Study Results
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.
TERMINATED
NA
39 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2018-01-08
2020-12-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
The Efficacy of High-flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy in Sepsis Patients
NCT04560842
CLinical Efficacy of Hemoperfusion With a Cytokine Adsorber in Norepinephrine-Resistant SEptic Shock
NCT05136183
Citrulline in Severe Sepsis
NCT01474863
Neutrophil Elastase Inhibitor in Treatment of ARDS Patients With Mechanical Ventilation Caused by Sepsis
NCT05672472
Therapeutic Plasma Exchange in Adult Patients With Severe Sepsis
NCT04057872
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
In the last decade, high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) appeared as an alternative ventilatory support intermediate between conventional oxygen and mechanical ventilation. Among others (3-7), the investigators have also demonstrated their effectiveness in patients with respiratory failure of different etiologies (8-11). Patients treated with HFNC quickly show a reduction of respiratory rate and respiratory work, associated with an improvement of the functional residual capacity and gas exchange. The absence of significant side effects and low cost makes HFNC especially attractive as adjunctive medical treatment in severe sepsis.
Then, the hypothesis is that in patients with severe sepsis, high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy could reduce work of breathing, which would allow a redistribution of cardiac output from the respiratory muscles to other organs, improving peripheral perfusion with minor injury of organs at distance, less multiorgan failure and improved survival. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of HFNC for improving sixty-day survival in patients with severe sepsis. This study will also provide a detailed evaluation of the HFNC's effects on the need for vital support (mechanical ventilation, dialysis, vasoactive drugs) and physiological parameters (acidosis, clearance of lactate, SvO2 and SOFA).
DESIGN Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in 592 patients with severe sepsis admitted into a network of 18 ICUs from university and community hospitals in Spain to define the role of high flow oxygen therapy, with one experimental arm that will receive high flow oxygen therapy and a control arm that will receive conventional oxygen therapy if required.
Patients who consent will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive HFNC or conventional treatment, which consists of adding oxygen on nasal prongs or Venturi mask only if hypoxemia is detected as SpO2 \< 92% by pulse oximetry.
STUDY ARMS
1. HFNC therapy (experimental group) Treatment with HFNC (Airvo2® Fisher \& Paykel, and AquaNASE® Armstrong Medical) will begin with high flow (50 L/min), high temperature and humidity and oxygen concentration adjusted for SpO2 \>92%, even with FiO2 of 0.21, if needed.
The rationale for this HFNC dosage is that minute ventilation can be already reduced with 30 L/min, but functional residual capacity and oxygenation maximally improve at higher flow. On the contrary, flow \>50 L/min is uncomfortable for many patients.
In the case of clinical intolerance, flow will be reduced to 40, 30 or 20 L/min. Yet it is not tolerated, HFNC will be stopped and patients will receive conventional oxygen if required, but will be evaluated as in the HFNC group by intention to treat.
In HFNC patients we propose an extra caution to avoid delaying a mechanical ventilation that would be beneficial. To do this, the ROX index (ROX = SpO2/FiO2/respiratory rate) will be calculated and if it is \< 5, it is recommended to assess mechanical ventilatory support, either invasive or non-invasive.
2. Conventional therapy (control group) Patients assigned to the conventional treatment will receive the standard care given at hospital which consists of adding oxygen on nasal prongs or Venturi mask only if hypoxemia is suggested by SpO2 \< 92% by pulse oximetry.
Target for oxygenation in both arms is SpO2 between 92% and 95%. SpO2 \>95% without oxygen supply is acceptable. On the contrary, SpO2 \<92% may be acceptable when needed for medical reasons, mainly chronic hypercapnic patients.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
High-Flow nasal cannula (HFNC)
Treatment with HFNC will be adjusted for SpO2 \>92%, even with FiO2 of 0.21, if needed.
The rationale for this HFNC dosage is that minute ventilation can be already reduced with 30 L/min, but functional residual capacity and oxygenation maximally improve at higher flow. On the contrary, flow \>50 L/min is uncomfortable for many patients.
In the case of clinical intolerance, flow will be reduced to 40, 30 or 20 L/min. Yet it is not tolerated, HFNC will be stopped and patients will receive conventional oxygen if required, but will be evaluated as in the HFNC group by intention to treat.
