SepsisPhase 4SPACESNCT07172451
Gelaspan vs Crystalloid Therapy in Sepsis
A Phase 4 study testing Balanced Gelatin Solution and Acetate Ringer's Solution in people with Sepsis and Intra-Abdominal Infections, run by Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital at 9 sites in China.
Trial summary
The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to evaluate whether balanced gelatin solution is more effective and safe than balanced crystalloid solution for perioperative fluid management in adults with sepsis undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Sepsis, Intra-Abdominal Infections
- What is being tested?
- Balanced Gelatin Solution and Acetate Ringer's Solution
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 318 participants
- Where
- 9 sitesChina
- Study dates
- 13 Feb 2026to 30 Dec 2028
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
Who may be able to join
- Age ≥ 18 years.
- Diagnosis of sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 definition, caused by intra-abdominal infection, and requiring emergency abdominal surgery for source control.
- Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA-2) score ≥ 2 (determined by the most recent available clinical data) and blood lactate > 2 mmol/L (measured within 6 hours prior to enrollment).
- Subject or legal representative can understand the study purpose and provide written informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Received any dose of artificial colloids within 24 hours prior to randomization.
- Predicted mortality within 48 hours (ASA physical status class ≥ V).
- Atrial fibrillation or congestive heart failure.
- Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS).
- Preoperative coagulation dysfunction or receiving anticoagulant therapy.
- Preoperative requirement for renal replacement therapy (long-term or intermittent, including hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis).
Show all 13Show fewer
- Acute burns exceeding 10% of the total body surface area.
- Severe hepatic impairment.
- Severe electrolyte disturbance.
- Pregnancy or breastfeeding.
- Known allergy to gelatin.
- Current participation in other interventional clinical trials.
- Other conditions that the investigator considers inappropriate for inclusion.
Trial locations and contacts
9 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
9 sites in 1 country
China9 sites, 9 recruiting
- Not yet recruiting
West China Hospital of Sichuan University
Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041
Site Investigator, +86-028-85422851, hxlcyjglb@163.com
Tao Zhu
- Not yet recruiting
The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510080
Site Investigator, +86-020-87755766, zsyyyb@mail.sysu.edu.cn
Xia Feng
- Not yet recruiting
The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine
Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310058
Site Investigator, +86-0571-8820810, global_zusm@zju.edu.cn
Min Yan
- Not yet recruiting
Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University
Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210009
Site Investigator, +86-025-83272015, ZDLL2015@163.com
Jie Sun
- Recruiting
Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University
Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, 200032
Jian Huang, MD, +8618018684575, huang.jian1@zs-hospital.sh.cn
Jing Zhong, MD, +86-021-64041990 ext. 3997, zhong.jing@zs-hospital.sh.cn
- Not yet recruiting
The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University
Suzhou, Jiangsu, 215006
Site Investigator, +86-0512-67972858, sdfyy8040@126.com
Fuhai Ji
- Not yet recruiting
Tianjin Medical University General Hospital
Tianjing, Tianjing, 300052
Site Investigator, +86-022-60362237, keyanchu@yahoo.com.cn
Yonghao Yu
- Not yet recruiting
The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University (WMU)
Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000
Site Investigator, +86-0577-85676879, feykjkcy@126.com
Wangning Shangguan
- Not yet recruiting
Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University
Xuzhou, Jiangsu, 221000
Site Investigator, +86-0516-85609999, xyfyec@163.com
Zhiping Wang
About this study
Official title: Efficacy and Safety of Balanced Gelatin Solution for Fluid Infusion in Sepsis Patients Undergoing Emergency Abdominal Surgery: A Multicenter, Adaptive Designed, Randomized Controlled Trial
The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to evaluate whether balanced gelatin solution is more effective and safe than balanced crystalloid solution for perioperative fluid management in adults with sepsis undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Sepsis often causes severe fluid loss from the bloodstream into tissues, leading to low blood pressure, impaired organ function, and the need for urgent fluid resuscitation. Balanced gelatin, a colloid solution, may help maintain intravascular volume more effectively than crystalloid alone.
In this study, participants are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either balanced gelatin or Ringer's acetate during surgery and in the first 24 hours afterward. All patients receive standardized anesthesia care, goal-directed fluid therapy, and protocolized use of vasoactive drugs. The main questions the study aims to answer are:
Read more
- Does balanced gelatin reduce positive fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery?
- Does it improve hemodynamic stability during the early postoperative period?
- What effects does balanced gelatin have on kidney function, microcirculation, postoperative recovery, and other clinical outcomes?
Participants will be followed throughout hospitalization and contacted again on postoperative day 28 and day 90 to assess survival, complications, and health-related quality of life. The trial is double-blind, meaning that patients, clinicians, and outcome assessors do not know which fluid is being used. An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board will oversee patient safety during the study.
The findings of this trial are expected to provide important evidence to guide perioperative fluid resuscitation strategies for septic patients undergoing emergency surgery.
Read the detailed description
Study Background Sepsis is a life-threatening syndrome caused by a dysregulated host response to severe infection, which can rapidly progress to septic shock, multiple organ dysfunction, and death.Despite advances in recognition and treatment in recent years, sepsis remains a major global health challenge, with overall mortality rates still ranging from 18% to 30%.Pathophysiologically, sepsis is characterized by increased capillary permeability and vasodilation, resulting in substantial fluid extravasation into the interstitial space, tissue edema, and intravascular volume depletion. These changes lead to inadequate tissue perfusion, impaired oxygen delivery, and ultimately organ dysfunction. Therefore, timely and appropriate fluid resuscitation remains one of the most fundamental and essential components of sepsis management. Individualized, goal-directed fluid therapy aims to improve systemic perfusion while minimizing the risks associated with fluid overload.
In 2001, Rivers et al. introduced the concept of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), demonstrating significant mortality reduction (30.5% vs 45%) in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.This finding prompted widespread adoption of early aggressive fluid resuscitation. However, three large multicenter trials published between 2014 and 2015 (ARISE, ProCESS, and ProMISe) later found no significant mortality differences between EGDT and usual care (approximately 18-25%).These results suggested that with improvements in routine clinical practice, contemporary usual care may already include adequate hemodynamic optimization.
Based on this evidence, the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines recommended administration of at least 30 mL/kg of crystalloid fluid within the first 3 hours for patients with sepsis-induced hypoperfusion, followed by hemodynamic-guided adjustment.Because many participants in these large trials had already received similar volumes before randomization, this dosage became associated with favorable outcomes. The 2021 SSC guideline retained this recommendation, though downgraded from a "strong" to a "weak" recommendation in the absence of new high-quality evidence.This highlights persistent uncertainty and the need for further research on optimal fluid type and strategy in sepsis resuscitation.
