patients, potentially improving outcomes.
What could go wrong
This is a small, early-stage study with only 40 participants, so results may not apply to all patients. The methods are still being tested for accuracy.

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.

Participants

About 40 people

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

Expected to start

May 2026

An estimate. Start dates often move.

Expected to finish

Nov 2026

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.

Who is studied

septic shock patients in ICU

Ages

18 to 50 years

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: * ▪ Age:18-50 years old * Sex: both males \&females. * Patients diagnosed with septic shock according to SOFA score more than or equal 1 * Presence of at least one sign of acute circulatory failure from: 1. Low blood pressure (mean arterial pressure \<65 mmHg and / or systolic \<90 mmHg). 2. Tachycardia\> 120 bpm without other obvious cause of circulatory failure. 3. Oliguria \<1 ml / kg during the last hour suggestive of circulatory failure. 4. Blood hyperlactatemia \> 2mmol / l without other obvious cause a systemic circulatory failure. 5. Another sign justifying, for example vascular increase capillary refill time more than 2 seconds. Exclusion Criteria: * ▪ Known significant valvular heart disease (sever aortic insufficiency or stenosis) * Known carotid artery stenosis \>50% or previous carotid surgery * Clear contraindication to the carotid artery Doppler such as wound or infection or complete or partial occlusion of the carotid artery. * Arrhythmias affect stroke volume assessment (atrial fibrillation, frequent PVCs) * Dilated cardiomyopathy. * Poor transthoracic echocardiographic window * Patient refusal

Get updates

Get notified about this study

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

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

toxic shock syndrome

As listed by the trial registrant

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

Fluid resuscitation Septic 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

  • Faculty of medicine, Ain Shams University

    RECRUITING

    Cairo, Egypt

More trials for these conditions

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