The Effect of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure on Functional Residual Capacity During Mechanical Ventilation

NCT ID: NCT03511651

Last Updated: 2020-05-29

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

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

30 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2020-08-01

Study Completion Date

2021-03-31

Brief Summary

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

Although positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) has been widely used in mechanical ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), how to select the "optimal" PEEP is far from consensus. The application of PEEP may result in beneficial effect by recruiting previously collapsed lung areas, harmful effect by over-distending previously aerated lung areas, or a combination of the both. The net effect of PEEP in a certain patient may depend on the recruitability. Because recruitability varies extremely in ARDS patients and strongly correlates with the response to PEEP, estimation of end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) may be essential for individualized setting of PEEP. Whether the FRC changes at different PEEP levels remains unknown.

Detailed Description

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

Although positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) has been widely used in mechanical ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), how to select the "optimal" PEEP is far from consensus. The application of PEEP may result in beneficial effect by recruiting previously collapsed lung areas, harmful effect by over-distending previously aerated lung areas, or a combination of the both. The net effect of PEEP in a certain patient may depend on the recruitability. Because recruitability varies extremely in ARDS patients and strongly correlates with the response to PEEP, estimation of end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) may be essential for individualized setting of PEEP.

Passive spirometry has long been used to measure the lung recruitment volume (VREC). A prolonged expiration to zero end-expiratory pressure (ZEEP) or airway release maneuver is required and PEEP induced lung volume change above functional residual capacity (FRC) is measured. This technique assumes that FRC does not change at different PEEP levels.

This assumption that PEEP has no effect on FRC can date back to the study of Valta et al in the early 1990s. Using respiratory inductive plethysmography (RIP), they found that in ALI/ARDS patients, after expiring from different PEEP levels to ZEEP, the plethysmography signal returned to the same baseline value. They concluded that FRC does not change with PEEP, and that changes of EELV are attributable only to change in ∆EELV. Ranieri et al arrived at similar conclusions by measuring differences in lung volumes at different PEEP levels using standardized pressure-volume (P-V) curves derived from the ventilator circuit monitors. However, Patroniti et al found an elevation of FRC as increasing of PEEP in patients with ARDS. In this study, FRC was measured with the helium dilution technique, and concluded that neglecting this effect resulted in marked underestimation of VREC. Whether the FRC changes at different PEEP levels remains controversial. The aim of the study is to assess the effect of PEEP on FRC during mechanical ventilation.

Conditions

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

Mechanical Ventilation Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Functional Residual Capacity

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

OTHER

Blinding Strategy

QUADRUPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

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

FRC at clinical PEEP level

Measuring FRC at clinical PEEP level

Group Type OTHER

PEEP

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Two PEEP levels will be used during mechanical ventilation.

FRC at clinical PEEP + 5cmH2O

Increasing PEEP to clinical PEEP + 5cmH2O

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

PEEP

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Two PEEP levels will be used during mechanical ventilation.

Interventions

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

PEEP

Two PEEP levels will be used during mechanical ventilation.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

1. Diagnosed with ARDS according to the Berlin Definition;
2. Age 18-80 years;
3. Ventilated with volume-controlled ventilation using constant flow;
4. Deep sedation (RASS -4 to -5) and absence of spontaneous breathing (i.e., no triggering during tidal breaths and no inspiratory effort during a 5-second end-expiratory hold).

Exclusion Criteria

1. Evidence of active air leak from the lung, including bronchopleural fistula, pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, or existing chest tube;
2. Chest wall and/or abdominal injuries;
3. Evidence suggesting reduced chest wall compliance, such as existing large pleural effusion, thoracic trauma and intra-abdominal hypertension (i.e., intra-abdominal pressure \> 20 mmHg).
4. Presence of pacemaker, defibrillator, and implantable pumps).
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Capital Medical University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Jian-Xin Zhou

Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Jian-Xin Zhou, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Beijing Tiantan Hospital

Locations

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

Jian-Xin Zhou

Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China

Site Status

Countries

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

China

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Jian-Xin Zhou, MD

Role: CONTACT

8610 67096579

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Jian-Xin Zhou, MD

Role: primary

8610 67096579

Other Identifiers

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

KY2018-004-02

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Position and Esophageal Pressure
NCT02816359 COMPLETED NA
Driving Pressure in Neurosurgery
NCT04421976 COMPLETED NA