Increasing attention has been paid to microcirculation in recent years. While macrocirculatory parameters such as blood pressure may normalize after resuscitation, this does not necessarily indicate restoration of tissue-level perfusion.Persistent microcirculatory dysfunction may contribute to inadequate oxygen delivery and delayed organ recovery. Understanding how different fluid therapies influence both macro- and microcirculation is therefore crucial for optimizing outcomes.
Currently used resuscitation fluids include crystalloids and colloids. Crystalloids rapidly redistribute into the interstitial space and may exacerbate tissue edema-particularly in sepsis where capillary permeability is increased-potentially impairing microcirculatory flow.Colloids contain larger molecules that remain intravascular for longer periods, generating oncotic pressure and maintaining circulating volume more effectively, which may theoretically support microcirculatory perfusion and oxygen delivery. Clinically used colloids include albumin, hydroxyethyl starch (HES), and gelatin. Albumin is effective but costly and limited in availability. HES has fallen out of favor due to its association with kidney injury and increased mortality in sepsis.Gelatin, derived from bovine collagen hydrolysates, is now the only artificial colloid still recommended by guidelines for hypovolemia in sepsis patients.Nevertheless, high-quality randomized controlled evidence comparing gelatin with crystalloids in sepsis remains insufficient.
Based on this background, the present study focuses on balanced gelatin solution-a compound solution containing 4% succinylated gelatin in a balanced crystalloid carrier. We hypothesize that, compared with balanced crystalloid alone, balanced gelatin may better support hemodynamic stability through its colloid osmotic effect, more effectively correct fluid imbalance, improve microcirculatory perfusion, promote organ function recovery, and ultimately improve clinical outcomes. This randomized controlled trial is designed to rigorously test this hypothesis.
Patient and Public Involvement (PPIE)
During the protocol development stage, this study incorporated Patient and Public Involvement (PPIE). Three public contributors without medical backgrounds were invited to review the full protocol and informed consent form prior to study initiation. They provided feedback from the perspective of typical patients and family members. The main areas of concern included:
- The need for more accessible and patient-friendly language when describing the study background and objectives.
- Difficulty understanding the double-blind design, with recommendations to use analogies or simplified explanations.
- High concern regarding safety issues, including allergic reactions, kidney injury, and fluid-related adverse events, and a desire for clear descriptions of emergency procedures and contact information.
- Interest in treatment stability, postoperative supportive care needs, long-term complications, and follow-up arrangements.
- Questions regarding treatment-related costs, the exploratory nature of the intervention, and whether future protocol optimization is planned.
- Expectation that overall study results will be shared with participants after study completion.
Based on this feedback, the research team has revised and optimized the protocol background, the explanation of "double-blind" in the informed consent form, the safety management procedures, the follow-up plan, and the approach for disseminating study results. These adjustments aim to enhance the clarity, acceptability, and overall engagement of patient participants.
Study Objectives Primary Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of balanced gelatin solution in perioperative fluid management for septic patients undergoing emergency non-cardiac surgery, with emphasis on:reducing perioperative positive fluid balance;promoting hemodynamic stability;improving microcirculatory perfusion;and supporting organ function recovery and clinical outcomes.
Secondary Objective To assess the safety of balanced gelatin solution in this population, focusing on its effects on kidney function, coagulation status, and common postoperative complications.
Study Design This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial with an adaptive design incorporating sample size re-estimation. An initial sample size of 318 patients (159 per group) will be recruited, with an interim analysis after enrollment of 50% of participants to reassess the required sample size. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either balanced gelatin or crystalloid solution (Ringer's acetate). Randomization is stratified by baseline blood lactate level (≤ 4 mmol/L vs > 4 mmol/L) using a central dynamic allocation system to ensure balance between groups.
Population Eligible patients are adults (≥18 years) with sepsis (per Sepsis-3 criteria) due to abdominal infection requiring emergency surgery. Inclusion requires a SOFA score ≥2 and lactate >2 mmol/L. Key exclusions include prior colloid use within 24 hours, expected death within 48 hours, advanced heart failure, severe ARDS, pre-existing renal replacement therapy, severe coagulopathy, liver failure, or allergy to gelatin.
Interventions All participants receive standardized anesthesia care. Intraoperative fluid therapy follows a goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) protocol guided by stroke volume (SV) monitoring. To ensure double-blinding, the study fluid (either balanced gelatin or Ringer's acetate) is prepared by independent, unblinded personnel, remaining masked to clinicians, investigators, and patients. During anesthesia, all patients receive a baseline infusion of Ringer's acetate at 3 mL/kg/h (ideal body weight, IBW). For volume expansion, fluid boluses (3 mL/kg IBW of the assigned study fluid over 5 minutes) are administered; a bolus is repeated if SV increases by >10%. Postoperatively, the assigned study fluid remains the primary resuscitation fluid for up to 24 hours. The cumulative dose of the study fluid is capped at 30 mL/kg (IBW) within this 24-hour intervention period; if the limit is reached, subsequent resuscitation reverts to Ringer's acetate. Vasoactive or inotropic support is standardized based on predefined hemodynamic triggers after optimizing SV.
Endpoints
Primary endpoints include:
Cumulative fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery. Proportion of patients achieving hemodynamic stability within 24 hours. Secondary endpoints include kidney function, SOFA score dynamics, lactate clearance, need for vasopressors or renal replacement therapy, postoperative complications, ICU and hospital length of stay, and all-cause mortality at 28 and 90 days. Safety endpoints include pulmonary edema, arrhythmias, and acute kidney injury.
Follow-up Patients will be followed during hospitalization and by structured telephone interviews at day 28 and day 90. Follow-up assessments include survival, complications, and health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire.
Blinding and Oversight The study is double-blind: patients, treating clinicians, outcome assessors, and statisticians remain unaware of group allocation. Randomization and drug packaging are handled by independent, unblinded coordinators under the supervision of independent witnesses to ensure masking integrity. Strict role isolation is maintained, ensuring that any personnel with access to allocation information are prohibited from participating in subject recruitment, clinical intervention, follow-up, or data analysis. Emergency unblinding is permitted only for patient safety. An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will oversee trial conduct, perform interim analyses for the adaptive design, and review adverse events.
Statistical Note:
A fixed-sequence hierarchical testing procedure will be applied to the primary endpoints to maintain the overall family-wise type I error rate at 0.05. Primary endpoint 1 (24-hour cumulative fluid balance) will be tested first; primary endpoint 2 (hemodynamic stability) will only be formally tested for statistical significance if the first endpoint reaches p < 0.05.
Significance By directly comparing balanced gelatin with crystalloids in septic patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery, this trial will provide critical evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of gelatin-based fluid resuscitation. Results are expected to inform perioperative fluid management strategies and contribute to guideline development in the management of sepsis.
- Conditions
- Sepsis, Intra-Abdominal Infections
- Being tested
- Balanced Gelatin Solution, Acetate Ringer's Solution
- Keywords
- Balanced gelatin solution, Succinylated gelatin, Crystalloid, Ringer's acetate, Fluid resuscitation, Goal-directed fluid therapy, Emergency abdominal surgery, Microcirculation, Hemodynamic stabilization, SOFA score, Lactate clearance, Randomized controlled trial
- Medical subject headings
- Sepsis, Intraabdominal Infections
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Balanced Gelatin SolutionDrug
Also called Succinylated Gelatin 4%, Gelatin Infusion, Gelaspan
Description: Balanced gelatin solution (4% succinylated gelatin in a balanced crystalloid carrier). Administered as the primary resuscitation fluid during the intraoperative period and may be continued into the first 24 postoperative hours if clinically indicated and available. Infusion follows a stroke volume-guided, goal-directed fluid therapy protocol. The total dose of the study fluid is capped at 30 mL/kg (ideal body weight) within 24 hours. If the maximum dose is reached or the study fluid is no longer available postoperatively, additional resuscitation is provided with Ringer's acetate solution.
Acetate Ringer's SolutionDrug
Also called Balanced Crystalloid Solution, Ringer's Acetate
Description: Acetate Ringer's solution, a balanced crystalloid, administered as the sole resuscitation fluid in patients with sepsis undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Fluid therapy follows the same stroke volume-guided, goal-directed protocol as the experimental arm. This regimen is maintained throughout the intraoperative period and the first 24 postoperative hours to ensure the exclusion of any exogenous colloids or lactate-containing solutions. There is no upper limit for the total volume of crystalloid infusion.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Balanced Gelatin Solution | Experimental | Patients randomized to the balanced gelatin group receive balanced gelatin solution (4% succinylated gelatin in a balanced crystalloid carrier) for volume expansion during the surgical procedure, guided by a stroke volume (SV) monitoring protocol. The study fluid management may continue for up to 24 hours post-randomization according to clinical needs. The cumulative dose of balanced gelatin is capped at 30 mL/kg (ideal body weight) within the first 24 hours; once reached or when the study fluid is unavailable, Ringer's acetate is used for subsequent resuscitation. Receives: Drug: Balanced Gelatin Solution |
| Crystalloid Solution | Active comparator | Patients randomized to the crystalloid group receive acetate Ringer's solution as the sole resuscitation fluid during emergency abdominal surgery for sepsis, according to the same goal-directed protocol guided by stroke volume monitoring. No gelatin solution or lactate-containing crystalloids will be administered within the first 24 hours post-randomization. The total volume of crystalloid infusion is not limited. Receives: Drug: Acetate Ringer's Solution |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Primary Outcome 1: Net fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery
[Hierarchical Testing Sequence: 1st] This is the first primary endpoint in the hierarchical testing sequence. Net fluid balance is defined as the difference between total infused volume and total output volume during surgery and the first 24 postoperative hours.
Input volume includes all study fluids (balanced gelatin solution or acetate Ringer's), albumin, blood products, and maintenance crystalloid infusion. Excluded are solvent volumes <50 mL and non-therapeutic fluids such as irrigation or enteral/oral intake. Albumin is recorded in mL of solution administered. Blood product volumes are standardized: packed red blood cells 1 unit = 200 mL; plasma = actual volume; apheresis platelets 1 therapeutic dose = 250 mL; cryoprecipitate 1 unit = 25 mL (with center-specific adjustment allowed).
Output volume includes intraoperative blood loss, urine output, and measurable drainage (thoracic, abdominal, nasogastric, etc.), excluding insensible or unmeasurable losses.
Measured: Intraoperative period and postoperative 24 hours
Primary Outcome 2: Proportion of patients achieving hemodynamic stability within 24 hours after surgery
[Hierarchical Testing Sequence: 2nd] This is the second primary endpoint in the hierarchical testing sequence.
Hemodynamic stability (HDS) is defined as meeting all of the following three criteria at postoperative 24 hours:
- Mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg without vasopressor support, sustained ≥1 hour after discontinuation of vasopressors, with all subsequent MAP measurements ≥65 mmHg.
- Blood lactate ≤2 mmol/L, based on the most recent venous or arterial sample.
- Urine output ≥1 mL/kg/h, based on the average over the preceding 6 hours. The outcome measure is the percentage of patients in each group who fulfill all three criteria.
Measured: Postoperative 24 hours
Secondary outcomes (20)
Secondary Outcome 1.1: Intensity of study drug use within 24 hours after surgery
Cumulative volume of study drug administered from randomization to 24 hours postoperatively, standardized by ideal body weight (mL/kg).
Measured: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 1.2: Blood product utilization rate within 24 hours after surgery
Proportion of patients receiving any blood product during the intervention period, regardless of type. Each patient is counted once even if multiple blood products are used.
Measured: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 1.3: Vasopressor load within 24 hours after surgery
Vasopressor dose converted to norepinephrine-equivalent according to predefined equivalence table (norepinephrine:epinephrine:dopamine:phenylephrine:vasopressin = 1:1:0.01:0.01:0.02), normalized by ideal body weight and infusion time (μg/kg/min).
Measured: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 1.4: Proportion of patients receiving inotropic drugs within 24 hours after surgery
Proportion of patients treated with any inotrope (dobutamine, milrinone, levosimendan, etc.) within 24 hours postoperatively.
Measured: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 2.1: Intraoperative lactate reduction magnitude
Difference between baseline lactate and lactate at end of surgery (mmol/L).
Measured: Baseline to end of surgery
Secondary Outcome 2.2: 24-hour lactate reduction magnitude
Difference between baseline lactate and lactate at 24 hours after surgery (mmol/L).
Measured: Baseline to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 2.3: Normalization rate of capillary refill time (CRT) at end of surgery
Proportion of patients with CRT ≤3 seconds at end of surgery, measured every 30 minutes from preoperative period to end of surgery using standardized glass-slide method.
Measured: From baseline to end of surgery
Secondary Outcome 3.1: Proportion of patients with decrease in SOFA score at postoperative day 3 compared with baseline
SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) score is used to evaluate dysfunction across six organ systems (respiratory, coagulation, hepatic, cardiovascular, renal, and central nervous system), with each system scored from 0 to 4 and a total score ranging from 0 to 24.
In this study, SOFA scoring follows the updated SOFA-2 criteria, including standardized rules for handling sedation, intubation, and mortality.
Improvement is defined as a decrease in the total SOFA score at postoperative day 3 compared with baseline (score difference > 0). If the SOFA score does not decrease or increases (difference ≤ 0), the patient is categorized as not improved.
Measured: Baseline (preoperative) to postoperative day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.2: Proportion of patients with severe organ dysfunction within 3 days after surgery
Severe organ dysfunction is defined as SOFA score ≥3 in any organ system (respiratory, coagulation, liver, cardiovascular, renal, CNS) at least once during POD1-3. Deaths are counted as maximum scores.
Measured: Postoperative day 1 to day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.3: Incidence of acute kidney injury within 3 days after surgery
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is defined according to KDIGO 2012 criteria, assessed at POD1, POD2, and POD3.
Measured: Baseline to postoperative day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.4: Cumulative duration of renal replacement therapy within 28 days after surgery
Total number of days on renal replacement therapy (CRRT, intermittent hemodialysis, or peritoneal dialysis) during the 28 days after surgery.
Measured: Postoperative day 1 to day 28
Secondary Outcome 3.5: Incidence of coagulopathy within 3 days after surgery
Coagulopathy is defined as PT prolongation >3 seconds from baseline or INR >1.5 at any time during POD1-3.
Measured: Baseline to postoperative day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.6: Duration of ventilator-free time within 24 hours after surgery
Total hours without invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation in the first 24 hours postoperatively. Interruptions <1 hour are excluded.
Measured: Postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 3.7: Duration of ventilator-free time within 7 days after surgery
Total days without invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation during the first 7 postoperative days. Interruptions <1 day are excluded.
Measured: Postoperative day 1 to day 7
Secondary Outcome 3.8: Duration of vasopressor-free time within 24 hours after surgery
Total hours during which MAP ≥65 mmHg is maintained without vasopressor support, sustained ≥1 hour, within the first 24 hours.
Measured: Postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 3.9: Duration of vasopressor-free time within 72 hours after surgery
Total hours during which MAP ≥65 mmHg is maintained without vasopressor support, sustained ≥1 hour, within the first 72 hours.
Measured: Postoperative day 1 to day 3
Secondary Outcome 4.1: Length of ICU stay
Number of calendar days spent in the intensive care unit after surgery.
Measured: From ICU admission to ICU discharge
Secondary Outcome 4.2: Length of total hospital stay
Number of calendar days from hospital admission to hospital discharge.
Measured: From hospital admission to discharge
Secondary Outcome 5.1: All-cause mortality within 28 days after surgery
Death from any cause within 28 days postoperatively.
Measured: Postoperative day 1 to day 28
Secondary Outcome 5.2: All-cause mortality within 90 days after surgery
Death from any cause within 90 days postoperatively.
Measured: Postoperative day 1 to day 90
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Sep 2025
- Study start13 Feb 2026
- Primary completion30 Sep 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Dec 2028 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (30)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for SepsisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Shanghai Zhongshan HospitalThe 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
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This is a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial with a parallel assignment design. Eligible patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either balanced gelatin solution or crystalloid solution as the primary resuscitation fluid during emergency abdominal surgery for sepsis. Randomization is stratified by baseline lactate level (≤4 vs. \>4 mmol/L) using a central dynamic allocation system.
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 318 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- B. Braun Medical International Trading Company Ltd.
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Changhong Miao, MD, Principal investigator, Fudan University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07172451
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- ZSANES.B2025-465R
- Other IDs
- Ethics Approval No. B2025-465R
- Acronym
- SPACES
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 3 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 20 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: At this time, the study team has not finalized an IPD sharing plan. This is a multicenter trial in critically ill patients; data governance, site ownership, and de-identification procedures are still under review. If sharing is pursued, it would be limited to a de-identified dataset sufficient to reproduce key findings-not the complete raw source data (e.g., free-text notes or imaging). Any decision will be guided by participant privacy, consent language, local/national regulations, and approvals by the sponsor/IRB/DSMB. Aggregate results will be reported in publications and on ClinicalTrials.gov.
Publications
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985 Oct;13(10):818-29.
PubMed 3928249Hedrick TL, McEvoy MD, Mythen MMG, Bergamaschi R, Gupta R, Holubar SD, Senagore AJ, Gan TJ, Shaw AD, Thacker JKM, Miller TE, Wischmeyer PE, Carli F, Evans DC, Guilbert S, Kozar R, Pryor A, Thiele RH, Everett S, Grocott M, Abola RE, Bennett-Guerrero E, Kent ML, Feldman LS, Fiore JF Jr; Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) 2 Workgroup. American Society for Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Quality Initiative Joint Consensus Statement on Postoperative Gastrointestinal Dysfunction Within an Enhanced Recovery Pathway for Elective Colorectal Surgery. Anesth Analg. 2018 Jun;126(6):1896-1907. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002742.
PubMed 29293183Lee DH, Dane MJ, van den Berg BM, Boels MG, van Teeffelen JW, de Mutsert R, den Heijer M, Rosendaal FR, van der Vlag J, van Zonneveld AJ, Vink H, Rabelink TJ; NEO study group. Deeper penetration of erythrocytes into the endothelial glycocalyx is associated with impaired microvascular perfusion. PLoS One. 2014 May 9;9(5):e96477. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096477. eCollection 2014.
PubMed 24816787Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x. Epub 2011 Apr 9.
PubMed 21479777Khwaja A. KDIGO clinical practice guidelines for acute kidney injury. Nephron Clin Pract. 2012;120(4):c179-84. doi: 10.1159/000339789. Epub 2012 Aug 7. No abstract available.
PubMed 22890468Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, Willatts S, De Mendonca A, Bruining H, Reinhart CK, Suter PM, Thijs LG. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 1996 Jul;22(7):707-10. doi: 10.1007/BF01709751. No abstract available.
PubMed 8844239Chappell D, Jacob M, Hofmann-Kiefer K, Conzen P, Rehm M. A rational approach to perioperative fluid management. Anesthesiology. 2008 Oct;109(4):723-40. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181863117.
PubMed 18813052Qureshi SH, Rizvi SI, Patel NN, Murphy GJ. Meta-analysis of colloids versus crystalloids in critically ill, trauma and surgical patients. Br J Surg. 2016 Jan;103(1):14-26. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9943. Epub 2015 Nov 2.
PubMed 26522616van der Heijden M, Verheij J, van Nieuw Amerongen GP, Groeneveld AB. Crystalloid or colloid fluid loading and pulmonary permeability, edema, and injury in septic and nonseptic critically ill patients with hypovolemia. Crit Care Med. 2009 Apr;37(4):1275-81. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819cedfd.
PubMed 19242338Stockwell MA, Scott A, Day A, Riley B, Soni N. Colloid solutions in the critically ill. A randomised comparison of albumin and polygeline 2. Serum albumin concentration and incidences of pulmonary oedema and acute renal failure. Anaesthesia. 1992 Jan;47(1):7-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1992.tb01942.x.
PubMed 1536412Gondos T, Marjanek Z, Ulakcsai Z, Szabo Z, Bogar L, Karolyi M, Gartner B, Kiss K, Havas A, Futo J. Short-term effectiveness of different volume replacement therapies in postoperative hypovolaemic patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010 Sep;27(9):794-800. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833b3504.
PubMed 20520555Tseng CH, Chen TT, Wu MY, Chan MC, Shih MC, Tu YK. Resuscitation fluid types in sepsis, surgical, and trauma patients: a systematic review and sequential network meta-analyses. Crit Care. 2020 Dec 14;24(1):693. doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03419-y.
PubMed 33317590Marx G, Schindler AW, Mosch C, Albers J, Bauer M, Gnass I, Hobohm C, Janssens U, Kluge S, Kranke P, Maurer T, Merz W, Neugebauer E, Quintel M, Senninger N, Trampisch HJ, Waydhas C, Wildenauer R, Zacharowski K, Eikermann M. Intravascular volume therapy in adults: Guidelines from the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2016 Jul;33(7):488-521. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000447. No abstract available.
PubMed 27043493Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, Meier-Hellmann A, Ragaller M, Weiler N, Moerer O, Gruendling M, Oppert M, Grond S, Olthoff D, Jaschinski U, John S, Rossaint R, Welte T, Schaefer M, Kern P, Kuhnt E, Kiehntopf M, Hartog C, Natanson C, Loeffler M, Reinhart K; German Competence Network Sepsis (SepNet). Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2008 Jan 10;358(2):125-39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070716.
PubMed 18184958Perner A, Haase N, Guttormsen AB, Tenhunen J, Klemenzson G, Aneman A, Madsen KR, Moller MH, Elkjaer JM, Poulsen LM, Bendtsen A, Winding R, Steensen M, Berezowicz P, Soe-Jensen P, Bestle M, Strand K, Wiis J, White JO, Thornberg KJ, Quist L, Nielsen J, Andersen LH, Holst LB, Thormar K, Kjaeldgaard AL, Fabritius ML, Mondrup F, Pott FC, Moller TP, Winkel P, Wetterslev J; 6S Trial Group; Scandinavian Critical Care Trials Group. Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer's acetate in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 12;367(2):124-34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1204242. Epub 2012 Jun 27.
PubMed 22738085
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy and Safety of Balanced Gelatin Solution for Fluid Infusion in Sepsis Patients Undergoing Emergency Abdominal Surgery: A Multicenter, Adaptive Designed, Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07172451
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SPACES / ZSANES.B2025-465R
- Conditions
- Sepsis, Intra-Abdominal Infections
- Keywords
- Balanced gelatin solution, Succinylated gelatin, Crystalloid, Ringer's acetate, Fluid resuscitation, Goal-directed fluid therapy, Emergency abdominal surgery, Microcirculation
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 318 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Shanghai Zhongshan HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- B. Braun Medical International Trading Company Ltd.
- Study start
- 13 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- First posted
- 15 Sep 2025 (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.
The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to evaluate whether balanced gelatin solution is more effective and safe than balanced crystalloid solution for perioperative fluid management in adults with sepsis undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Sepsis often causes severe fluid loss from the bloodstream into tissues, leading to low blood pressure, impaired organ function, and the need for urgent fluid resuscitation. Balanced gelatin, a colloid solution, may help maintain intravascular volume more effectively than crystalloid alone.
In this study, participants are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either balanced gelatin or Ringer's acetate during surgery and in the first 24 hours afterward. All patients receive standardized anesthesia care, goal-directed fluid therapy, and protocolized use of vasoactive drugs. The main questions the study aims to answer are:
- Does balanced gelatin reduce positive fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery?
- Does it improve hemodynamic stability during the early postoperative period?
- What effects does balanced gelatin have on kidney function, microcirculation, postoperative recovery, and other clinical outcomes?
Participants will be followed throughout hospitalization and contacted again on postoperative day 28 and day 90 to assess survival, complications, and health-related quality of life. The trial is double-blind, meaning that patients, clinicians, and outcome assessors do not know which fluid is being used. An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board will oversee patient safety during the study.
The findings of this trial are expected to provide important evidence to guide perioperative fluid resuscitation strategies for septic patients undergoing emergency surgery.
Detailed description
Study Background Sepsis is a life-threatening syndrome caused by a dysregulated host response to severe infection, which can rapidly progress to septic shock, multiple organ dysfunction, and death.Despite advances in recognition and treatment in recent years, sepsis remains a major global health challenge, with overall mortality rates still ranging from 18% to 30%.Pathophysiologically, sepsis is characterized by increased capillary permeability and vasodilation, resulting in substantial fluid extravasation into the interstitial space, tissue edema, and intravascular volume depletion. These changes lead to inadequate tissue perfusion, impaired oxygen delivery, and ultimately organ dysfunction. Therefore, timely and appropriate fluid resuscitation remains one of the most fundamental and essential components of sepsis management. Individualized, goal-directed fluid therapy aims to improve systemic perfusion while minimizing the risks associated with fluid overload.
In 2001, Rivers et al. introduced the concept of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), demonstrating significant mortality reduction (30.5% vs 45%) in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.This finding prompted widespread adoption of early aggressive fluid resuscitation. However, three large multicenter trials published between 2014 and 2015 (ARISE, ProCESS, and ProMISe) later found no significant mortality differences between EGDT and usual care (approximately 18-25%).These results suggested that with improvements in routine clinical practice, contemporary usual care may already include adequate hemodynamic optimization.
Based on this evidence, the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines recommended administration of at least 30 mL/kg of crystalloid fluid within the first 3 hours for patients with sepsis-induced hypoperfusion, followed by hemodynamic-guided adjustment.Because many participants in these large trials had already received similar volumes before randomization, this dosage became associated with favorable outcomes. The 2021 SSC guideline retained this recommendation, though downgraded from a "strong" to a "weak" recommendation in the absence of new high-quality evidence.This highlights persistent uncertainty and the need for further research on optimal fluid type and strategy in sepsis resuscitation.
Increasing attention has been paid to microcirculation in recent years. While macrocirculatory parameters such as blood pressure may normalize after resuscitation, this does not necessarily indicate restoration of tissue-level perfusion.Persistent microcirculatory dysfunction may contribute to inadequate oxygen delivery and delayed organ recovery. Understanding how different fluid therapies influence both macro- and microcirculation is therefore crucial for optimizing outcomes.
Currently used resuscitation fluids include crystalloids and colloids. Crystalloids rapidly redistribute into the interstitial space and may exacerbate tissue edema-particularly in sepsis where capillary permeability is increased-potentially impairing microcirculatory flow.Colloids contain larger molecules that remain intravascular for longer periods, generating oncotic pressure and maintaining circulating volume more effectively, which may theoretically support microcirculatory perfusion and oxygen delivery. Clinically used colloids include albumin, hydroxyethyl starch (HES), and gelatin. Albumin is effective but costly and limited in availability. HES has fallen out of favor due to its association with kidney injury and increased mortality in sepsis.Gelatin, derived from bovine collagen hydrolysates, is now the only artificial colloid still recommended by guidelines for hypovolemia in sepsis patients.Nevertheless, high-quality randomized controlled evidence comparing gelatin with crystalloids in sepsis remains insufficient.
Based on this background, the present study focuses on balanced gelatin solution-a compound solution containing 4% succinylated gelatin in a balanced crystalloid carrier. We hypothesize that, compared with balanced crystalloid alone, balanced gelatin may better support hemodynamic stability through its colloid osmotic effect, more effectively correct fluid imbalance, improve microcirculatory perfusion, promote organ function recovery, and ultimately improve clinical outcomes. This randomized controlled trial is designed to rigorously test this hypothesis.
Patient and Public Involvement (PPIE)
During the protocol development stage, this study incorporated Patient and Public Involvement (PPIE). Three public contributors without medical backgrounds were invited to review the full protocol and informed consent form prior to study initiation. They provided feedback from the perspective of typical patients and family members. The main areas of concern included:
- The need for more accessible and patient-friendly language when describing the study background and objectives.
- Difficulty understanding the double-blind design, with recommendations to use analogies or simplified explanations.
- High concern regarding safety issues, including allergic reactions, kidney injury, and fluid-related adverse events, and a desire for clear descriptions of emergency procedures and contact information.
- Interest in treatment stability, postoperative supportive care needs, long-term complications, and follow-up arrangements.
- Questions regarding treatment-related costs, the exploratory nature of the intervention, and whether future protocol optimization is planned.
- Expectation that overall study results will be shared with participants after study completion.
Based on this feedback, the research team has revised and optimized the protocol background, the explanation of "double-blind" in the informed consent form, the safety management procedures, the follow-up plan, and the approach for disseminating study results. These adjustments aim to enhance the clarity, acceptability, and overall engagement of patient participants.
Study Objectives Primary Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of balanced gelatin solution in perioperative fluid management for septic patients undergoing emergency non-cardiac surgery, with emphasis on:reducing perioperative positive fluid balance;promoting hemodynamic stability;improving microcirculatory perfusion;and supporting organ function recovery and clinical outcomes.
Secondary Objective To assess the safety of balanced gelatin solution in this population, focusing on its effects on kidney function, coagulation status, and common postoperative complications.
Study Design This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial with an adaptive design incorporating sample size re-estimation. An initial sample size of 318 patients (159 per group) will be recruited, with an interim analysis after enrollment of 50% of participants to reassess the required sample size. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either balanced gelatin or crystalloid solution (Ringer's acetate). Randomization is stratified by baseline blood lactate level (≤ 4 mmol/L vs > 4 mmol/L) using a central dynamic allocation system to ensure balance between groups.
Population Eligible patients are adults (≥18 years) with sepsis (per Sepsis-3 criteria) due to abdominal infection requiring emergency surgery. Inclusion requires a SOFA score ≥2 and lactate >2 mmol/L. Key exclusions include prior colloid use within 24 hours, expected death within 48 hours, advanced heart failure, severe ARDS, pre-existing renal replacement therapy, severe coagulopathy, liver failure, or allergy to gelatin.
Interventions All participants receive standardized anesthesia care. Intraoperative fluid therapy follows a goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) protocol guided by stroke volume (SV) monitoring. To ensure double-blinding, the study fluid (either balanced gelatin or Ringer's acetate) is prepared by independent, unblinded personnel, remaining masked to clinicians, investigators, and patients. During anesthesia, all patients receive a baseline infusion of Ringer's acetate at 3 mL/kg/h (ideal body weight, IBW). For volume expansion, fluid boluses (3 mL/kg IBW of the assigned study fluid over 5 minutes) are administered; a bolus is repeated if SV increases by >10%. Postoperatively, the assigned study fluid remains the primary resuscitation fluid for up to 24 hours. The cumulative dose of the study fluid is capped at 30 mL/kg (IBW) within this 24-hour intervention period; if the limit is reached, subsequent resuscitation reverts to Ringer's acetate. Vasoactive or inotropic support is standardized based on predefined hemodynamic triggers after optimizing SV.
Endpoints
Primary endpoints include:
Cumulative fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery. Proportion of patients achieving hemodynamic stability within 24 hours. Secondary endpoints include kidney function, SOFA score dynamics, lactate clearance, need for vasopressors or renal replacement therapy, postoperative complications, ICU and hospital length of stay, and all-cause mortality at 28 and 90 days. Safety endpoints include pulmonary edema, arrhythmias, and acute kidney injury.
Follow-up Patients will be followed during hospitalization and by structured telephone interviews at day 28 and day 90. Follow-up assessments include survival, complications, and health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire.
Blinding and Oversight The study is double-blind: patients, treating clinicians, outcome assessors, and statisticians remain unaware of group allocation. Randomization and drug packaging are handled by independent, unblinded coordinators under the supervision of independent witnesses to ensure masking integrity. Strict role isolation is maintained, ensuring that any personnel with access to allocation information are prohibited from participating in subject recruitment, clinical intervention, follow-up, or data analysis. Emergency unblinding is permitted only for patient safety. An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will oversee trial conduct, perform interim analyses for the adaptive design, and review adverse events.
Statistical Note:
A fixed-sequence hierarchical testing procedure will be applied to the primary endpoints to maintain the overall family-wise type I error rate at 0.05. Primary endpoint 1 (24-hour cumulative fluid balance) will be tested first; primary endpoint 2 (hemodynamic stability) will only be formally tested for statistical significance if the first endpoint reaches p < 0.05.
Significance By directly comparing balanced gelatin with crystalloids in septic patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery, this trial will provide critical evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of gelatin-based fluid resuscitation. Results are expected to inform perioperative fluid management strategies and contribute to guideline development in the management of sepsis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This is a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial with a parallel assignment design. Eligible patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either balanced gelatin solution or crystalloid solution as the primary resuscitation fluid during emergency abdominal surgery for sepsis. Randomization is stratified by baseline lactate level (≤4 vs. >4 mmol/L) using a central dynamic allocation system.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Balanced Gelatin Solution | Experimental | Drug: Balanced Gelatin SolutionPatients randomized to the balanced gelatin group receive balanced gelatin solution (4% succinylated gelatin in a balanced crystalloid carrier) for volume expansion during the surgical procedure, guided by a stroke volume (SV) monitoring protocol. The study fluid management may continue for up to 24 hours post-randomization according to clinical needs. The cumulative dose of balanced gelatin is capped at 30 mL/kg (ideal body weight) within the first 24 hours; once reached or when the study fluid is unavailable, Ringer's acetate is used for subsequent resuscitation. |
| Crystalloid Solution | Active comparator | Drug: Acetate Ringer's SolutionPatients randomized to the crystalloid group receive acetate Ringer's solution as the sole resuscitation fluid during emergency abdominal surgery for sepsis, according to the same goal-directed protocol guided by stroke volume monitoring. No gelatin solution or lactate-containing crystalloids will be administered within the first 24 hours post-randomization. The total volume of crystalloid infusion is not limited. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age ≥ 18 years.
- Diagnosis of sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 definition, caused by intra-abdominal infection, and requiring emergency abdominal surgery for source control.
- Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA-2) score ≥ 2 (determined by the most recent available clinical data) and blood lactate > 2 mmol/L (measured within 6 hours prior to enrollment).
- Subject or legal representative can understand the study purpose and provide written informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Received any dose of artificial colloids within 24 hours prior to randomization.
- Predicted mortality within 48 hours (ASA physical status class ≥ V).
- Atrial fibrillation or congestive heart failure.
- Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS).
- Preoperative coagulation dysfunction or receiving anticoagulant therapy.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Balanced Gelatin SolutionAlso: Succinylated Gelatin 4%, Gelatin Infusion, GelaspanDescription: Balanced gelatin solution (4% succinylated gelatin in a balanced crystalloid carrier). Administered as the primary resuscitation fluid during the intraoperative period and may be continued into the first 24 postoperative hours if clinically indicated and available. Infusion follows a stroke volume-guided, goal-directed fluid therapy protocol. The total dose of the study fluid is capped at 30 mL/kg (ideal body weight) within 24 hours. If the maximum dose is reached or the study fluid is no longer available postoperatively, additional resuscitation is provided with Ringer's acetate solution. | Drug | Balanced Gelatin Solution |
| Acetate Ringer's SolutionAlso: Balanced Crystalloid Solution, Ringer's AcetateDescription: Acetate Ringer's solution, a balanced crystalloid, administered as the sole resuscitation fluid in patients with sepsis undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Fluid therapy follows the same stroke volume-guided, goal-directed protocol as the experimental arm. This regimen is maintained throughout the intraoperative period and the first 24 postoperative hours to ensure the exclusion of any exogenous colloids or lactate-containing solutions. There is no upper limit for the total volume of crystalloid infusion. | Drug | Crystalloid Solution |
Primary outcome
Primary Outcome 1: Net fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Intraoperative period and postoperative 24 hours
[Hierarchical Testing Sequence: 1st] This is the first primary endpoint in the hierarchical testing sequence. Net fluid balance is defined as the difference between total infused volume and total output volume during surgery and the first 24 postoperative hours. Input volume includes all study fluids (balanced gelatin solution or acetate Ringer's), albumin, blood products, and maintenance crystalloid infusion. Excluded are solvent volumes <50 mL and non-therapeutic fluids such as irrigation or enteral/oral intake. Albumin is recorded in mL of solution administered. Blood product volumes are standardized: packed red blood cells 1 unit = 200 mL; plasma = actual volume; apheresis platelets 1 therapeutic dose = 250 mL; cryoprecipitate 1 unit = 25 mL (with center-specific adjustment allowed). Output volume includes intraoperative blood loss, urine output, and measurable drainage (thoracic, abdominal, nasogastric, etc.), excluding insensible or unmeasurable losses.
Primary Outcome 2: Proportion of patients achieving hemodynamic stability within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative 24 hours
[Hierarchical Testing Sequence: 2nd] This is the second primary endpoint in the hierarchical testing sequence. Hemodynamic stability (HDS) is defined as meeting all of the following three criteria at postoperative 24 hours: 1. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg without vasopressor support, sustained ≥1 hour after discontinuation of vasopressors, with all subsequent MAP measurements ≥65 mmHg. 2. Blood lactate ≤2 mmol/L, based on the most recent venous or arterial sample. 3. Urine output ≥1 mL/kg/h, based on the average over the preceding 6 hours. The outcome measure is the percentage of patients in each group who fulfill all three criteria.
20 secondary outcomes
Secondary Outcome 1.1: Intensity of study drug use within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 1.2: Blood product utilization rate within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 1.3: Vasopressor load within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 1.4: Proportion of patients receiving inotropic drugs within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Randomization to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 2.1: Intraoperative lactate reduction magnitude
Time frame: Baseline to end of surgery
Secondary Outcome 2.2: 24-hour lactate reduction magnitude
Time frame: Baseline to postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 2.3: Normalization rate of capillary refill time (CRT) at end of surgery
Time frame: From baseline to end of surgery
Secondary Outcome 3.1: Proportion of patients with decrease in SOFA score at postoperative day 3 compared with baseline
Time frame: Baseline (preoperative) to postoperative day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.2: Proportion of patients with severe organ dysfunction within 3 days after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative day 1 to day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.3: Incidence of acute kidney injury within 3 days after surgery
Time frame: Baseline to postoperative day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.4: Cumulative duration of renal replacement therapy within 28 days after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative day 1 to day 28
Secondary Outcome 3.5: Incidence of coagulopathy within 3 days after surgery
Time frame: Baseline to postoperative day 3
Secondary Outcome 3.6: Duration of ventilator-free time within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 3.7: Duration of ventilator-free time within 7 days after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative day 1 to day 7
Secondary Outcome 3.8: Duration of vasopressor-free time within 24 hours after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative 24 hours
Secondary Outcome 3.9: Duration of vasopressor-free time within 72 hours after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative day 1 to day 3
Secondary Outcome 4.1: Length of ICU stay
Time frame: From ICU admission to ICU discharge
Secondary Outcome 4.2: Length of total hospital stay
Time frame: From hospital admission to discharge
Secondary Outcome 5.1: All-cause mortality within 28 days after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative day 1 to day 28
Secondary Outcome 5.2: All-cause mortality within 90 days after surgery
Time frame: Postoperative day 1 to day 90
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Mar 2026.
- Background: PubMed 3928249Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985 Oct;13(10):818-29.
- Background: PubMed 29293183Hedrick TL, McEvoy MD, Mythen MMG, Bergamaschi R, Gupta R, Holubar SD, Senagore AJ, Gan TJ, Shaw AD, Thacker JKM, Miller TE, Wischmeyer PE, Carli F, Evans DC, Guilbert S, Kozar R, Pryor A, Thiele RH, Everett S, Grocott M, Abola RE, Bennett-Guerrero E, Kent ML, Feldman LS, Fiore JF Jr; Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) 2 Workgroup. American Society for Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Quality Initiative Joint Consensus Statement on Postoperative Gastrointestinal Dysfunction Within an Enhanced Recovery Pathway for Elective Colorectal Surgery. Anesth Analg. 2018 Jun;126(6):1896-1907. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002742.
- Background: PubMed 24816787Lee DH, Dane MJ, van den Berg BM, Boels MG, van Teeffelen JW, de Mutsert R, den Heijer M, Rosendaal FR, van der Vlag J, van Zonneveld AJ, Vink H, Rabelink TJ; NEO study group. Deeper penetration of erythrocytes into the endothelial glycocalyx is associated with impaired microvascular perfusion. PLoS One. 2014 May 9;9(5):e96477. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096477. eCollection 2014.
- Background: PubMed 21479777Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x. Epub 2011 Apr 9.
- Background: PubMed 22890468Khwaja A. KDIGO clinical practice guidelines for acute kidney injury. Nephron Clin Pract. 2012;120(4):c179-84. doi: 10.1159/000339789. Epub 2012 Aug 7. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 8844239Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, Willatts S, De Mendonca A, Bruining H, Reinhart CK, Suter PM, Thijs LG. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 1996 Jul;22(7):707-10. doi: 10.1007/BF01709751. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 18813052Chappell D, Jacob M, Hofmann-Kiefer K, Conzen P, Rehm M. A rational approach to perioperative fluid management. Anesthesiology. 2008 Oct;109(4):723-40. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181863117.
- Background: PubMed 26522616Qureshi SH, Rizvi SI, Patel NN, Murphy GJ. Meta-analysis of colloids versus crystalloids in critically ill, trauma and surgical patients. Br J Surg. 2016 Jan;103(1):14-26. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9943. Epub 2015 Nov 2.
- Background: PubMed 19242338van der Heijden M, Verheij J, van Nieuw Amerongen GP, Groeneveld AB. Crystalloid or colloid fluid loading and pulmonary permeability, edema, and injury in septic and nonseptic critically ill patients with hypovolemia. Crit Care Med. 2009 Apr;37(4):1275-81. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819cedfd.
- Background: PubMed 1536412Stockwell MA, Scott A, Day A, Riley B, Soni N. Colloid solutions in the critically ill. A randomised comparison of albumin and polygeline 2. Serum albumin concentration and incidences of pulmonary oedema and acute renal failure. Anaesthesia. 1992 Jan;47(1):7-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1992.tb01942.x.
- Background: PubMed 20520555Gondos T, Marjanek Z, Ulakcsai Z, Szabo Z, Bogar L, Karolyi M, Gartner B, Kiss K, Havas A, Futo J. Short-term effectiveness of different volume replacement therapies in postoperative hypovolaemic patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010 Sep;27(9):794-800. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833b3504.
- Background: PubMed 33317590Tseng CH, Chen TT, Wu MY, Chan MC, Shih MC, Tu YK. Resuscitation fluid types in sepsis, surgical, and trauma patients: a systematic review and sequential network meta-analyses. Crit Care. 2020 Dec 14;24(1):693. doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03419-y.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. At this time, the study team has not finalized an IPD sharing plan. This is a multicenter trial in critically ill patients; data governance, site ownership, and de-identification procedures are still under review. If sharing is pursued, it would be limited to a de-identified dataset sufficient to reproduce key findings-not the complete raw source data (e.g., free-text notes or imaging). Any decision will be guided by participant privacy, consent language, local/national regulations, and approvals by the sponsor/IRB/DSMB. Aggregate results will be reported in publications and on ClinicalTrials.gov.
Related trials for Sepsis
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
A Pivotal Safety and Immunogenicity GBS-NN/NN2 Vaccine Maternal Immunisation Trial
Streptococcus Agalactiae Infection, Neonatal Sepsis
Active, not recruiting
CT for Personalized Mechanical Ventilation
Ventilator-Induced Lung Injury, Sepsis Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 4
A Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Extended and Intermittent Infusion of Beta-lactams in Critically Ill Paediatric Patients
Infection, Sepsis
Not yet recruiting
Double Plasma Separation and Adsorption in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (DPMAS-ACLF Trial)
Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF)
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Thymosin Alpha 1 and IgM Levels in Sepsis
Sepsis, Septic Shock
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.
Changhong Miao, MD principal investigator
Fudan University
9 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Balanced Gelatin Solution and Acetate Ringer's Solution in people with Sepsis and Intra-Abdominal Infections, run by Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital at 9 sites in China.
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 4 inclusion and 13 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 9 sites in China. 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.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Jian Huang, MD (+8618018684575, huang.jian1@zs-hospital.sh.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Primary Outcome 1: Net fluid balance within 24 hours after surgery (time frame: Intraoperative period and postoperative 24 hours). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07172451, which also lists 30 linked publications.
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 20 Mar 2026.