CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07424378ECCOUpdated Feb 20, 2026

Epoprostenol Plus Conventional Therapy in COld and Frostbite Injury (ECCO)

A Phase 4 interventional study of Standard of care plus Epoprostenol infusion for 8 hours (hrs) per day up to 5 days maximum and Standard of Care + Placebo (Normal Saline)infusion for 8 hours per day up to 5 days maximum in Frostbite, sponsored by University of Colorado, Denver. Not yet recruiting at 2 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-02-20.

Sponsored by University of Colorado, Denver · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
66
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Severe frostbite injury can result in significant lifelong disability and amputation. Various medicines, including intravenous vasodilators (prostaglandins/iloprost, pentoxifylline, buflomedil) along with thrombolytics (alteplase), have been described to counter tissue ischemia after rewarming, with poor quality of evidence. An in-class prostacyclin, epoprostenol, has similar pharmacodynamic properties to iloprost including vasodilation and platelet inhibition and has been used in peripheral tissue ischemia such as Raynaud's and scleroderma. In this trial, we will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of epoprostenol treatment for severe frostbite injury in addition to standard of care.

Read the detailed description

Prospective single center placebo controlled randomized trial comparing epoprostenol versus placebo in patients already receiving the standard of care for frostbite, including alteplase. Hypothesis: treatment effect of epoprostenol will be greater than placebo, independent of prior alteplase administration. Standard of care in both groups includes immediate warm water rewarming, thrombolysis with alteplase if they are a thrombolytic candidate per our usual care, immediate therapeutic anticoagulation if received thrombolysis, and ibuprofen at the attending physician's discretion.

Study Aim: To determine the efficacy and safety of treatment with epoprostenol versus placebo in adult patients with severe frostbite injury.

Intervention Group: Standard of care plus epoprostenol intravenous infusion titrated based on tolerability for 5 days.

Control Group: Standard of care plus placebo (normal saline) infusion dosed and titrated to match epoprostenol infusion for 5 days.

02

Conditions studied

  • Frostbite

Keywords

  • Frostbite
  • Epoprostenol
  • Prostaglandin
  • Amputation
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of Colorado, Denver is the lead sponsor of 1,499 studies on the registry; 315 are open to participants now.

Of its 139 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 89 (64%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  1. Aged ≥ 18 years
  2. Admitted to University of Colorado Hospital (UCH) Burn and Frostbite Center
  3. Cauchy Grade 2-4 frostbite injury
  4. Admission within 72 hours post-rewarming

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients unable to initiate therapy within 72 hours post-rewarming
  2. Unsalvageable frostbite as defined by obvious necrosis of tissue, wet gangrene, or other condition requiring amputation (within the first week)
  3. Anticipated death within 48 hours of admission
  4. Pregnant or breastfeeding patients
  5. Prisoners
  6. Inability to obtain consent from patient or legally authorized representative (LAR) or proxy
  7. Not a good candidate for treatment per treating physician or investigator
  8. Patients with known allergy/hypersensitivity to epoprostenol
  9. Current or planned receipt of other prostaglandin analog (iloprost and treprostinil)
  10. Known congestive heart failure due to severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV)
  11. Known right heart failure (RHF)
  12. Hypotension unresponsive to fluids and discontinuation of concomitant anti-hypertensives (mean arterial pressure (MAP) \< 65 mmHg)
  13. Known pulmonary hypertension
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
66 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Epoprostenol

    Standard of care plus epoprostenol intravenous infusion titrated based on tolerability for 8 hours per day and up to 5 days of treatment.

    Drug: Standard of care plus Epoprostenol infusion for 8 hours (hrs) per day up to 5 days maximum

  • Placebo comparator
    Placebo (Normal Saline)

    Standard of care plus placebo infusion dosed and titrated to match epoprostenol infusion for 8 hours per day and up to 5 days of treatment.

