Goal of Open Lung Ventilation in Donors

NCT ID: NCT03439995

Last Updated: 2021-05-06

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

154 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-07-09

Study Completion Date

2021-01-01

Brief Summary

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

The primary goal of this study is to assess whether ventilation of deceased organ donors with an open lung protective ventilatory strategy will improve donor lung utilization rates and donor oxygenation compared to a conventional ventilatory strategy.

Detailed Description

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

Deceased organ donors are maintained on life support including mechanical ventilation during the time between brain death and organ procurement. The optimal mode of mechanical ventilation for deceased organ donors has not been definitively established. Since deceased organ donors may develop atelectasis leading to impaired oxygenation, an open lung protective ventilatory strategy with higher positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP), lower tidal volume and recruitment maneuvers has been hypothesized to be beneficial. Favorable outcomes were observed in a European clinical trial comparing open lung protective ventilation (OLPV) to a conventional ventilatory strategy in terms of donor oxygenation and lung utilization for transplantation (Mascia L et al, Journal of the American Medical Association 2010). However, donor management procedures in Europe are much shorter in duration compared to the US and it is not clear that these findings are generalizable to the US donor management environment.

The GOLD trial will test the effect of an OLPV strategy compared to conventional ventilation (CV) in the US donor management environment. This multi center trial will enroll 400 brain dead organ donors randomized into 1 of 2 treatment arms. After randomization, mechanical ventilation will be protocolized according to treatment arm with one arm receiving control ventilation (CV) utilizing standard Donor Network West (DNW) protocols and the other arm receiving the OLPV strategy with higher positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) and lower tidal volume compared to CV. The primary outcomes is donor lung utilization for transplantation.

Conditions

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

Brain Death Organ Donation Organ Transplant Failure or Rejection

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

Enrolled donors will be randomly assigned to two different modes of mechanical ventilation for the duration of donor management
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors
Outcomes in donors and lung transplant recipients will be done by assessors who are blinded to ventilator treatment assignment

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Open Lung Protective Ventilation

Volume cycled assist control ventilation with tidal volume 8 cc/kg predicted body weight, PEEP 10 cm water (H2O), recruitment maneuvers every 8 hours and after any ventilator disconnect

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Open lung protective ventilation

Intervention Type OTHER

Higher PEEP, lower tidal volume mechanical ventilation

Conventional Ventilation

Volume cycled assist control ventilation with tidal volume 10 cc/kg predicted body weight, PEEP 5 cm H2O, recruitment maneuvers after any ventilator disconnect

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Conventional ventilation

Intervention Type OTHER

Lower PEEP, standard tidal volume mechanical ventilation

Interventions

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

Open lung protective ventilation

Higher PEEP, lower tidal volume mechanical ventilation

Intervention Type OTHER

Conventional ventilation

Lower PEEP, standard tidal volume mechanical ventilation

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Brain death
* Authorization for research
* ≥13 years of age

Exclusion Criteria

* Arterial/Inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) ≤ 150 mmHg
* PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 400 mmHg
* BMI \> 40
* Hepatitis B surface antigen positive
* Hepatitis C positive
* Failure to complete donation process
* Hemodynamic instability
Minimum Eligible Age

13 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

University of California, San Francisco

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of California, Los Angeles

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Stanford University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Donor Network West

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role collaborator

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Lorraine B. Ware

Professor of Medicine

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Lorraine B Ware, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Locations

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

UCLA

Los Angeles, California, United States

Site Status

Stanford University

Palo Alto, California, United States

Site Status

University of California San Francisco

San Francisco, California, United States

Site Status

Donor Network West

San Ramon, California, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

References

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

Mascia L, Pasero D, Slutsky AS, Arguis MJ, Berardino M, Grasso S, Munari M, Boifava S, Cornara G, Della Corte F, Vivaldi N, Malacarne P, Del Gaudio P, Livigni S, Zavala E, Filippini C, Martin EL, Donadio PP, Mastromauro I, Ranieri VM. Effect of a lung protective strategy for organ donors on eligibility and availability of lungs for transplantation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010 Dec 15;304(23):2620-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1796.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21156950 (View on PubMed)

Ware LB, Koyama T, Shaver CM, Swain S, Nguyen J, Salehi A, Dhillon G, Wickersham N, Maheshwari J, Singer JP, Weigt SS, Kukreja J, Matthay MA. A randomized trial of open lung protective ventilation compared to conventional mechanical ventilation in deceased organ donors. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2025 Aug;44(8):1251-1259. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2025.03.027. Epub 2025 Apr 3.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 40187505 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

R01HL126176

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: org_study_id

View Link

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.