High-Flow nasal cannula (HFNC)
The patient will receive HFNC adjusted for SatO2 \> 92% and with, at least, 30 liters of total flow.
Conventional therapy
Patients assigned to the conventional treatment will receive the standard care given at hospital which consists of adding oxygen on nasal prongs or Venturi mask only if hypoxemia is suggested by SpO2 \< 92% by pulse oximetry.
Target for oxygenation in both arms is SpO2 between 92% and 95%. SpO2 \>95% without oxygen supply is acceptable. On the contrary, SpO2 \<92% may be acceptable when needed for medical reasons, mainly chronic hypercapnic patients.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
High-Flow nasal cannula (HFNC)
The patient will receive HFNC adjusted for SatO2 \> 92% and with, at least, 30 liters of total flow.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* Patients with limitation of the therapeutic effort or orders of not CPR.
* Patients not susceptible to treatment with HFNC (facial trauma, tracheostomized, rejection of previous treatments with HFNC).
* Participation in other clinical trials that may affect survival.
* Home treatment with oxygen, CPAP or Non-invasive ventilation.
18 Years
99 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Althaia Xarxa Assistencial Universitària de Manresa
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Rafael Fernandez
Director. Critical Care Department
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Rafael Fernandez, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Fundacio Althaia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
ICU. Fundacio Althaia
Manresa, Barcelona, Spain
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Rubenfeld GD, Webb S, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R; Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including The Pediatric Subgroup. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med. 2013 Feb;39(2):165-228. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8. Epub 2013 Jan 30.
Viires N, Sillye G, Aubier M, Rassidakis A, Roussos C. Regional blood flow distribution in dog during induced hypotension and low cardiac output. Spontaneous breathing versus artificial ventilation. J Clin Invest. 1983 Sep;72(3):935-47. doi: 10.1172/JCI111065.
Roca O, Riera J, Torres F, Masclans JR. High-flow oxygen therapy in acute respiratory failure. Respir Care. 2010 Apr;55(4):408-13.
Riera J, Perez P, Cortes J, Roca O, Masclans JR, Rello J. Effect of high-flow nasal cannula and body position on end-expiratory lung volume: a cohort study using electrical impedance tomography. Respir Care. 2013 Apr;58(4):589-96. doi: 10.4187/respcare.02086.
Stephan F, Barrucand B, Petit P, Rezaiguia-Delclaux S, Medard A, Delannoy B, Cosserant B, Flicoteaux G, Imbert A, Pilorge C, Berard L; BiPOP Study Group. High-Flow Nasal Oxygen vs Noninvasive Positive Airway Pressure in Hypoxemic Patients After Cardiothoracic Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2015 Jun 16;313(23):2331-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.5213.
Frat JP, Thille AW, Mercat A, Girault C, Ragot S, Perbet S, Prat G, Boulain T, Morawiec E, Cottereau A, Devaquet J, Nseir S, Razazi K, Mira JP, Argaud L, Chakarian JC, Ricard JD, Wittebole X, Chevalier S, Herbland A, Fartoukh M, Constantin JM, Tonnelier JM, Pierrot M, Mathonnet A, Beduneau G, Deletage-Metreau C, Richard JC, Brochard L, Robert R; FLORALI Study Group; REVA Network. High-flow oxygen through nasal cannula in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 4;372(23):2185-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1503326. Epub 2015 May 17.
Hernandez G, Vaquero C, Colinas L, Cuena R, Gonzalez P, Canabal A, Sanchez S, Rodriguez ML, Villasclaras A, Fernandez R. Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Noninvasive Ventilation on Reintubation and Postextubation Respiratory Failure in High-Risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2016 Oct 18;316(15):1565-1574. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.14194.
Hernandez G, Vaquero C, Gonzalez P, Subira C, Frutos-Vivar F, Rialp G, Laborda C, Colinas L, Cuena R, Fernandez R. Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Reintubation in Low-Risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2016 Apr 5;315(13):1354-61. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.2711.
Fernandez R, Subira C, Frutos-Vivar F, Rialp G, Laborda C, Masclans JR, Lesmes A, Panadero L, Hernandez G. High-flow nasal cannula to prevent postextubation respiratory failure in high-risk non-hypercapnic patients: a randomized multicenter trial. Ann Intensive Care. 2017 Dec;7(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s13613-017-0270-9. Epub 2017 May 2.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CEI17/54
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.