ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03529461Updated May 31, 2019Results posted

Use of Non-Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation in Patients With Severe Obesity Undergoing Upper Endoscopy Procedures

An interventional study of Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation through nasal mask and Rescue non-invasive positive pressure ventilation through nasal mask in Severe Obesity and Hypoxia, sponsored by Bristol Hospital. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-05-31.

Sponsored by Bristol Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 1 year after the study started (first participant enrolled Apr 2017, registered May 2018).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
56
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 65 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The study evaluated the effect of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) to decrease the incidence of desaturation events in patients with severe obesity undergoing upper endoscopy.

Read the detailed description

Patients being evaluated for bariatric surgery often undergo preoperative upper endoscopy. Patients with obesity are at increased risk for sedation related adverse events during endoscopy. The study evaluated the effect of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) to decrease the incidence of desaturation in patients with severe obesity undergoing upper endoscopy. The study was a randomized controlled trial that assessed the effectiveness of NIPPV in patients undergoing upper endoscopy. Patients were randomized into experimental group NIPPV or control group. Primary endpoints were desaturation events (SpO2 \<=94%) and desaturation events requiring intervention (SpO2\<=90%). A secondary endpoint was the use of NIPPV to rescue patients who developed a clinically significant desaturation event.

02

Conditions studied

  • Severe Obesity
  • Hypoxia

Keywords

  • severe obesity
  • non-invasive positive pressure ventilation
  • endoscopy
  • hypoxia
  • bariatric surgery
  • sedation
  • adverse events
  • BMI
  • anesthesia
  • complications
03

In context

Obesity, Morbid

936 studies on the registry are indexed under Obesity, Morbid; 169 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 56 is close to the median of 60 across 599 interventional studies indexed under Obesity, Morbid.

Browse Obesity, Morbid studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Bristol Hospital as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 65 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Weight loss surgery patients undergoing preoperative upper endoscopy
  • BMI 40-60

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant patients
  • Previous weight loss surgery or stomach surgery
  • BMI > 60 and BMI \< 40
  • Active smokers
  • Patients with a history of recent URTI (Upper Respiratory Tract Infection) within the preceding 2 weeks
  • Lung disease, COPD asthma, cystic fibrosis, sarcoidosis
  • Baseline O2 saturation less than or equal to 94%
  • Exclude substance abusers (active alcohol abuse, benzodiazepine abuse, and active illicit drug use)
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Sequential assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
56 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Other
    Control

    Intervention: nasal cannula (6L O2) + non invasive positive pressure nasal mask (not connected to machine)

    Device: Rescue non-invasive positive pressure ventilation through nasal mask · Other: Secondary rescue maneuvers

  • Experimental
    Experimental

    Intervention: Non invasive positive pressure nasal mask (connect to machine once patient is sedated)

    Device: Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation through nasal mask · Other: Secondary rescue maneuvers

Interventions

  • DeviceNon-invasive positive pressure ventilation through nasal mask

    Inspiratory pressure 12 cm H2O/Expiratory pressure 6 cm H2O which can be increased to meet a tidal volume (TV) of 300-800 mL (target is 450-500), with maximum Inspiratory pressure 18 cm H2O /Expiratory pressure 8 cm H2O on 100% FiO2.If TVs are more or less than 300 to 800 mL range, the pressure will be adjusted by 1-2 cm H2O) accordingly

  • DeviceRescue non-invasive positive pressure ventilation through nasal mask

    If desaturation below 90 %, nasal cannula removed and non invasive positive pressure nasal mask connected to machine: Inspiratory pressure 12 cm H2O/Expiratory pressure 6 cm H2O which can be increased to meet a tidal volume (TV) of 300-800 mL (target is 450-500), with maximum Inspiratory pressure 18 cm H2O /Expiratory pressure 8 cm H2O on 100% FiO2.If TVs are more or less than 300 to 800 mL range, the pressure will be adjusted by 1-2 cm H2O) accordingly

  • OtherSecondary rescue maneuvers

    If rescue non invasive positive pressure maneuver attempted (including adjustments in pressure) and O2 sat is not above 90 % within 3 min of starting non invasive positive pressure, scope removed and secondary rescue maneuver started. Secondary rescue maneuvers performed at the discretion of the anesthesiologist (chin lift, oral airway, bag mask, nasal trumpet, LMA, intubation). If sat \> 90 % with secondary rescue maneuvers, resumption of scope exam to the discretion of anesthesia. If sat does not increase \> 90 % with secondary rescue maneuvers, scope exam to be cancelled and patient care per anesthesiologist

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event ≤ 94%

    Percentage of participants who develop a peripheral oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry ≤ 94%

    Time frame: Time in seconds beginning with the start of procedure (anesthesia induction) ending with procedure completion (eyes open to verbal stimuli).

