Comparison of Humidification Devices During Non Invasive Ventilation, in Acute Respiratory Failure

NCT ID: NCT00190346

Last Updated: 2011-10-26

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

TERMINATED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

250 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2001-12-31

Study Completion Date

2003-04-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Comparison of humidification devices during non invasive ventilation, in acute respiratory failure.

The hypothesis was, due to dead space, lower humidification, a reduced efficiency of the technique (NIV) when HME are used in comparison with HH.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Comparison of humidification devices during non invasive ventilation, in acute respiratory failure.

The hypothesis was, due to dead space, lower humidification, a reduced efficiency of the technique (NIV) when HME are used in comlparison with HH Several physiological previously performed showed that 1) with HME, because of its working principles, humidification was reduced because of leaks 2) work of breathing was increased with HME because of dead space and 3) alveolar ventilation was reduced with HME because of additional technical dead space.

For these reasons, the hypothesis was an improvement of NIV tolerance, of efficiency to clear te CO2 with HH in comparison with HME and finally to reduce the intubation rate with HH.

The patients were included when requiring NIV (see inclusion and exclusion criteria) and randomisation was performed with stratification according to presence or absence of respiratory acidosis.

The number of patients to include was baszd on the hypothesis that intubation rate would be reduced from 40 with HME to 25% with HME. A total of 250 patients was required with alpha risk of 0,05 and beta risk of 0,2 (power 80%). Intubation criteria were predefined according to the litterature. The expected duration was 18 months. The official support was institutional (DRRC of AP-HP). HH were furnished free of charge, as well as HME. Masks used were the same in both groups.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Respiratory Failure COPD Hypoxemia Non Invasive Ventilation

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Humidification devices: HH vs HME

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Age between 18 and 85 years
* Exacerbation of dyspnea lasting less than two weeks

TWO OR THREE following criteria :

* Respiratory rate higher or equal to 25 b/min
* SaO2 lower or equal to 90% (breathing room air or oxygen)
* Arterial pH \< 7.35

Exclusion Criteria

* immediate need for intubation
* cardiac arrest or RR\< 10 breaths/min.
* systemic hypotension (SAP \< 80 mmHg ) with no response to 500 ml of macromolecules
* coma defined by GCS \< 8.
* high probability of surgical procedure
* major facial deformity
* pneumothorax
* bad short-term prognosis
* refusal of intubation by the patient or do not intubated order.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

85 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Nicolas Best

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

DRRC hopitaux de Paris

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Département d'Anesthésie - Hôpital de l'Enfant Jésus

Québec, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Hôpital Victor Dupouy, Argenteuil

Argenteuil, , France

Site Status

CHU de La Cavale Blanche

Brest, , France

Site Status

Réanimation du Service de Pneumologie - Centre Hospitalier Beaujon

Clichy, , France

Site Status

Réanimation Médicale - Hôpital Louis Mourier

Colombes, , France

Site Status

Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation "B" - CHU Saint Eloi

Montpellier, , France

Site Status

Hôpital Georges Pompidou HEGP

Paris, , France

Site Status

Réanimation du Service Pneumologie - Hôtel Dieu

Paris, , France

Site Status

Réanimation pneumologique, Hôpital Pitié Salpétrière

Paris, , France

Site Status

Réanimation Pneumologique- CHU Tenon

Paris, , France

Site Status

Réanimation Médicale - Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Poissy

Poissy, , France

Site Status

Réanimation Médicale, Hôpital Charles Nicolle

Rouen, , France

Site Status

Istituto di anestesiologia e Rianimazione - Università Cattolica Policlinico A. Gemelli

Roma, , Italy

Site Status

Réanimation Polyvalente - CHU Fatima Bourguiba

Monastir, , Tunisia

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada France Italy Tunisia

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Lellouche F, L'Her E, Abroug F, Deye N, Rodriguez PO, Rabbat A, Jaber S, Fartoukh M, Conti G, Cracco C, Richard JC, Ricard JD, Mal H, Mentec H, Loisel F, Lacherade JC, Taille S, Brochard L. Impact of the humidification device on intubation rate during noninvasive ventilation with ICU ventilators: results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Intensive Care Med. 2014 Feb;40(2):211-219. doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-3145-z. Epub 2013 Nov 26.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 24275900 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

PHRC 2001

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id