Active clinical trials for "Shock"

This study will be conducted as a single-center, prospective, open-label, randomized trial that will evaluate adult patients admitted with septic shock to the medical critical care unit (MCC). The objective of the study is to determine if the use of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone is associated with a faster resolution of shock (defined as 24 hours vasopressor free) when compared to the use of hydrocortisone alone in medical, critically ill septic shock patients.

The purpose of this study is to explore different mechanisms for anaphylaxis and find novel biomarkers for this hypersensitivity syndrome. The study participants are patients with anaphylaxis, patients with mild allergic reactions, and patients with febrile transfusion reactions. The investigators will also include a group of healthy controls.

40 chronic stroke patients with upper limb spasticity will randomly divided into two groups. First group will receive 3 sessions of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) with one week apart without cessation of current physical therapy, while the second group will continue to receive conventional rehabilitative program. Assessment will be done at baseline, 2 weeks after rESWT and 3 months after rESWT using Modified Ashworth Scale, Fugl Meyer Assessment for hand function and wrist control, motricity index for pinch grip and Hmax/ Mmax amplitude ratio of flexor carpi radialis muscle.

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.

The purpose of this study is to find out whether adult patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit with septic shock who are given hydrocortisone compared to placebo (a dummy solution), will have an improved rate of survival 90 days later. Septic shock is the result of an infection, which triggers a complex response by the body (the inflammatory response) that causes a decrease in blood pressure and subsequently one or more organ systems to fail when blood supply to these organs is reduced. This may result in poor recovery and death. About a quarter of the people who suffer septic shock that is not rapidly reversed, will die. When patients are admitted to Intensive Care with sepsis and/or septic shock they receive a number of therapies. These include fluids given through a drip, antibiotics, drugs to boost your blood pressure and other organ systems. In addition to these therapies, steroids (hydrocortisone) are sometimes administered. Whether steroids are useful or not in the treatment of severe infections has been studied for more than 50 years. Previous research has suggested that the use of low dose steroid may have shortterm benefits in improving the circulation. However, there is no agreement amongst doctors around the world about whether treatment with or without low dose steroids improves the overall recovery and survival in patients with septic shock. This study would allow doctors to make informed decisions about whether the addition of low dose steroid therapy is better for patients with septic shock in intensive care. The study will include 3800 intensive care patients who have septic shock. Each enrolled patient will be randomised to receive either Hydrocortisone 200mg or placebo daily for 7 days as a continuous intravenous infusion while in intensive care. The patient will be followed for 90 days. If the patient is discharged prior to 90 days a telephone call will be made for the followup information. At six months the patient will be contacted again for completion of a quality of life questionnaire.

The impact of lactate guided therapy on septic shock has not been extensively investigated, however the goal directed therapy has been used for years. The investigators aim was to test the hypothesis that lactate directed hemodynamic therapy is associated with improving the outcome of patients with septic shock by comparing different goal directed strategies which have been commonly recommended clinically. In this multicenter, randomized trial, the investigators assigned patients with septic shock to three groups: Patients were treated with hemodynamic therapy directed either by conventional parameters treatment (control group), or central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2), or blood lactate respectively in each group. The primary outcome was the rate of death at 28 days after randomization and in-hospital mortality; secondary end points include hemodynamic states, time to goal-achievement.

Sepsis is the most severe complication of infections. Sepsis-associated Acute kidney injury (AKI) is commonly encountered in critically ill patients and independently predicts poor outcome. Unfortunately, no drug or management strategy was able to reduce incidence of AKI. To adapt the level of mean arterial pressure according to local renal hemodynamic evaluated by renal Doppler could lead to a better renal perfusion, and then less AKI.

This clinical study designed as a prospective, open labelled, multi-centre, RCT will be carried out to evaluate if direct hemoperfusion with polymyxin B immobilized fiber column (PMX) is superior to conventional medical therapy for sepsis, for patients with sepsis arising from abdominal cavity infection, accompanied by the failure of one or more organs. 120 patients (60 treatment/60 control) will be considered in this study. Those patients fulfilling inclusion criteria and not having exclusion criteria will be randomly allocated to one of two study groups. One group will be treated with PMX (PMX group) and the other will receive a "standard therapy" for sepsis (control group). All patients will receive full intensive care management, including fluid resuscitation, vasopressors, antimicrobial chemotherapy, ventilatory support, and renal replacement therapy, if required. Each patient will be followed up for 28 days after study entry.

Septic shock has a high mortality risk despite the availability of various treatments. Endotoxin, that is present in the cell walls of gram-negative bacteria, is a potent trigger of innate immunity. Endotoxin leads to an activation of a cascade with an overwhelming systemic overflow of pro- and anti- inflammatory mediators at the early phase of sepsis with generalized vascular endothelial damage, tissue injury and multi-organ failure. Extracorporeal blood purification therapies aim to reduce the circulating level of endotoxin. Different extracorporeal blood purification systems are available. The oXiris™ device comprises a surface treated AN69 membrane capable to adsorb a large spectrum of plasma cytokines, such as IL-6 and HMGB1 protein. The positively charged inner surface of the membrane allows absorbing negatively charged bacterial products such as endotoxin. From an historical perspective, filters containing AN69-based membranes have been the most commonly used products for CRRT in the management of critically ill patients and a substantial volume of published data exist. Another extracorporeal endotoxin removal therapy is the hemoperfusion with ToraymyxinTM (PMX) filter, which is a cartridge selectively removing blood endotoxin. PMX is composed of polymyxin B covalently bonded to polystyrene-derivative fibres. It is well known that the polarity of the polymyxin B antibiotic binds endotoxin and has bactericidal activity. Therefore, the rationale underlying extracorporeal therapy with PMX is to remove circulating endotoxin by adsorption. Trial with medical device

Eligible patients with severe cardiogenic shock will be randomized to one of the two arms: immediate ECMO therapy or early conservative therapy. In the invasive group, veno-arterial ECMO will be implanted according to the local practice with flow settings to ensure sufficient tissue perfusion. With the exception of ECMO implantation in the invasive group, all other diagnostic and therapeutic procedures will be done according to the current standard of care at the tertiary cardiovascular center, including other cardiovascular interventions (i.e. percutaneous coronary intervention or cardiac surgery). Implantation of other mechanical support devices including ECMO in the primary conservative group is allowed in the case of shock progression with rise of serum lactate by 3 mmol/L in comparison with the lowest value during the past 24 hours. Follow-up include visits at 30 days, 6 moths and 12 months.