ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome)NCT07908368
Pulse Wave vs. Saline Contrast EIT for Pulmonary Perfusion in ARDS
An observational study of ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) and Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT), run by Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
Monitoring pulmonary perfusion is crucial in critical care, especially for conditions like ARDS. Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) is a valuable, non-invasive tool for real-time bedside monitoring.While well-established for lung ventilation, EIT faces a challenge in perfusion imaging because the related impedance… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome), Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT), Mechanical Ventilation
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 22 Dec 2025to 30 Dec 2027
- How long will I take part?
- 1 Day
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 to 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria will undergo both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT monitoring at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Who may be able to join
- Age: 18-80 years;
- Endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation;
- Presence of a subclavian or internal jugular venous catheter in place;
- Diagnosis of ARDS according to the 2023 global ARDS definition.
Who cannot join
- Age <18 or >80 years;
- Severe obesity (BMI ≥35 kg/m²);
- Pregnant or lactating women;
- Pulmonary diseases: acute asthma exacerbation, COPD, pulmonary fibrosis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary embolism;
- Cardiac diseases: arrhythmias, significant valvular regurgitation, or cardiac dysfunction (LVEF <50% or right ventricular dysfunction);
- Hypernatremia;
- Receiving ECMO therapy;
- Failure to provide informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
China1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology
Wuhan, Hubei, 430000
Xue Tian, MD, 027-85351606, m202376326@hust.edu.cn
About this study
Official title: Pulse Wave Method Versus Saline Contrast Pulmonary Perfusion EIT Imaging for Detecting Pulmonary Perfusion in ARDS Patients: a Prospective Observational Study
Monitoring pulmonary perfusion is crucial in critical care, especially for conditions like ARDS. Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) is a valuable, non-invasive tool for real-time bedside monitoring.While well-established for lung ventilation, EIT faces a challenge in perfusion imaging because the related impedance signal is very weak. Currently, two main methods are used:Saline Bolus EIT: Involves injecting a saline solution during a breath-hold to track blood flow.Pulse Wave EIT: Utilizes cardiac-induced vascular pulsations to assess perfusion.However, both methods have limitations in ARDS patients, as the disease's altered physiology can affect their accuracy.
This study compares pulse wave versus saline bolus EIT for pulmonary perfusion assessment in ARDS patients and investigates the impact of different PEEP levels.
Read the detailed description
During clinical diagnosis and treatment, a patient's oxygenation status is not only related to ventilation but also closely associated with pulmonary blood flow perfusion. In many diseases, physicians need to closely monitor patients' pulmonary perfusion function, such as pulmonary embolism (PE), pulmonary hypertension (PH), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
Particularly during mechanical ventilation for ARDS or fluid resuscitation for shock patients, there is an urgent need for bedside, dynamic, non-invasive, continuous, real-time, and visual monitoring of critically ill patients. Simultaneously, understanding the real-time dynamic changes in cardiac and respiratory pathophysiology is essential for implementing individualized, goal-directed precision therapy, improving patient outcomes, and reducing mortality.
Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) is an imaging technique that reconstructs images based on the impedance characteristics of biological tissues. Thoracic EIT can non-invasively, real-time, and dynamically monitor changes in pulmonary electrical impedance, capturing impedance images and data that vary with lung ventilation and perfusion. This reflects lung pathology and dynamic processes, holding significant value for the diagnosis and treatment of critically ill patients.
EIT has long been established in the field of lung ventilation and is widely used clinically. However, using EIT for pulmonary perfusion imaging is challenging. The impedance changes caused by pulmonary blood perfusion are less than one-tenth of those caused by ventilation and are easily masked by various types of noise, making them extremely difficult to extract. Currently, there are two main solutions:Injecting a high-conductivity contrast agent, also known as saline bolus EIT imaging or contrast-enhanced EIT imaging;The pulse wave method.
The former is performed by injecting a 3%-20% sodium chloride (NaCl) solution via a catheter during an end-expiratory breath-hold, eliminating respiratory interference. As the saline passes sequentially through the right atrium, right ventricle, and pulmonary artery, it produces a first-pass kinetic dilution effect. The resulting impedance changes reflect forward pulmonary blood flow-regions with rich perfusion exhibit high conductivity, and the collected thoracic impedance data show a decrease. Images are then reconstructed based on the obtained impedance-time curve. However, in moderate to severe ARDS patients, variations in lung compliance and pulmonary vascular resistance may affect perfusion detection during apnea.
The latter method monitors pulmonary perfusion based on the principle that lung blood perfusion coincides with vascular pulsations. Nevertheless, increased pulmonary vascular permeability in ARDS patients may impact the accuracy of pulse wave-based perfusion detection.
This study aims to compare pulse wave EIT and saline bolus EIT for assessing pulmonary perfusion in ARDS patients, and to evaluate the changes in monitoring indices under different PEEP levels.
- Conditions
- ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome), Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT), Mechanical Ventilation
- Medical subject headings
- Acute Lung Injury
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Pulmonary perfusion was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
At a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, pulse wave EIT data were recorded for 3 minutes. Subsequently, during an inspiratory or expiratory hold, a 10 mL bolus of 10% hypertonic saline was administered via the central venous catheter while EIT data were simultaneously recorded for another 3 minutes. This procedure was repeated at a PEEP of 15 cmH₂O. Pulmonary perfusion data were obtained through offline analysis of the EIT data.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Secondary outcomes (18)
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O and 15 cmH₂O, perform EIT monitoring of pulmonary perfusion during a 15-second inspiratory or expiratory hold.
At a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, EIT data were first recorded for 1 minute, followed by a 15-second inspiratory hold, after which data acquisition was continued for an additional 2 minutes. The entire procedure was repeated at a PEEP of 15 cmH₂O. Pulmonary perfusion data were subsequently analyzed using offline software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired during bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline for pulmonary perfusion analysis.
At a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, the following protocol was performed: First, EIT data were recorded for 1 minute, followed by a bolus injection of 10 mL of 0.9% saline via the central venous catheter; data acquisition then continued for an additional 2 minutes. Then, the procedure was repeated with a bolus injection of 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline. Pulmonary perfusion data were subsequently analyzed using offline software.
Measured: Under a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, EIT data acquisition was performed after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was monitored by EIT during 15-second inspiratory or expiratory holds at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired during bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline for ventilation-perfusion matching percentage.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, EIT data acquisition was performed after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The dead space percentage was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The dead space percentage was monitored by EIT during 15-second inspiratory or expiratory holds at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, the dead space percentage was obtained by EIT monitoring following bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The shunt percentage was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The shunt space percentage was monitored by EIT during 15-second inspiratory or expiratory holds at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, the shunt space percentage was obtained by EIT monitoring following bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was derived from EIT images using offline analysis software.
Measured: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O, heart rate was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, following bolus injections of 10 mL of 0.9% saline and 10% hypertonic saline, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Heart rate was obtained from the patient monitor.
Measured: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 15 cmH₂O, heart rate was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Heart rate was obtained from the patient monitor.
Measured: Under PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O, blood pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, following bolus injections of 10 mL of 0.9% saline and 10% hypertonic saline, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Blood pressure was obtained from the patient monitor.
Measured: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 15 cmH₂O, blood pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Blood pressure was obtained from the patient monitor.
Measured: Under PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O, central venous pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, following bolus injections of 10 mL of 0.9% saline and 10% hypertonic saline, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures
Central venous pressure was obtained from the patient monitor.
Measured: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 15 cmH₂O, central venous pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Central venous pressure was obtained from the patient monitor.
Measured: Under PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio was recorded prior to patient enrollment.
The PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio was obtained from arterial blood gas analysis.