    Drug: Standard of Care + Placebo (Normal Saline)infusion for 8 hours per day up to 5 days maximum

Interventions

  • DrugStandard of care plus Epoprostenol infusion for 8 hours (hrs) per day up to 5 days maximum

    An in-class prostacyclin, epoprostenol (originally derived prostaglandin), has similar pharmacodynamic properties to Iloprost including vasodilation and platelet inhibition, is widely available and already stocked at most hospitals for already approved indications (pulmonary hypertension). Epoprostenol has advantageous pharmacokinetics including organ independent elimination, a shorter half-life allowing for a faster "off-set" of action, and decades of experience of use for other indications. This randomized controlled trial will assess the efficacy and safety of epoprostenol for frostbite in addition to our standard of care treatment for frostbite: rewarming and qualified early thrombolytic therapy.

  • DrugStandard of Care + Placebo (Normal Saline)infusion for 8 hours per day up to 5 days maximum

    The placebo or Normal saline will be given exactly the same as the intervention drug - via intravenous infusion for 8 hours a day up to 5 days maximum. Vital signs and monitoring will be the same. The packaging will be labeled "study medication" (epoprostenol or placebo) and neither the participant, treating clinicians, or study personnel will be able to tell the difference as both epoprostenol and normal saline have identical color, general appearance, and viscosity.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Amputation Rate

    Amputation rate within 90 days of frostbite injury, defined as number of amputations per number of digits affected.

    Time frame: from enrollment to the end of treatment when client returns for clinic visit at 90 days.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Hennepin frostbite score change

    The Hennepin Frostbite score is a standardized, clinical tool used to quantify injury and tissue loss of frostbite injury. It assigns a numerical value to each digit, phalanx or limb affected, based on clinical appearance or absence of blood flow. The scale is classified from 0 to 3. 0 = absence of uptake 1. low uptake 2. normal uptake 3. high uptake Studies show patients with an absence (0) or low (1) uptake predicted amputation with high specificity. Change in Hennepin Frostbite Score from admission to final healing to day 90

    Time frame: from admission to final healing to day 90

  2. Preserved Digit Segments

    Number of preserved digit segments from admission to final healing to day 90.

    Time frame: from admission to final healing to Day 90

  3. Change in Perfusion Imaging (fluorescence intravenous indocyanine green)

    Change in perfusion imaging from admission to final imaging. SPY Portable Handheld Imaging System (SPY -PHI) fluorescence intravenous imaging is a near-infrared (NIR) imaging technology using indocyanine green (ICG) dye to provide real-time, high-resolution visualization of blood flow, tissue perfusion, and lymphatic vessels. It enables physicians to immediately assess tissue viability and vascularity. Physicians select a region of interest of uninjured tissue as baseline perfusion (for example 100%), and then a relative percentage value (0-100%) is obtained for affected tissue. Studies have identified a perfusion cut-off value of 33% (using SPY-QP) to determine tissue viability, with some studies showing a high negative predictive value (up to 91-93%) for identifying ischemic tissue. Data on affected tissue perfusion and location will be serially recorded every other day throughout the treatment period. A higher score means a better outcome.

    Time frame: from admission to final imaging at day 7

  4. Change in Technetium Bone Scans

    Technetium-99m bone scans for frostbite measure tissue perfusion, viability, and deep-tissue/bone infarction. They use a triple-phase technique to distinguish viable from necrotic (dead) tissue, providing early prognosis, identifying regions suitable for thrombolytic therapy, and determining the necessary amputation level. These scans are superior to initial clinical exams, which may not show true tissue damage for weeks. The scale we are using ranges from 5 options - worst outcome is completely absent perfusion, then decreased activity/perfusion, questionable or possible decreased activity, hyperfusion/increased blood flow, to the best possible outcome, which is no abnormality/no problems.

    Time frame: from admission to final imaging at day 7

Other outcomes

  1. Hospital Length of Stay

    Measure the total number of days each patient spent in the hospital.

    Time frame: from admission to day 90

  2. Mortality Rate

    Measure the incidence of death within the patients admitted to the hospital, enrolled in this frostbite study, expressed as a rate or percentage.

    Time frame: from admission to day 90

  3. Need for Skin graft procedures

    The number of patients who had a skin graft

    Time frame: from admission to 90 days of frostbite injury

  4. Need for Surgical Debridement

    The number of patients who had a surgical debridement

    Time frame: from admission to day 90

  5. Need for surgical excision

    The number of patients who had a surgical excision

    Time frame: from admission to day 90.

  6. Need for surgical flap

    The number of patients who had a surgical flap

    Time frame: from admission to day 90

  7. Long term outcome- Neuropathy level

    The level of neuropathy as measured by the Qualitative Sensory Test(QST), performed at Day 90 after frostbite injury. The QST is a psychophysical test that assesses sensory nerve function by measuring a person's ability to detect stimuli such as heat, cold and vibration. It is used to detect nerve damage or dysfunction after frostbite. The TSA2Air devise is a hand- held device used to measure sensory nerve function. Generally, at the onset of a stimulus, an adaptation temperature between 30°C and 32°C is set (within this range, the subject should have neither a warm sensation or a cool sensation). For threshold measurement, temperature will then decrease or increase at a constant rate until a response from the subject or operator is received. Response can be recorded by either using the keyboard (operator or subject) or the Patient Response Unit (subject). The temperature at which the response was noted is saved, and the next cycle of stimuli starts.

    Time frame: from admission to 90 days after frostbite injury

  8. Long term outcome: Neuropathy Level

    The Neuropathic Pain Diagnostic Questionnaire (DN4) is a questionnaire that measures the presence and severity of neuropathy on a scale from 0 to 10. Ten questions are asked. A yes answer is 1 point, and a no answer is 0 points. The lower the score, the better the outcome. This questionnaire is given at the Burn Clinic return visit, 90 days after frostbite injury.

    Time frame: from admission to 90 days after frostbite injury

  9. Functional Ability -Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, Hand (DASH)

    The Quick DASH questionnaire for arms and shoulders and hand mobility. Each question has a scale rating from No difficulty, mild difficulty, moderate difficulty, severe difficulty, or unable to do task. It also asks about pain levels ranging from none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), severe (3) to extreme (4).

    Time frame: from admission to 90 days after frostbite injury

  10. Functional Ability - Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS)

    The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) is a questionnaire that scores for all 20 items to get a total score between 0 and 80. Each item is scored on a 5-point scale from 0 (extreme difficulty or unable to perform) to 4 (no difficulty). A higher LEFS score indicates better lower extremity function

    Time frame: from admission to 90 days after frostbite injury

  11. Quality of Life - Five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire(EQ-5D-5L)

    The EQ-5D-5L is a generic health questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life by asking respondents to rate their current health status across five dimensions: * mobility, * self-care, * usual activities, * pain/discomfort, and * anxiety/depression. For each dimension, respondents choose from five (5) levels of severity, indicating no, slight, moderate, severe, or extreme problems. The questionnaire also includes a visual analogue scale (VAS), where individuals rate their overall health from 0 (worst possible) to 100 (best possible).

    Time frame: from admission to 90 days after frostbite injury

  12. Return to Work

    Return to work is a yes/no question determining if the subject has returned to work (if working prior to hospitalization) at day 90 after discharge. The answers provided are yes, no, did not work/attend school previously or unknown.

