Dataset Information

Randomized trial of inhaled nitric oxide to treat acute pulmonary embolism: The iNOPE trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The study hypothesis is that administration of inhaled nitric oxide (NO) plus oxygen to subjects with submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) will improve right ventricular (RV) systolic function and reduce RV strain and necrosis, while improving patient dyspnea, more than treatment with oxygen alone. METHODS:This article describes the rationale and protocol for a registered (NCT01939301), nearly completed phase II, 3-center, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Eligible patients have pulmonary imaging-proven acute PE. Subjects must be normotensive, and have RV dysfunction on echocardiography or elevated troponin or brain natriuretic peptide and no fibrinolytics. Subjects receive NO plus oxygen or placebo for 24 hours (±3 hours) with blood sampling before and after treatment, and mandatory echocardiography and high-sensitivity troponin posttreatment to assess the composite primary end point. The sample size of N=78 was predicated on 30% more NO-treated patients having a normal high-sensitivity troponin (<14 pg/mL) and a normal RV on echocardiography at 24 hours with ?=.05 and ?=.20. Safety was ensured by continuous spectrophotometric monitoring of percentage of methemoglobinemia and a predefined protocol to respond to emergent changes in condition. Blinding was ensured by identical tanks, software, and physical shielding of the device display and query of the clinical care team to assess blinding efficacy. RESULTS:We have enrolled 78 patients over a 31-month period. No patient has been withdrawn as a result of a safety concern, and no patient has had a serious adverse event related to NO. CONCLUSIONS:We present methods and a protocol for the first double-blinded, randomized trial of inhaled NO to treat PE.

SUBMITTER: Kline JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5412723 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized trial of inhaled nitric oxide to treat acute pulmonary embolism: The iNOPE trial.

Kline Jeffrey A JA Hall Cassandra L CL Jones Alan E AE Puskarich Michael A MA Mastouri Ronald A RA Lahm Tim T

American heart journal 20170127

<h4>Background</h4>The study hypothesis is that administration of inhaled nitric oxide (NO) plus oxygen to subjects with submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) will improve right ventricular (RV) systolic function and reduce RV strain and necrosis, while improving patient dyspnea, more than treatment with oxygen alone.<h4>Methods</h4>This article describes the rationale and protocol for a registered (NCT01939301), nearly completed phase II, 3-center, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Eligi ...[more]

PMID: 28454823

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe inhaled vasodilators nitric oxide and epoprostenol may be initiated to improve oxygenation in mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute respiratory failure (ARF); however, practice patterns and head-to-head comparisons of effectiveness are unclear.Research questionWhat are the practice patterns and comparative effectiveness for inhaled nitric oxide and epoprostenol in severe ARF?Study design and methodsUsing a large US database (Premier Healthcare Database), we identified adult patients with ARF or ARDS who were mechanically ventilated and started on inhaled nitric oxide, epoprostenol, or both. Leveraging large hospital variation in the choice of initial inhaled vasodilator, we compared the effectiveness of inhaled nitric oxide with that of epoprostenol by limiting analysis to patients admitted to hospitals that exclusively used either inhaled nitric oxide or epoprostenol. The primary outcome of successful extubation was modeled using multivariate Fine-Grey competing risk (death or hospice discharge) time-to-event models.ResultsAmong 11,200 patients (303 hospitals), 6,366 patients (56.8%) received inhaled nitric oxide first, 4,720 patients (42.1%) received inhaled epoprostenol first, and 114 patients (1.0%) received both therapies on the same day. One hundred four hospitals (34.3%; 1,666 patients) exclusively used nitric oxide and 118 hospitals (38.9%; 1,812 patients) exclusively used epoprostenol. No differences were found in the likelihood of successful extubation between patients admitted to nitric oxide-only hospitals vs those admitted to epoprostenol-only hospitals (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80-1.18). Also no differences were found in total hospital costs or death. Results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses.InterpretationLarge variation exists in the use of initial inhaled vasodilator for respiratory failure across US hospitals. Comparative effectiveness analyses identified no differences in outcomes based on inhaled vasodilator type.

Dataset Information

Randomized trial of inhaled nitric oxide to treat acute pulmonary embolism: The iNOPE trial.

Publications

Randomized trial of inhaled nitric oxide to treat acute pulmonary embolism: The iNOPE trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets