Dataset Information

International randomised controlled trial of patient triggered ventilation in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To compare the effects of patient triggered ventilation (PTV) with conventional ventilation (IMV) in preterm infants ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).

Methods

Nine hundred and twenty four babies from 22 neonatal intensive care units were assessed. They were under 32 weeks of gestation and had been ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) for less than 6 hours within 72 hours of birth. The infants were randomly allocated to receive either PTV or IMV. Analysis was on an "intention to treat" basis. Death before discharge home or oxygen therapy at 36 weeks of gestation; pneumothorax while ventilated; cerebral ultrasound abnormality nearest to 6 weeks; and duration of ventilation in survivors were the main outcome measures.

Results

There was no significant difference in outcome between the two groups. Unadjusted rates for death or oxygen dependency at 36 weeks of gestation were 47.4% and 48.7%, for PTV and IMV, respectively; for pneumothorax these were 13.4% and 10.3%; and for cerebral ultrasound abnormality nearest to 6 weeks these were 35.4% and 36.9%. Median duration of ventilation for survivors in both groups was 6 days. Overall, 79% of babies received only their assigned ventilation. PTV babies were more likely to depart from their intended ventilation (27% vs 15%). The trend towards higher pneumothorax rates with PTV occurred only in infants below 28 weeks of gestation (18.8% vs 11.8%).

Conclusions

There was no observed benefit from the use of PTV, with a trend towards a higher rate of pneumothorax under 28 weeks of gestation. Although PTV has a similar outcome to IMV for treatment of RDS in infants of 28 weeks or more gestation, within 72 hours of birth, it was abandoned more often. It cannot be recommended for infants of less than 28 weeks' gestation with the ventilators used in this study.

SUBMITTER: Baumer JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1721044 | biostudies-literature | 2000 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

International randomised controlled trial of patient triggered ventilation in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.

Baumer J H JH

Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition 20000101 1

<h4>Aim</h4>To compare the effects of patient triggered ventilation (PTV) with conventional ventilation (IMV) in preterm infants ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).<h4>Methods</h4>Nine hundred and twenty four babies from 22 neonatal intensive care units were assessed. They were under 32 weeks of gestation and had been ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) for less than 6 hours within 72 hours of birth. The infants were randomly allocated to receive either PTV or IMV. ...[more]

PMID: 10634832

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aims to demonstrate the positive effects on oxygenation of flow-controlled ventilation compared to conventionally ventilated patients in patients suffering from Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) associated with COVID-19.We define ARDS according to the "Berlin" definition integrating the oxygenation index (P/F ratio), the level of Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP), radiological and clinical findings.Trial designThis is a prospective, randomized (1:1 ratio), parallel group feasibility study in adult patients with proven COVID-19 associated ARDS.ParticipantsAll adult patients admitted to the ICU of Hamad Medical Corporation facilities in Qatar because of COVID-19 infection who develop moderate to severe ARDS are eligible. The inclusion criteria are above 18 years of age, proven COVID-19 infection, respiratory failure necessitating intubation and mechanical ventilation, ARDS with a P/F ratio of at least 200mmHg or less and a minimum PEEP 5cmH2O, BMI less 30 kg/ m2. The following exclusion criteria: no written consent, chronic respiratory disease, acute or chronic cardiovascular disease, pregnancy or need for special therapy (prone position and/or Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation).Intervention and comparatorAfter randomisation, the group A patients will be ventilated with the test-device for 48 hours. The settings will be started with the pre-existing-PEEP. The upper pressure will be determined to achieve a tidal volume of 6 ml/kg lean body mass, while the respiratory rate will be set to maintain an arterial pH above 7.2. In group B, the ventilator settings will be adjusted by the attending ICU team in accordance with lung-protective ventilation strategy. All other treatment will be unchanged and according to our local policies/guidelines.Main outcomesThe primary end point is PaO2. As this is a dynamic parameter, we will record it every 6-8 hours and analyse it sequentially.RandomisationThe study team screens the ventilated patients who fulfil the inclusion criteria and randomise using a 1:1 allocation ratio after consenting using a closed envelope method. The latter were prepared and sealed in advance by an independent person.Blinding (masking)Due to the technical nature of the study (use of a specific ventilator) blinding is only possible for the data-analysts and the patients.Numbers to be randomised (sample size)The sample size calculation based on the assumption of an effect size (change in PaO2) of 1.5 SDS in the primary endpoint (PaO2), an intended power of 80%, an alpha error of 5% and an equal sample ratio results in n=7 patients needed to treat. However, to compensate for dropouts we will include 10 patients in each group, which means in total 20 patients.Trial statusThe local registration number is MRC-05-018 with the protocol version number 3. The date of approval is 14th April 2020. Recruitment began 28th May 2020 and is expected to end in September 2020.Trial registrationThe protocol was registered before starting subject recruitment under the title: "Flow controlled ventilation in ARDS associated with COVID-19" in ClinicalTrials.org with the registration number: NCT04399317 . Registered on 22 May 2020.Full protocolThe full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Low tidal volume ventilation lowers mortality in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Previous studies reported poor low tidal volume ventilation implementation. We sought to determine the rate, quality, and predictors of low tidal volume ventilation use. DESIGN:Retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING:One academic and three community hospitals in the Chicago region. PATIENTS:A total of 362 adults meeting the Berlin Definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome consecutively admitted between June and December 2013. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Seventy patients (19.3%) were treated with low tidal volume ventilation (tidal volume < 6.5?mL/kg predicted body weight) at some time during mechanical ventilation. In total, 22.2% of patients requiring an FIO2 greater than 40% and 37.3% of patients with FIO2 greater than 40% and plateau pressure greater than 30?cm H2O received low tidal volume ventilation. The entire cohort received low tidal volume ventilation 11.4% of the time patients had acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among patients who received low tidal volume ventilation, the mean (SD) percentage of acute respiratory distress syndrome time it was used was 59.1% (38.2%), and 34% waited more than 72 hours prior to low tidal volume ventilation initiation. Women were less likely to receive low tidal volume ventilation, whereas sepsis and FIO2 greater than 40% were associated with increased odds of low tidal volume ventilation use. Four attending physicians (6.2%) initiated low tidal volume ventilation within 1 day of acute respiratory distress syndrome onset for greater than or equal to 50% of their patients, whereas 34 physicians (52.3%) never initiated low tidal volume ventilation within 1 day of acute respiratory distress syndrome onset. In total, 54.4% of patients received a tidal volume less than 8?mL/kg predicted body weight, and the mean tidal volume during the first 72 hours after acute respiratory distress syndrome onset was never less than 8?mL/kg predicted body weight. CONCLUSIONS:More than 12 years after publication of the landmark low tidal volume ventilation study, use remains poor. Interventions that improve adoption of low tidal volume ventilation are needed.