    Time frame: from discharge to 90 days after frostbite injury

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • University of Colorado, Denver
    Aurora, Colorado 80045, United States
  • University of Colorado, Denver
    Aurora, Colorado 80045, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Endorf FW, Nygaard RM. Social Determinants of Poor Outcomes Following Frostbite Injury: A Study of the National Inpatient Sample. J Burn Care Res. 2021 Nov 24;42(6):1261-1265. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irab115. PubMed 34139760 ↗
  • Update: Cold weather injuries, active and reserve components, U.S. Armed Forces, July 2016-June 2021. MSMR. 2021 Oct 1;28(10):2-10. PubMed 34964583 ↗
  • Nygaard RM, Endorf FW. Frostbite in the United States: An Examination of the National Burn Repository and National Trauma Data Bank. J Burn Care Res. 2018 Aug 17;39(5):780-785. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irx048. PubMed 29931369 ↗
  • Badesch DB, Tapson VF, McGoon MD, Brundage BH, Rubin LJ, Wigley FM, Rich S, Barst RJ, Barrett PS, Kral KM, Jobsis MM, Loyd JE, Murali S, Frost A, Girgis R, Bourge RC, Ralph DD, Elliott CG, Hill NS, Langleben D, Schilz RJ, McLaughlin VV, Robbins IM, Groves BM, Shapiro S, Medsger TA Jr. Continuous intravenous epoprostenol for pulmonary hypertension due to the scleroderma spectrum of disease. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2000 Mar 21;132(6):425-34. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-132-6-200003210-00002. PubMed 10733441 ↗
  • Young A, Namas R, Dodge C, Khanna D. Hand Impairment in Systemic Sclerosis: Various Manifestations and Currently Available Treatment. Curr Treatm Opt Rheumatol. 2016 Sep;2(3):252-269. doi: 10.1007/s40674-016-0052-9. Epub 2016 Jul 19. PubMed 28018840 ↗
  • Kowal-Bielecka O, Landewe R, Avouac J, Chwiesko S, Miniati I, Czirjak L, Clements P, Denton C, Farge D, Fligelstone K, Foldvari I, Furst DE, Muller-Ladner U, Seibold J, Silver RM, Takehara K, Toth BG, Tyndall A, Valentini G, van den Hoogen F, Wigley F, Zulian F, Matucci-Cerinic M; EUSTAR Co-Authors. EULAR recommendations for the treatment of systemic sclerosis: a report from the EULAR Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EUSTAR). Ann Rheum Dis. 2009 May;68(5):620-8. doi: 10.1136/ard.2008.096677. Epub 2009 Jan 15. PubMed 19147617 ↗
  • Del Galdo F, Lescoat A, Conaghan PG, Bertoldo E, Colic J, Santiago T, Suliman YA, Matucci-Cerinic M, Gabrielli A, Distler O, Hoffmann-Vold AM, Castellvi I, Balbir-Gurman A, Vonk M, Ananyeva L, Rednic S, Tarasova A, Ostojic P, Boyadzhieva V, El Aoufy K, Farrington S, Galetti I, Denton CP, Kowal-Bielecka O, Mueller-Ladner U, Allanore Y. EULAR recommendations for the treatment of systemic sclerosis: 2023 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2025 Jan;84(1):29-40. doi: 10.1136/ard-2024-226430. Epub 2025 Jan 2. PubMed 39874231 ↗
  • Sitbon O, Vonk Noordegraaf A. Epoprostenol and pulmonary arterial hypertension: 20 years of clinical experience. Eur Respir Rev. 2017 Jan 17;26(143):160055. doi: 10.1183/16000617.0055-2016. Print 2017 Jan. PubMed 28096285 ↗
  • McIntosh SE, Freer L, Grissom CK, Auerbach PS, Rodway GW, Cochran A, Giesbrecht GG, McDevitt M, Imray CH, Johnson EL, Pandey P, Dow J, Hackett PH. Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Frostbite: 2019 Update. Wilderness Environ Med. 2019 Dec;30(4S):S19-S32. doi: 10.1016/j.wem.2019.05.002. Epub 2019 Jul 17. PubMed 31326282 ↗
  • Bello JW, Rickrode GA, Harlan NP, Buckey JC. Systemic Prostacyclin Analogues for Frostbite Require Careful Monitoring. J Burn Care Res. 2023 Mar 2;44(2):487-488. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irac178. No abstract available. PubMed 36444642 ↗
  • Bouhassira D, Attal N, Alchaar H, Boureau F, Brochet B, Bruxelle J, Cunin G, Fermanian J, Ginies P, Grun-Overdyking A, Jafari-Schluep H, Lanteri-Minet M, Laurent B, Mick G, Serrie A, Valade D, Vicaut E. Comparison of pain syndromes associated with nervous or somatic lesions and development of a new neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire (DN4). Pain. 2005 Mar;114(1-2):29-36. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2004.12.010. Epub 2005 Jan 26. PubMed 15733628 ↗