Measured: Prior to enrollment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Nov 2026
- Study start22 Dec 2025
- Primary completion30 Dec 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Dec 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome)Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and TechnologyThe 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
- 20 participants (estimated)
- Target duration
- 1 Day
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07908368
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LPEIT20241102
- Status last verified
- Dec 2025
- First submitted
- 25 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 2 Nov 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Nov 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Pulse Wave Method Versus Saline Contrast Pulmonary Perfusion EIT Imaging for Detecting Pulmonary Perfusion in ARDS Patients: a Prospective Observational Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07908368
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LPEIT20241102
- Conditions
- ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome), Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT), Mechanical Ventilation
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and TechnologyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 22 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Dec 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Dec 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 2 Nov 2026 (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.
Monitoring pulmonary perfusion is crucial in critical care, especially for conditions like ARDS. Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) is a valuable, non-invasive tool for real-time bedside monitoring.While well-established for lung ventilation, EIT faces a challenge in perfusion imaging because the related impedance signal is very weak. Currently, two main methods are used:Saline Bolus EIT: Involves injecting a saline solution during a breath-hold to track blood flow.Pulse Wave EIT: Utilizes cardiac-induced vascular pulsations to assess perfusion.However, both methods have limitations in ARDS patients, as the disease's altered physiology can affect their accuracy.
This study compares pulse wave versus saline bolus EIT for pulmonary perfusion assessment in ARDS patients and investigates the impact of different PEEP levels.
Detailed description
During clinical diagnosis and treatment, a patient's oxygenation status is not only related to ventilation but also closely associated with pulmonary blood flow perfusion. In many diseases, physicians need to closely monitor patients' pulmonary perfusion function, such as pulmonary embolism (PE), pulmonary hypertension (PH), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
Particularly during mechanical ventilation for ARDS or fluid resuscitation for shock patients, there is an urgent need for bedside, dynamic, non-invasive, continuous, real-time, and visual monitoring of critically ill patients. Simultaneously, understanding the real-time dynamic changes in cardiac and respiratory pathophysiology is essential for implementing individualized, goal-directed precision therapy, improving patient outcomes, and reducing mortality.
Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) is an imaging technique that reconstructs images based on the impedance characteristics of biological tissues. Thoracic EIT can non-invasively, real-time, and dynamically monitor changes in pulmonary electrical impedance, capturing impedance images and data that vary with lung ventilation and perfusion. This reflects lung pathology and dynamic processes, holding significant value for the diagnosis and treatment of critically ill patients.
EIT has long been established in the field of lung ventilation and is widely used clinically. However, using EIT for pulmonary perfusion imaging is challenging. The impedance changes caused by pulmonary blood perfusion are less than one-tenth of those caused by ventilation and are easily masked by various types of noise, making them extremely difficult to extract. Currently, there are two main solutions:Injecting a high-conductivity contrast agent, also known as saline bolus EIT imaging or contrast-enhanced EIT imaging;The pulse wave method.
The former is performed by injecting a 3%-20% sodium chloride (NaCl) solution via a catheter during an end-expiratory breath-hold, eliminating respiratory interference. As the saline passes sequentially through the right atrium, right ventricle, and pulmonary artery, it produces a first-pass kinetic dilution effect. The resulting impedance changes reflect forward pulmonary blood flow-regions with rich perfusion exhibit high conductivity, and the collected thoracic impedance data show a decrease. Images are then reconstructed based on the obtained impedance-time curve. However, in moderate to severe ARDS patients, variations in lung compliance and pulmonary vascular resistance may affect perfusion detection during apnea.
The latter method monitors pulmonary perfusion based on the principle that lung blood perfusion coincides with vascular pulsations. Nevertheless, increased pulmonary vascular permeability in ARDS patients may impact the accuracy of pulse wave-based perfusion detection.
This study aims to compare pulse wave EIT and saline bolus EIT for assessing pulmonary perfusion in ARDS patients, and to evaluate the changes in monitoring indices under different PEEP levels.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 1 Day
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria will undergo both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT monitoring at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age: 18-80 years;
- Endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation;
- Presence of a subclavian or internal jugular venous catheter in place;
- Diagnosis of ARDS according to the 2023 global ARDS definition.
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Age <18 or >80 years;
- Severe obesity (BMI ≥35 kg/m²);
- Pregnant or lactating women;
- Pulmonary diseases: acute asthma exacerbation, COPD, pulmonary fibrosis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary embolism;
- Cardiac diseases: arrhythmias, significant valvular regurgitation, or cardiac dysfunction (LVEF <50% or right ventricular dysfunction);
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
Pulmonary perfusion was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, pulse wave EIT data were recorded for 3 minutes. Subsequently, during an inspiratory or expiratory hold, a 10 mL bolus of 10% hypertonic saline was administered via the central venous catheter while EIT data were simultaneously recorded for another 3 minutes. This procedure was repeated at a PEEP of 15 cmH₂O. Pulmonary perfusion data were obtained through offline analysis of the EIT data.
18 secondary outcomes
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O and 15 cmH₂O, perform EIT monitoring of pulmonary perfusion during a 15-second inspiratory or expiratory hold.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired during bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline for pulmonary perfusion analysis.
Time frame: Under a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, EIT data acquisition was performed after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The ventilation-perfusion matching percentage was monitored by EIT during 15-second inspiratory or expiratory holds at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired during bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline for ventilation-perfusion matching percentage.
Time frame: Under a PEEP of 5 cmH₂O, EIT data acquisition was performed after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The dead space percentage was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The dead space percentage was monitored by EIT during 15-second inspiratory or expiratory holds at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, the dead space percentage was obtained by EIT monitoring following bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline.
Time frame: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The shunt percentage was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The shunt space percentage was monitored by EIT during 15-second inspiratory or expiratory holds at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O.
Time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, the shunt space percentage was obtained by EIT monitoring following bolus injections of either 10 mL of 0.9% saline or 10 mL of 10% hypertonic saline.
Time frame: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O, heart rate was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, following bolus injections of 10 mL of 0.9% saline and 10% hypertonic saline, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Time frame: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 15 cmH₂O, heart rate was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Time frame: Under PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O, blood pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, following bolus injections of 10 mL of 0.9% saline and 10% hypertonic saline, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Time frame: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 15 cmH₂O, blood pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Time frame: Under PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 5 cmH₂O, central venous pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, following bolus injections of 10 mL of 0.9% saline and 10% hypertonic saline, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures
Time frame: Under PEEP 5 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
At PEEP 15 cmH₂O, central venous pressure was monitored: at baseline, during 15-second inspiratory and expiratory holds, and during combined breath-hold-and-injection procedures.
Time frame: Under PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.
The PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio was recorded prior to patient enrollment.
Time frame: Prior to enrollment
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 2 Nov 2026.
Related trials for ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome)
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
Little Lungs Study
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation, Severe Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Evaluating AVM0703 for Treatment of COVID-19 or Influenza-mediated ARDS
ARDS, Covid19
RecruitingPhase 3
Efficacy and Safety of Tozorakimab in Patients Hospitalised for Viral Lung Infection Requiring Supplemental Oxygen
Viral Lung Infection and Acute Respiratory Failure
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Early Switch in Moderate ARDS
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Fostamatinib for Treating Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) in Hospitalized Adults
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, ARDS
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.
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 ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) and Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT), run by Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology at 1 site 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 8 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 2 Nov 2026. 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 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.
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 Xue Tian, MD (027-85351606, m202376326@hust.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Pulmonary perfusion was assessed using both pulse wave and saline bolus EIT at PEEP levels of 5 and 15 cmH₂O. (time frame: Under both PEEP 5 cmH₂O and PEEP 15 cmH₂O conditions, EIT data were acquired after 30 minutes of stable ventilation.). 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 2 Nov 2026.