Clinical Research Directory

The FILTRATE Trial: High-Rate Ultrafiltration for Intravascular Congestion

The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a personalized, high-rate fluid removal strategy guided by ultrasound is as safe and effective as the standard fluid removal rate for patients with advanced kidney disease who are hospitalized due to severe fluid overload (congestion). When patients with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) on chronic hemodialysis are admitted to the hospital with excess fluid, doctors often need to remove this fluid quickly to relieve symptoms like severe shortness of breath. However, traditional guidelines recommend conservative fluid removal rates-called ultrafiltration (UF) rates-between 10 and 13 mL/kg/h to prevent sudden drops in blood pressure (intradialytic hypotension). Despite these guidelines, doctors in real-world hospital settings frequently use higher rates to provide urgent relief, though this practice lacks strong scientific backing. This study utilizes advanced bedside ultrasound protocols (such as lung ultrasound and VExUS) to objectively measure the amount of fluid congestion inside the patient's blood vessels. The researchers hypothesize that patients with high ultrasound markers of congestion can safely tolerate higher fluid removal rates because their blood vessels are overfilled, meaning fluid can be pulled out faster without causing blood pressure drops. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups during their first in-hospital hemodyalisis session: * Standard Group: Receives a standard fluid removal rate of 10 mL/kg/h. * High-Rate Group: Receives a higher fluid removal rate of over 13 mL/kg/h (with a safety ceiling up to 15 mL/kg/h). The study will compare the two groups over the first 24 hours to monitor blood pressure stability (safety) and check for improvements in ultrasound congestion scores, shortness of breath, and the need for supplemental oxygen (effectiveness).

Palliative Care for People With HF

Imagine having heart failure, a condition where the heart struggles to pump blood, making daily life hard. People with heart failure often don't feel well and end up going to the hospital a lot. Many of these people could feel better with extra help, but there aren't many programs that offer support beyond usual heart failure treatments. That's where the ADAPT program comes in, which stands for "Advancing Symptom Alleviation with Palliative Treatment." In this program, nurses and social workers call people weekly, helping them manage their toughest symptoms, offering tools to cope with heart failure, and keeping the patients' current doctors involved. We tested this program in a research study with heart failure patients and found that it improved their quality of life and lowered depression, anxiety, and heart failure symptoms. The question now is if the ADAPT program will work in the community, outside of a research setting, so that more people could benefit from it. Specifically, can the ADAPT program work well in new places? Will patients and their families find it helpful? Most importantly, can it help improve the lives of people with heart failure in these new settings? To answer these questions, the study team will work with healthcare providers to 1) ask how to adjust the ADAPT program to work well in various settings (e.g. primary care, heart failure clinic) and 2) use this information to create simple materials and trainings to help them easily provide ADAPT. This will prepare for the next phase of this project to test out the new ADAPT program.

Evaluation of the Use of Empagliflozin in Patients with HF with PEF in a Cardiology Outpatient Department

This study aims to evaluate whether the use of a 25 mg dose of empagliflozin compared to the 10 mg dose used would bring additional benefits in the improvement outcomes of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ SST), in the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) without causing significant side effects.