  • Tan G, Jensen MP, Thornby JI, Shanti BF. Validation of the Brief Pain Inventory for chronic nonmalignant pain. J Pain. 2004 Mar;5(2):133-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2003.12.005. PubMed 15042521 ↗
  • Kamstra RJM, Boorsma A, Krone T, van Stokkum RM, Eggink HM, Peters T, Pasman WJ. Validation of the Mobile App Version of the EQ-5D-5L Quality of Life Questionnaire Against the Gold Standard Paper-Based Version: Randomized Crossover Study. JMIR Form Res. 2022 Aug 11;6(8):e37303. doi: 10.2196/37303. PubMed 35969437 ↗
  • Ogawa A, Matsubara H, Fujio H, Miyaji K, Nakamura K, Morita H, Saito H, Kusano KF, Emori T, Date H, Ohe T. Risk of alveolar hemorrhage in patients with primary pulmonary hypertension--anticoagulation and epoprostenol therapy. Circ J. 2005 Feb;69(2):216-20. doi: 10.1253/circj.69.216. PubMed 15671616 ↗
  • Lindford A, Valtonen J, Hult M, Kavola H, Lappalainen K, Lassila R, Aho P, Vuola J. The evolution of the Helsinki frostbite management protocol. Burns. 2017 Nov;43(7):1455-1463. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2017.04.016. Epub 2017 Aug 1. PubMed 28778759 ↗
  • Murphy J, Endorf FW, Winters MK, Rogers C, Walter E, Neumann N, Weber L, Lacey AM, Punjabi G, Nygaard RM. Bleeding Complications in Patients With Severe Frostbite Injury. J Burn Care Res. 2023 Jul 5;44(4):745-750. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irac180. PubMed 36482743 ↗
  • Poole A, Gauthier J, MacLennan M. Management of severe frostbite with iloprost, alteplase and heparin: a Yukon case series. CMAJ Open. 2021 May 21;9(2):E585-E591. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20200214. Print 2021 Apr-Jun. PubMed 34021017 ↗
  • Crooks S, Shaw BH, Andruchow JE, Lee CH, Walker I. Effectiveness of intravenous prostaglandin to reduce digital amputations from frostbite: an observational study. CJEM. 2022 Sep;24(6):622-629. doi: 10.1007/s43678-022-00342-9. Epub 2022 Jul 23. PubMed 35870081 ↗
  • Cauchy E, Cheguillaume B, Chetaille E. A controlled trial of a prostacyclin and rt-PA in the treatment of severe frostbite. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jan 13;364(2):189-90. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1000538. No abstract available. PubMed 21226604 ↗
  • Cauchy E, Davis CB, Pasquier M, Meyer EF, Hackett PH. A New Proposal for Management of Severe Frostbite in the Austere Environment. Wilderness Environ Med. 2016 Mar;27(1):92-9. doi: 10.1016/j.wem.2015.11.014. PubMed 26948558 ↗
  • Wibbenmeyer L, Lacey AM, Endorf FW, Logsetty S, Wagner ALL, Gibson ALF, Nygaard RM. American Burn Association Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Treatment of Severe Frostbite. J Burn Care Res. 2024 May 6;45(3):541-556. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irad022. PubMed 37045447 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Data will be shared with Department of Defense

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 20, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07424378
Lead sponsor
University of Colorado, Denver
Collaborators
United States Department of Defense
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Feb 20, 2026
Start date
Feb 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Nov 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Nov 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Feb 20, 2026

Study contacts

Beth A Strimpel, MA, BSN, RN
Contact
beth.a.strimpel@cuanschutz.edu
203-980-2209
Arek J Wiktor, MD, FACS
Contact
arek.wiktor@cuanschutz.edu
303-724-1055
Arek J Wiktor, MD, FACS
principal investigator · University of Colorado, Denver

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Feb 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion