ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07667608Updated Jun 25, 2026

Ultrasound Assessment of Diaphragmatic Structure and Function in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis: A Point-of-Care Tool for Predicting Complications and Sarcopenia in Limited Resource Settings

An observational study in Cirrhosis of the Liver, Ascites and Pleural Effusion Disorder, sponsored by Assiut University. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-06-25.

Primary conditionAscitesRegistry: FibrosisReclassifiedWhy we changed it
Registry
Fibrosis — the first condition term the registry derived for this study.
ClinicalTrials.gg
Ascites
Why
  1. Fibrosis is a broad heading, used only when no more specific condition is named.
  2. The study's listed conditions name Ascites.
Confidence
High: the new condition is named in the study's own listed conditions. Of 351 hand-checked studies reclassified this way, 68% were exactly right and 84% in the right disease family; the registry's first term was right for 5% (measured 2026-10-21). How we classify →
Wrong?
Tell us the study's main condition →

Sponsored by Assiut University · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
120
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this observational study is to learn how liver cirrhosis affects the diaphragm, the main muscle used for breathing, in adults. The study will measure diaphragmatic thickness, thickening fraction, and excursion using bedside ultrasound and compare these values between patients with cirrhosis and healthy volunteers. The main questions it aims to answer are:

Do patients with cirrhosis show reduced diaphragmatic function compared to healthy adults?

Does removal of ascitic fluid by paracentesis improve diaphragmatic mechanics?

Can ultrasound measurements of the diaphragm serve as a reliable non-invasive marker of sarcopenia when compared to CT scans?

Participants will:

Undergo diaphragmatic ultrasound during quiet and deep breathing

Provide clinical and laboratory data related to liver disease severity

In some cases, have ultrasound repeated before and after paracentesis

For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, CT scans will be analyzed to measure muscle mass

Read the detailed description

This study is a prospective observational cohort designed to evaluate diaphragmatic structure and function in adults with liver cirrhosis. Using bedside ultrasound, the study will measure diaphragmatic thickness, thickening fraction, and excursion, and compare these values across different stages of liver disease severity and complications such as ascites, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatocellular carcinoma. A subgroup of patients undergoing large-volume paracentesis will have ultrasound assessments before and after fluid removal to determine the acute impact of ascites drainage on diaphragmatic mechanics. In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, existing CT scans will be analyzed to calculate skeletal muscle index, allowing correlation between ultrasound parameters and sarcopenia. Healthy volunteers will serve as a reference group for establishing normative values. Clinical and laboratory data, respiratory outcomes, and hospitalization details will also be collected to explore associations between diaphragmatic dysfunction and patient prognosis. The study aims to validate diaphragmatic ultrasound as a simple, non-invasive tool for respiratory monitoring and sarcopenia assessment in cirrhosis, particularly in resource-limited settings.

02

Conditions studied

  • Cirrhosis of the Liver
  • Ascites
  • Pleural Effusion Disorder
  • Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)
  • Sarcopenia
  • Diaphragm Movement
03

In context

Ascites Reclassified

247 studies on the registry are indexed under Ascites; 57 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 120 is above the median of 100 across 54 observational studies indexed under Ascites.

Browse Ascites studies →

Lead sponsor

Assiut University is the lead sponsor of 5,078 studies on the registry; 2,178 are open to participants now.

Of its 14 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Compared within Ascites, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Fibrosis. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Adults (≥18 years of age) with confirmed diagnosis of liver cirrhosis attending the hepatology outpatient clinic or admitted to the hepatology inpatient unit of the study institution.

Study Subgroups The total study sample will consist of 120 participants, including 95 patients with liver cirrhosis and 25 healthy controls. The cirrhotic cohort will include patients across different Child-Pugh classes and MELD scores and will encompass clinically relevant subgroups such as patients with ascites undergoing paracentesis, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

  • Subgroup A: Ascites/Paracentesis (n=30): Patients with tense or refractory ascites for whom large-volume paracentesis is clinically indicated. This subgroup will contribute both cross-sectional and longitudinal (pre/post paracentesis) data.
  • Subgroup B: Hepatic Hydrothorax (n=40): Twenty patients with confirmed hepatic hydrothorax (HH; defined as pleural effusion >500 mL in the absence of primary cardiopulm

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Age ≥18 years.
  2. Confirmed diagnosis of liver cirrhosis based on clinical, biochemical, histological, or imaging criteria.
  3. Ability to provide written in Arabic or English.
  4. For Subgroup A: clinical indication for large-volume paracentesis with an ascitic volume of ≥5 liters.
  5. For Subgroup B: confirmed hepatic hydrothorax or confirmed absence of pleural effusion on ultrasound or chest X-ray.
  6. For Subgroup C: radiologically confirmed HCC by triphasic CT or MRI according to EASL/AASLD diagnostic criteria, with available CT imaging for L3 SMI analysis.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Significant pre-existing primary pulmonary disease (e.g., moderate-to-severe defined as /FVC \<70% with FEV1 \<60% predicted, interstitial lung disease, pulmonary fibrosis) that independently affects diaphragmatic mechanics.
  2. Recent thoracic surgery, thoracocentesis within the preceding 72 hours, or thoracic trauma.
  3. Neuromuscular disease (e.g., myasthenia gravis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Guillain-Barré syndrome) independently affecting diaphragmatic function.
  4. Active mechanical ventilation at time of enrollment.
  5. Pregnancy.
  6. Inability to achieve adequate ultrasound acoustic windows (e.g., due to extreme obesity or surgical dressings).
  7. to paracentesis in Subgroup A (e.g., disseminated intravascular coagulation, bowel obstruction).
  8. Prior or planned liver transplantation within the study period, which would confound longitudinal follow-up.
  9. Refusal or inability to provide .
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(4)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

FEV1

From a breathing test (spirometry): how much air you can blow out in the first second. Often given as a percentage of what is expected for your age, height and sex.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
120 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Adults with Liver Cirrhosis

    This cohort includes adults diagnosed with liver cirrhosis, with subgroups defined by complications such as ascites, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatocellular carcinoma. A subgroup undergoing paracentesis will be assessed before and after fluid removal to evaluate acute changes in diaphragmatic function. In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, CT scans will be analyzed to calculate skeletal muscle index for correlation with ultrasound findings. A small number of healthy volunteers will also undergo diaphragmatic ultrasound to establish normative reference values; however, they are not considered a separate cohort for analysis.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Diaphragmatic Thickness (Tdi-exp, Tdi-insp) [cm]

    Diaphragmatic thickness at end-expiration (Tdi-exp) and end-inspiration (Tdi-insp) measured by B-mode ultrasound.

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  2. Diaphragmatic Thickening Fraction (TF) [%]

    Thickening fraction calculated as \[(Tdi-insp - Tdi-exp) / Tdi-exp\] × 100, measured by B-mode ultrasound.

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  3. Diaphragmatic Excursion (DE) [cm]

    Amplitude of diaphragmatic displacement measured by M-mode ultrasound during quiet breathing.

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  4. Group Differences in Diaphragmatic Thickness Across Cirrhosis Stages

    Mean differences in diaphragmatic thickness (cm) between patients with Child-Pugh A, B, and C cirrhosis, and across MELD score strata. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment)

  5. Group Differences in Diaphragmatic Thickening Fraction Across Cirrhosis Stages

    Mean differences in diaphragmatic thickening fraction (%) between patients with Child-Pugh A, B, and C cirrhosis, and across MELD score strata. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (%).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  6. Group Differences in Diaphragmatic Excursion Across Cirrhosis Stages

    Mean differences in diaphragmatic excursion (cm) between patients with Child-Pugh A, B, and C cirrhosis, and across MELD score strata. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  7. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Thickness with Disease Severity

    Correlation between diaphragmatic thickness (cm) and liver disease severity scores (Child-Pugh class, MELD score). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  8. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Thickening Fraction (TF) with Disease Severity

    Correlation between diaphragmatic thickening fraction (%) and liver disease severity scores (Child-Pugh class, MELD score). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  9. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Excursion (DE) with Disease Severity

    Correlation between diaphragmatic excursion (cm) and liver disease severity scores (Child-Pugh class, MELD score). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Correlation between diaphragmatic ultrasound parameters and skeletal muscle index (CT scans)

    In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, triphasic CT scans will be analyzed to calculate skeletal muscle index. These values will be correlated with diaphragmatic ultrasound parameters to assess the utility of ultrasound as a surrogate marker of sarcopenia.

    Time frame: At baseline (single measurement)

  2. Change in Diaphragmatic Thickness After Paracentesis

    Change in diaphragmatic thickness (cm) measured by B-mode ultrasound before and within 60 ± 15 minutes after large-volume paracentesis. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (cm).

    Time frame: Pre-paracentesis (Day 1, immediately before procedure) and within 60 minutes post-paracentesis.

  3. Change in Diaphragmatic Thickening Fraction After Paracentesis

    Change in diaphragmatic thickening fraction (%) measured by B-mode ultrasound before and within 60 ± 15 minutes after large-volume paracentesis. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (%).

    Time frame: Pre-paracentesis (Day 1, immediately before procedure) and within 60 minutes post-paracentesis.

  4. Change in Diaphragmatic Excursion After Paracentesis

    Change in diaphragmatic excursion (cm) measured by M-mode ultrasound before and within 60 ± 15 minutes after large-volume paracentesis. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (cm).

    Time frame: Pre-paracentesis (Day 1, immediately before procedure) and within 60 minutes post-paracentesis.

  5. Diaphragmatic Thickness in Patients With vs. Without Hepatic Hydrothorax

    Comparison of mean diaphragmatic thickness (cm) between cirrhotic patients with hepatic hydrothorax and matched cirrhotic controls without hydrothorax. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  6. Diaphragmatic Thickening Fraction in Patients With vs. Without Hepatic Hydrothorax

    Comparison of mean diaphragmatic thickening fraction (%) between cirrhotic patients with hepatic hydrothorax and matched cirrhotic controls without hydrothorax. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (%).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  7. Diaphragmatic Excursion in Patients With vs. Without Hepatic Hydrothorax

    Comparison of mean diaphragmatic excursion (cm) between cirrhotic patients with hepatic hydrothorax and matched cirrhotic controls without hydrothorax. Unit of Measure: Mean difference (cm).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  8. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Dysfunction with Dyspnea Score

    Correlation between diaphragmatic dysfunction (defined by ultrasound parameters) and dyspnea severity measured by the mMRC scale (0-4). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  9. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Dysfunction with Respiratory Rate

    Correlation between diaphragmatic dysfunction and respiratory rate (breaths/min). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  10. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Dysfunction with Oxygen Saturation

    Correlation between diaphragmatic dysfunction and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂, %). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1, at enrollment).

  11. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Dysfunction with Length of Hospital Stay

    Correlation between diaphragmatic dysfunction (defined by ultrasound parameters: thickness, thickening fraction, excursion) and length of hospital stay (days). Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r).

    Time frame: During hospitalization (up to 30 days).

  12. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Dysfunction with ICU Admission

    Correlation between diaphragmatic dysfunction and need for ICU admission. Unit of Measure: Odds ratio (% of patients requiring ICU admission).

    Time frame: During hospitalization (up to 30 days).

  13. Correlation of Diaphragmatic Dysfunction with In-Hospital Complications

    Correlation between diaphragmatic dysfunction and occurrence of complications (e.g., respiratory failure, infection). Unit of Measure: Incidence (% of patients with complications).

    Time frame: During hospitalization (up to 30 days).

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 26;4:863. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863. PubMed 24324449 ↗
  • Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012. Epub 2016 Mar 31. PubMed 27330520 ↗
  • Haaksma ME, Smit JM, Boussuges A, Demoule A, Dres M, Ferrari G, Formenti P, Goligher EC, Heunks L, Lim EHT, Mokkink LB, Soilemezi E, Shi Z, Umbrello M, Vetrugno L, Vivier E, Xu L, Zambon M, Tuinman PR. EXpert consensus On Diaphragm UltraSonography in the critically ill (EXODUS): a Delphi consensus statement on the measurement of diaphragm ultrasound-derived parameters in a critical care setting. Crit Care. 2022 Apr 8;26(1):99. doi: 10.1186/s13054-022-03975-5. PubMed 35395861 ↗
  • Goligher EC, Laghi F, Detsky ME, Farias P, Murray A, Brace D, Brochard LJ, Bolz SS, Rubenfeld GD, Kavanagh BP, Ferguson ND. Measuring diaphragm thickness with ultrasound in mechanically ventilated patients: feasibility, reproducibility and validity. Intensive Care Med. 2015 Apr;41(4):642-9. doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-3687-3. Epub 2015 Feb 19. PubMed 25693448 ↗
  • GBD 2017 Cirrhosis Collaborators. The global, regional, and national burden of cirrhosis by cause in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Mar;5(3):245-266. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30349-8. Epub 2020 Jan 22. PubMed 31981519 ↗
  • Ebadi M, Bhanji RA, Dunichand-Hoedl AR, Mazurak VC, Baracos VE, Montano-Loza AJ. Sarcopenia Severity Based on Computed Tomography Image Analysis in Patients with Cirrhosis. Nutrients. 2020 Nov 11;12(11):3463. doi: 10.3390/nu12113463. PubMed 33187310 ↗
  • D'Amico G, Garcia-Tsao G, Pagliaro L. Natural history and prognostic indicators of survival in cirrhosis: a systematic review of 118 studies. J Hepatol. 2006 Jan;44(1):217-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2005.10.013. Epub 2005 Nov 9. No abstract available. PubMed 16298014 ↗
  • Carey EJ, Lai JC, Sonnenday C, Tapper EB, Tandon P, Duarte-Rojo A, Dunn MA, Tsien C, Kallwitz ER, Ng V, Dasarathy S, Kappus M, Bashir MR, Montano-Loza AJ. A North American Expert Opinion Statement on Sarcopenia in Liver Transplantation. Hepatology. 2019 Nov;70(5):1816-1829. doi: 10.1002/hep.30828. Epub 2019 Aug 19. PubMed 31220351 ↗
  • Cappellini I, Picciafuochi F, Bartolucci M, Matteini S, Virgili G, Adembri C. Evaluation of diaphragm thickening by diaphragm ultrasonography: a reproducibility and a repeatability study. J Ultrasound. 2021 Dec;24(4):411-416. doi: 10.1007/s40477-020-00462-x. Epub 2020 May 1. PubMed 32358646 ↗
  • Boussuges A, Gole Y, Blanc P. Diaphragmatic motion studied by m-mode ultrasonography: methods, reproducibility, and normal values. Chest. 2009 Feb;135(2):391-400. doi: 10.1378/chest.08-1541. Epub 2008 Nov 18. PubMed 19017880 ↗
  • Boussuges A, Finance J, Chaumet G, Bregeon F. Diaphragmatic motion recorded by M-mode ultrasonography: limits of normality. ERJ Open Res. 2021 Mar 22;7(1):00714-2020. doi: 10.1183/23120541.00714-2020. eCollection 2021 Jan. PubMed 33778044 ↗
09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Aug 2026; primary completion for Aug 2027, 12 months later.

Of 28 observational studies under Ascites, half reached primary completion within 50 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 20. This study's planned 12 months is below that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jun 16, 2026
First posted
Jun 25, 2026
StartEst.
Aug 10, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Aug 10, 2027
CompletionEst.
Dec 10, 2027
Last update
Jun 25, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 25, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07667608
Lead sponsor
Assiut University
Responsible party
Nada Refaat Mohamed Abdelshafy Samasiri (Resident Physician, Department of Gastroenterology and Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 25, 2026
Start date
Aug 10, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Aug 10, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 10, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 25, 2026

Study contacts

Nada Refaat Mohamed, MD
Contact
nadarefaat411@gmail.com
+201019860918
Mohamed Abdelghany Abdelhamed
Contact
Moh7111@aun.edu.eg
+201112828724
Ahmed Helmy Salem, professor
principal investigator · Assiut University
Maiada Kamal Eldeen Hashem
principal investigator · Assiut University

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jun 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