  2. Percentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event < 90%

    Percentage of participants who develop a peripheral oxygen saturation event \< 90%.

    Time frame: Time in seconds beginning with the start of procedure (anesthesia induction) ending with procedure completion (eyes open to verbal stimuli).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants in the Control Group With an Oxygen Saturation Less Than 90 % Who Responded to Rescue NIPPV

    We used non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) as a first rescue maneuver in control patients who developed an oxygen desaturation less than 90 % and reported on the percentage of participants who responded. The rescue was considered successful with recovery of oxygen saturation more than 90 % within 3 minutes.

    Time frame: 3 minutes following a desaturation event < 90 %

07

Results

Posted May 31, 2019

Participant flow

Recruitment began on 4/25/2017 and ended on 4/2/2018.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneControlExperimental
Started2828
Completed2828
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryPercentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event ≤ 94%

Percentage of participants who develop a peripheral oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry ≤ 94%

Time frame:
Time in seconds beginning with the start of procedure (anesthesia induction) ending with procedure completion (eyes open to verbal stimuli).
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event ≤ 94%
percentage of participantsControlExperimental
Percentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event ≤ 94%57.114.3
PrimaryPercentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event < 90%

Percentage of participants who develop a peripheral oxygen saturation event \< 90%.

Time frame:
Time in seconds beginning with the start of procedure (anesthesia induction) ending with procedure completion (eyes open to verbal stimuli).
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event < 90%
percentage of participantsControlExperimental
Percentage of Participants With an Oxygen Desaturation Event < 90%28.63.5
SecondaryPercentage of Participants in the Control Group With an Oxygen Saturation Less Than 90 % Who Responded to Rescue NIPPV

We used non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) as a first rescue maneuver in control patients who developed an oxygen desaturation less than 90 % and reported on the percentage of participants who responded. The rescue was considered successful with recovery of oxygen saturation more than 90 % within 3 minutes.

Time frame:
3 minutes following a desaturation event < 90 %
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Percentage of Participants in the Control Group With an Oxygen Saturation Less Than 90 % Who Responded to Rescue NIPPV
ParticipantsControl Participants With Oxygen Desaturation < 90%
Percentage of Participants in the Control Group With an Oxygen Saturation Less Than 90 % Who Responded to Rescue NIPPV8

Adverse events

Collected over 1800 seconds (30 minutes). Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Control0/28 (0%)0/28 (0%)0/28 (0%)
Experimental0/28 (0%)0/28 (0%)0/28 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)ControlExperimentalTotal
Mean38.8 ± 11.636.5 ± 11.837.6 ± 11.6
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)ControlExperimentalTotal
Female252348
Male358
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)ControlExperimentalTotal
Hispanic or Latino81018
Not Hispanic or Latino201838
Unknown or Not Reported000
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)ControlExperimentalTotal
United States282856
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Bristol Hospital
    Bristol, Connecticut 06010, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Gross JB, Bachenberg KL, Benumof JL, Caplan RA, Connis RT, Cote CJ, Nickinovich DG, Prachand V, Ward DS, Weaver EM, Ydens L, Yu S; American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management. Practice guidelines for the perioperative management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Anesthesiology. 2006 May;104(5):1081-93; quiz 1117-8. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200605000-00026. No abstract available. PubMed 16645462 ↗
  • Arakawa H, Kaise M, Sumiyama K, Saito S, Suzuki T, Tajiri H. Does pulse oximetry accurately monitor a patient's ventilation during sedated endoscopy under oxygen supplementation? Singapore Med J. 2013 Apr;54(4):212-5. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2013075. PubMed 23624448 ↗
  • De Palma GD, Forestieri P. Role of endoscopy in the bariatric surgery of patients. World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jun 28;20(24):7777-84. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i24.7777. PubMed 24976715 ↗
  • Flegal KM, Kruszon-Moran D, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL. Trends in Obesity Among Adults in the United States, 2005 to 2014. JAMA. 2016 Jun 7;315(21):2284-91. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.6458. PubMed 27272580 ↗
  • Fouladpour N, Jesudoss R, Bolden N, Shaman Z, Auckley D. Perioperative Complications in Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Review of the Legal Literature. Anesth Analg. 2016 Jan;122(1):145-51. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000841. PubMed 26111263 ↗
  • Gay PC. Complications of noninvasive ventilation in acute care. Respir Care. 2009 Feb;54(2):246-57; discussion 257-8. PubMed 19173756 ↗
  • Gomez V, Bhalla R, Heckman MG, Florit PT, Diehl NN, Rawal B, Lynch SA, Loeb DS. Routine Screening Endoscopy before Bariatric Surgery: Is It Necessary? Bariatr Surg Pract Patient Care. 2014 Dec 1;9(4):143-149. doi: 10.1089/bari.2014.0024. PubMed 25516819 ↗
  • Goudra BG, Singh PM, Penugonda LC, Speck RM, Sinha AC. Significantly reduced hypoxemic events in morbidly obese patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: Predictors and practice effect. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Jan;30(1):71-7. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.125707. PubMed 24574597 ↗
  • McVay T, Fang JC, Taylor L, Au A, Williams W, Presson AP, Al-Dulaimi R, Volckmann E, Ibele A. Safety Analysis of Bariatric Patients Undergoing Outpatient Upper Endoscopy with Non-Anesthesia Administered Propofol Sedation. Obes Surg. 2017 Jun;27(6):1501-1507. doi: 10.1007/s11695-016-2478-4. PubMed 27885537 ↗
  • Opperer M, Cozowicz C, Bugada D, Mokhlesi B, Kaw R, Auckley D, Chung F, Memtsoudis SG. Does Obstructive Sleep Apnea Influence Perioperative Outcome? A Qualitative Systematic Review for the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Task Force on Preoperative Preparation of Patients with Sleep-Disordered Breathing. Anesth Analg. 2016 May;122(5):1321-34. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001178. PubMed 27101493 ↗
  • Saunders R, Erslon M, Vargo J. Modeling the costs and benefits of capnography monitoring during procedural sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endosc Int Open. 2016 Mar;4(3):E340-51. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-100719. PubMed 27004254 ↗
  • Slagelse C, Vilmann P, Hornslet P, Jorgensen HL, Horsted TI. The role of capnography in endoscopy patients undergoing nurse-administered propofol sedation: a randomized study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2013 Oct;48(10):1222-30. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2013.830327. Epub 2013 Sep 2. PubMed 23992025 ↗
  • Soto RG, Davis M, Faulkner MJ. A comparison of the incidence of hypercapnea in non-obese and morbidly obese peri-operative patients using the SenTec transcutaneous pCO(2) monitor. J Clin Monit Comput. 2014 Jun;28(3):293-8. doi: 10.1007/s10877-013-9534-6. Epub 2013 Nov 29. PubMed 24292821 ↗
  • Wani S, Azar R, Hovis CE, Hovis RM, Cote GA, Hall M, Waldbaum L, Kushnir V, Early D, Mullady DK, Murad F, Edmundowicz SA, Jonnalagadda SS. Obesity as a risk factor for sedation-related complications during propofol-mediated sedation for advanced endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Dec;74(6):1238-47. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.006. PubMed 22136773 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol, analysis plan and consent form · Apr 23, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Apr 2017 to primary completion in Apr 2018, 11 months.

Results were first posted in May 2019, 1 year 1 month after primary completion.

Of 271 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Obesity, Morbid, half reached primary completion within 26 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 56. This study's 11 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 283 studies reached it within 26 months; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 52.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
May 3, 2018
First posted
May 18, 2018
StartActual
Apr 25, 2017
Primary completionActual
Apr 18, 2018
CompletionActual
Apr 18, 2018
Results first posted
May 31, 2019
Last update
May 31, 2019
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 31, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03529461
Lead sponsor
Bristol Hospital
Responsible party
Makram Gedeon, MD (Medical director of bariatric surgery program, principal investigator, Bristol Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 18, 2018
Start date
Apr 25, 2017
Primary completion
Apr 18, 2018
Completion
Apr 18, 2018
Results posted
May 31, 2019
Last update
May 31, 2019

Study contacts

Makram M Gedeon, MD
principal investigator · Bristol Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion