Septic ShockNCT05578534
CO2 Gap Changes in Septic Shock in Relation to Cardiac Output
An observational study of Septic Shock, run by Cairo University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Background The arteriovenous difference of partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2) between mixed or central venous blood and arterial blood is the ∆PCO2 or CO2 gap. Previous data demonstrated a strong relationship between ∆PCO2 and cardiac index (CI) at the very early phase of resuscitation in septic shock. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Septic Shock
- How many people
- 76 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Dec 2020to 1 Oct 2022
- How long will I take part?
- 28 Days
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: 76 consecutive adult patients admitted to critical care department of Cairo university hospitals with septic shock
Who may be able to join
- adult patients admitted to critical care department of Cairo university hospitals with septic shock and elevated blood lactate level > 2 mmol/ L requiring fluid resuscitation and/ or vasopressor drugs infusion.
Who cannot join
- Patients with advanced cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, or renal diseases were excluded from enrolment.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: CO2 Gap Changes Compared to Cardiac Output Changes in Response to Intravenous Volume Expansion and/or Vasopressor Therapy in Septic Shock
Background The arteriovenous difference of partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2) between mixed or central venous blood and arterial blood is the ∆PCO2 or CO2 gap. Previous data demonstrated a strong relationship between ∆PCO2 and cardiac index (CI) at the very early phase of resuscitation in septic shock. Monitoring the ∆PCO2 from the beginning of the resuscitation may be a useful tool to assess the adequacy of cardiac output (CO) in tissue perfusion.
Aim of work: To examine behavior of ∆PCO2 during early management of septic shock.
Methodology: Seventy-six patients with diagnosis of septic shock admitted to critical care department, Cairo university hospitals. We classified the study population according to initial resuscitation response, initial CO2 gap, or 28-days mortality. The response vs non-response to initial resuscitation, ICU morbidity and recovery rate were the study primary outcomes while secondary outcomes included ICU length of stay (LOS) and 28-day ICU Mortality.
Read the detailed description
Introduction
Shock is defined as a life-threatening, generalized acute circulatory failure with inadequate cellular oxygen utilization [1]. One of the goals of acute circulatory failure treatment is to increase cardiac output [2].
The ∆PCO2 is defined by the difference in the partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2) between mixed or central venous blood and arterial blood [1]. The ∆PCO2 has been correlated to outcome and mortality [3].
The mixed ∆PCO2 difference has been shown to be inversely correlated with the cardiac index (CI). A central venous PCO2, which is easier to obtain, may provide similar information. Substitution of a central for a mixed ∆PCO2 provides an accepted alternative [4].
Measurements of central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) and ∆PCO2 were advised to assess adequacy of cardiac output as well as to guide therapy [5]. A normal CO2 gap indicates that CO is high enough to wash out CO2 from peripheral tissue. Either PCO2 gap or the PCO2 gap to arterio-venous O2 content difference ratio could be used to guide resuscitation therapy [6].
∆PCO2 value of >6 mmHg suggests an insufficient blood flow in the tissues even when the ScvO2 is >70 % [1].
Aim of work
Our aim of the study is to investigate the value of PCO2 gap changes in the early septic shock management compared to the cardiac output.
Patients and methods
The study was approved by the ethical committee of faculty of medicine, Cairo University (N-194-2019)
A written informed consent was obtained from patient's first degree relatives.
Sample size calculation Based on past review of literature and by using G power software (version 3.1.3, Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf Germany) with a power of 0.90 and 0.05 alpha error, sample size was calculated to be 69 patients. With a withdrawal/non-evaluable subject rate of 10%, a total of 76 patients will be recruited.
Type of the study An observational prospective study was conducted on 76 consecutive adult patients admitted to critical care department of Cairo university hospitals with septic shock and elevated blood lactate level > 2 mmol/ L requiring fluid resuscitation and/ or vasopressor drugs infusion.
Duration : between December 2020 to March 2022
Definitions
Sepsis is identified by suspected or confirmed infection AND an organ dysfunction as defined by a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) [7].
Organ dysfunction defined by an increase in SOFA score of 2 points or more (sepsis-related) from up to 48 hours before to up to 24 hours after the onset of suspected infection [8].
Septic shock is clinically identified by a vasopressor requirement to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg or greater and serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (>18 mg/dL) in the absence of hypovolemia [7].
Inclusion criteria The study population were included immediately on admission to ICU after fulfilling inclusion criteria.
Exclusion criteria Patients with advanced cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, or renal diseases were excluded from enrolment.
Our patients were resuscitated according to surviving sepsis campaign recommendations within 1 hr of recognition. The study cohort were included immediately on admission to ICU and after insertion of invasive lines (T0).
The resuscitation targets were MAP ≥ 65 mmHg, urine output ≥ 0.5 ml/kg/min, ScvO2 ≥ 70%, normalization or significant decrease of serum lactate concentration.
Infusion of vasopressors during or after fluid resuscitation if MAP cannot be maintained, and infusion of dobutamine if evidence of myocardial dysfunction or ongoing hypoperfusion despite optimizing intravascular volume.
The 1st set of measurements were taken after insertion of invasive lines (T0) \& 2nd set of measurements were taken (T1) after completion the initial resuscitation when stable MAP by a fluid boluses of up to 30 ml/kg iv and/or by vasopressor infusion or after 3 hours which is closer.
Patients' demographics, comorbidities, APACHE II score up on ICU admission, SOFA score (initial and after 48 hrs), arterial lactate, ∆PCO2, blood gases (ABG, cvVBG), vital signs, echocardiographic LVOT cardiac output and index data were collected.
The microbiological data, source of sepsis, relevant laboratory data, vasopressor/inotropic support, ventilatory support, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) needs along with ICU-morbidities and readmissions were recorded.
Lactate clearance was calculated as a percentage ratio of (initial arterial lactate level at T0 - arterial lactate level at 6 hours after treatment)/ arterial lactate level at T0. The P/F ratio, ∆PCO2 (before and after resuscitation), PCO2 Gap at T1/PCO2 Gap at T0 (gap/gap ratio) and cardiac index responsiveness was calculated as well.
The patients were classified according to initial ∆PCO2, resuscitation response, and 28-days mortality into:
- High gap (Pcv-aCO2 > 6 mmHg) vs normal gap (Pcv-aCO2 ≤6 mmHg) [9] [10],
- Responsive (15% increase in CI or stable MAP was achieved) vs non-responsive (< 15% increase in CI or a stable MAP was not achieved) [11] [12]
- Survivors vs non-survivors
The gap/gap ratio is an expression of the trend of ∆PCO2 level during resuscitation and thus, it can be reflection of prognosis and outcome.
Response to resuscitation:
investigators defined the positive response to initial resuscitation as an increase in CI by 15% or a stable MAP was achieved within or after completion of the 1st 3 hrs post-enrolment. This cut-off value was chosen by the reference to previous studies.
- Conditions
- Septic Shock
- Medical subject headings
- Shock, Septic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| High CO2 gap (Pcv-aCO2 > 6 mmHg) | Patients had high PCO2 gaps before initial resuscitation | |
| Normal CO2 gap (Pcv-aCO2 ≤6 mmHg) | Patients had normal PCO2 gaps before initial resuscitation | |
| Responsive (15% increase in CI or stable MAP was achieved) | Patients who respond to initial resuscitation with 15% increase in CI | |
| Non-responsive (< 15% increase in CI or a stable MAP was not achieved) | Patients who do not respond to initial resuscitation with less than 15% increase in CI | |
| Survivors | Patients who survived after 28 days | |
| Non survivors | Patients who do not survive within 28 days |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The response to initial resuscitation
response to intial resuscitation with IV fluids and vasopressors measured by PCO2 gap
Measured: 6 hours
Secondary outcomes (1)
ICU length of stay (LOS) and 28-day mortality
correlation of measuring PCO2 gap as a resuscitation measure with ICU stay and mortality
Measured: 28 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Oct 2022
- Study start1 Dec 2020
- Primary completion30 Sep 2022
- Study completion1 Oct 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Septic ShockStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Cairo UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 76 participants (actual)
- Target duration
- 28 Days
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Mostafa Farouk, Cairo University
- Investigators
- Farouk Faris, MD, Principal investigator, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05578534
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- MD-194-2019
- Status last verified
- Oct 2022
- First submitted
- 5 Oct 2022
- Last updated
- 13 Oct 2022
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Oct 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- CO2 Gap Changes Compared to Cardiac Output Changes in Response to Intravenous Volume Expansion and/or Vasopressor Therapy in Septic Shock
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05578534
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MD-194-2019
- Conditions
- Septic Shock
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 76 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Oct 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background The arteriovenous difference of partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2) between mixed or central venous blood and arterial blood is the ∆PCO2 or CO2 gap. Previous data demonstrated a strong relationship between ∆PCO2 and cardiac index (CI) at the very early phase of resuscitation in septic shock. Monitoring the ∆PCO2 from the beginning of the resuscitation may be a useful tool to assess the adequacy of cardiac output (CO) in tissue perfusion.
Aim of work: To examine behavior of ∆PCO2 during early management of septic shock.
Methodology: Seventy-six patients with diagnosis of septic shock admitted to critical care department, Cairo university hospitals. We classified the study population according to initial resuscitation response, initial CO2 gap, or 28-days mortality. The response vs non-response to initial resuscitation, ICU morbidity and recovery rate were the study primary outcomes while secondary outcomes included ICU length of stay (LOS) and 28-day ICU Mortality.
Detailed description
Introduction
Shock is defined as a life-threatening, generalized acute circulatory failure with inadequate cellular oxygen utilization [1]. One of the goals of acute circulatory failure treatment is to increase cardiac output [2].
The ∆PCO2 is defined by the difference in the partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2) between mixed or central venous blood and arterial blood [1]. The ∆PCO2 has been correlated to outcome and mortality [3].
The mixed ∆PCO2 difference has been shown to be inversely correlated with the cardiac index (CI). A central venous PCO2, which is easier to obtain, may provide similar information. Substitution of a central for a mixed ∆PCO2 provides an accepted alternative [4].
Measurements of central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) and ∆PCO2 were advised to assess adequacy of cardiac output as well as to guide therapy [5]. A normal CO2 gap indicates that CO is high enough to wash out CO2 from peripheral tissue. Either PCO2 gap or the PCO2 gap to arterio-venous O2 content difference ratio could be used to guide resuscitation therapy [6].
∆PCO2 value of >6 mmHg suggests an insufficient blood flow in the tissues even when the ScvO2 is >70 % [1].
Aim of work
Our aim of the study is to investigate the value of PCO2 gap changes in the early septic shock management compared to the cardiac output.
Patients and methods
The study was approved by the ethical committee of faculty of medicine, Cairo University (N-194-2019)
A written informed consent was obtained from patient's first degree relatives.
Sample size calculation Based on past review of literature and by using G power software (version 3.1.3, Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf Germany) with a power of 0.90 and 0.05 alpha error, sample size was calculated to be 69 patients. With a withdrawal/non-evaluable subject rate of 10%, a total of 76 patients will be recruited.
Type of the study An observational prospective study was conducted on 76 consecutive adult patients admitted to critical care department of Cairo university hospitals with septic shock and elevated blood lactate level > 2 mmol/ L requiring fluid resuscitation and/ or vasopressor drugs infusion.
Duration : between December 2020 to March 2022
Definitions
Sepsis is identified by suspected or confirmed infection AND an organ dysfunction as defined by a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) [7].
Organ dysfunction defined by an increase in SOFA score of 2 points or more (sepsis-related) from up to 48 hours before to up to 24 hours after the onset of suspected infection [8].
Septic shock is clinically identified by a vasopressor requirement to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg or greater and serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (>18 mg/dL) in the absence of hypovolemia [7].
Inclusion criteria The study population were included immediately on admission to ICU after fulfilling inclusion criteria.
Exclusion criteria Patients with advanced cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, or renal diseases were excluded from enrolment.
Our patients were resuscitated according to surviving sepsis campaign recommendations within 1 hr of recognition. The study cohort were included immediately on admission to ICU and after insertion of invasive lines (T0).
The resuscitation targets were MAP ≥ 65 mmHg, urine output ≥ 0.5 ml/kg/min, ScvO2 ≥ 70%, normalization or significant decrease of serum lactate concentration.
Infusion of vasopressors during or after fluid resuscitation if MAP cannot be maintained, and infusion of dobutamine if evidence of myocardial dysfunction or ongoing hypoperfusion despite optimizing intravascular volume.
The 1st set of measurements were taken after insertion of invasive lines (T0) \& 2nd set of measurements were taken (T1) after completion the initial resuscitation when stable MAP by a fluid boluses of up to 30 ml/kg iv and/or by vasopressor infusion or after 3 hours which is closer.
Patients' demographics, comorbidities, APACHE II score up on ICU admission, SOFA score (initial and after 48 hrs), arterial lactate, ∆PCO2, blood gases (ABG, cvVBG), vital signs, echocardiographic LVOT cardiac output and index data were collected.
The microbiological data, source of sepsis, relevant laboratory data, vasopressor/inotropic support, ventilatory support, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) needs along with ICU-morbidities and readmissions were recorded.
Lactate clearance was calculated as a percentage ratio of (initial arterial lactate level at T0 - arterial lactate level at 6 hours after treatment)/ arterial lactate level at T0. The P/F ratio, ∆PCO2 (before and after resuscitation), PCO2 Gap at T1/PCO2 Gap at T0 (gap/gap ratio) and cardiac index responsiveness was calculated as well.
The patients were classified according to initial ∆PCO2, resuscitation response, and 28-days mortality into:
- High gap (Pcv-aCO2 > 6 mmHg) vs normal gap (Pcv-aCO2 ≤6 mmHg) [9] [10],
- Responsive (15% increase in CI or stable MAP was achieved) vs non-responsive (< 15% increase in CI or a stable MAP was not achieved) [11] [12]
- Survivors vs non-survivors
The gap/gap ratio is an expression of the trend of ∆PCO2 level during resuscitation and thus, it can be reflection of prognosis and outcome.
Response to resuscitation:
investigators defined the positive response to initial resuscitation as an increase in CI by 15% or a stable MAP was achieved within or after completion of the 1st 3 hrs post-enrolment. This cut-off value was chosen by the reference to previous studies.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 28 Days
- Number of arms
- 6
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| High CO2 gap (Pcv-aCO2 > 6 mmHg) | – | –Patients had high PCO2 gaps before initial resuscitation |
| Normal CO2 gap (Pcv-aCO2 ≤6 mmHg) | – | –Patients had normal PCO2 gaps before initial resuscitation |
| Responsive (15% increase in CI or stable MAP was achieved) | – | –Patients who respond to initial resuscitation with 15% increase in CI |
| Non-responsive (< 15% increase in CI or a stable MAP was not achieved) | – | –Patients who do not respond to initial resuscitation with less than 15% increase in CI |
| Survivors | – | –Patients who survived after 28 days |
| Non survivors | – | –Patients who do not survive within 28 days |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- 76 consecutive adult patients admitted to critical care department of Cairo university hospitals with septic shock
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- adult patients admitted to critical care department of Cairo university hospitals with septic shock and elevated blood lactate level > 2 mmol/ L requiring fluid resuscitation and/ or vasopressor drugs infusion.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with advanced cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, or renal diseases were excluded from enrolment.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
The response to initial resuscitation
Time frame: 6 hours
response to intial resuscitation with IV fluids and vasopressors measured by PCO2 gap
1 secondary outcome
ICU length of stay (LOS) and 28-day mortality
Time frame: 28 days
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Oct 2022.
Related trials for Septic Shock
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Serum GDF-15 and LGALS3BP as Prognostic Biomarkers in Sepsis
Sepsis, Septic Shock
RecruitingPhase 3
A Trial of Adjunctive Fludrocortisone (50mcg, 100mcg or Placebo) in Critically Ill Patients With Septic Shock Receiving Hydrocortisone, Evaluating Survival and Functional Recovery and the Influence of Transcriptomic Response
Septic Shock
Recruiting
Veno-arterial Carbon Dioxide Partial Pressure Difference (CO2gap) for Early Resuscitation of Septic Shock
Sepsis - to Reduce Mortality in the Intensive Care Unit, Septic Shock
Not yet recruiting
Hemodynamic Resuscitation Guided by Non-Invasive Mean Systemic Filling Pressure to Prevent Acute Kidney Injury in Septic Shock
Acute Kidney Injury Due to Sepsis
RecruitingObservational study
Clinical Value of EMR3 in Sepsis Diagnosis, Monitoring, and Prognosis: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study
Sepsis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Farouk Faris, MD principal investigator
Cairo University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Septic Shock, run by Cairo University at 1 site in Egypt.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Oct 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The response to initial resuscitation (time frame: 6 hours). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Oct 2022.