Project description:ObjectivesLung-protective ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome aims for providing sufficient oxygenation and carbon dioxide clearance, while limiting the harmful effects of mechanical ventilation. "Flow-controlled ventilation", providing a constant expiratory flow, has been suggested as a new lung-protective ventilation strategy. The aim of this study was to test whether flow-controlled ventilation attenuates lung injury in an animal model of acute respiratory distress syndrome.DesignPreclinical, randomized controlled animal study.SettingAnimal research facility.SubjectsNineteen German landrace hybrid pigs.InterventionFlow-controlled ventilation (intervention group) or volume-controlled ventilation (control group) with identical tidal volume (7 mL/kg) and positive end-expiratory pressure (9 cm H2O) after inducing acute respiratory distress syndrome with oleic acid.Measurements and main resultsPaO2 and PaCO2, minute volume, tracheal pressure, lung aeration measured via CT, alveolar wall thickness, cell infiltration, and surfactant protein A concentration in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Five pigs were excluded leaving n equals to 7 for each group. Compared with control, flow-controlled ventilation elevated PaO2 (154 ± 21 vs 105 ± 9 torr; 20.5 ± 2.8 vs 14.0 ± 1.2 kPa; p = 0.035) and achieved comparable PaCO2 (57 ± 3 vs 54 ± 1 torr; 7.6 ± 0.4 vs 7.1 ± 0.1 kPa; p = 0.37) with a lower minute volume (6.4 ± 0.5 vs 8.7 ± 0.4 L/min; p < 0.001). Inspiratory plateau pressure was comparable in both groups (31 ± 2 vs 34 ± 2 cm H2O; p = 0.16). Flow-controlled ventilation increased normally aerated (24% ± 4% vs 10% ± 2%; p = 0.004) and decreased nonaerated lung volume (23% ± 6% vs 38% ± 5%; p = 0.033) in the dependent lung region. Alveolar walls were thinner (5.5 ± 0.1 vs 7.8 ± 0.2 µm; p < 0.0001), cell infiltration was lower (20 ± 2 vs 32 ± 2 n/field; p < 0.0001), and normalized surfactant protein A concentration was higher with flow-controlled ventilation (1.1 ± 0.04 vs 1.0 ± 0.03; p = 0.039).ConclusionsFlow-controlled ventilation enhances lung aeration in the dependent lung region and consequently improves gas exchange and attenuates lung injury. Control of the expiratory flow may provide a novel option for lung-protective ventilation.

Project description:To determine the frequency of low-tidal volume ventilation in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome and assess if any demographic or clinical factors improve low-tidal volume ventilation adherence.Descriptive post hoc analysis of four multicenter pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome studies.Twenty-six academic PICU.Three hundred fifteen pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome patients.All patients who received conventional mechanical ventilation at hours 0 and 24 of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome who had data to calculate ideal body weight were included. Two cutoff points for low-tidal volume ventilation were assessed: less than or equal to 6.5?mL/kg of ideal body weight and less than or equal to 8?mL/kg of ideal body weight. Of 555 patients, we excluded 240 for other respiratory support modes or missing data. The remaining 315 patients had a median PaO2-to-FIO2 ratio of 140 (interquartile range, 90-201), and there were no differences in demographics between those who did and did not receive low-tidal volume ventilation. With tidal volume cutoff of less than or equal to 6.5?mL/kg of ideal body weight, the adherence rate was 32% at hour 0 and 33% at hour 24. A low-tidal volume ventilation cutoff of tidal volume less than or equal to 8?mL/kg of ideal body weight resulted in an adherence rate of 58% at hour 0 and 60% at hour 24. Low-tidal volume ventilation use was no different by severity of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome nor did adherence improve over time. At hour 0, overweight children were less likely to receive low-tidal volume ventilation less than or equal to 6.5?mL/kg ideal body weight (11% overweight vs 38% nonoverweight; p = 0.02); no difference was noted by hour 24. Furthermore, in the overweight group, using admission weight instead of ideal body weight resulted in misclassification of up to 14% of patients as receiving low-tidal volume ventilation when they actually were not.Low-tidal volume ventilation is underused in the first 24 hours of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Age, Pediatric Risk of Mortality-III, and pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome severity were not associated with improved low-tidal volume ventilation adherence nor did adherence improve over time. Overweight children were less likely to receive low-tidal volume ventilation strategies in the first day of illness.

Dataset Information

International randomised controlled trial of patient triggered ventilation in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

International randomised controlled trial of patient triggered ventilation in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets