CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT04017780Asyn-VentUpdated Nov 27, 2019

Asynchronies in Pediatric Noninvasive Ventilation

An interventional study of Single-Limb Turbine-Driven Ventilator and Double-Limb Intensive Care Unit ventilator in Pediatric Respiratory Diseases, sponsored by Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico. Status unknown at 1 site in Italy. Open to participants aged 1 Month to 4 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-11-27.

Sponsored by Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Nov 2019), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
12
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
1 Month to 4 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The term ''Non-invasive ventilation'' (NIV) refers to various methods of respiratory assistance, in the absence of an indwelling endotracheal tube. In recent years, the use of NIV has increased for the treatment of both acute and chronic pediatric respiratory failure. Patient tolerance to the technique is a critical factor determining its success in avoiding endotracheal intubation. One of the key factors determining tolerance to NIV is optimal synchrony between the patient's spontaneous breathing activity and the ventilator's set parameters, known as ''patient-ventilator interaction''.

Indeed, synchronization of the ventilator breath with the patient's inspiratory effort, optimizes comfort, minimizes work of breathing and reduces the need for sedation. During NIV, several factors can significantly interfere with the function of the ventilator, leading to an increased risk of asynchrony. Indeed, the presence of unintentional leaks at the patient-mask interface, the sensitivity of inspiratory and expiratory triggers, the ability to compensate for intentional and unintentional leaks and the presence/absence of expiratory valves are all factors that likely play a role in determining patient-ventilator synchronization.

The investigators therefore designed the present crossover trial in order to compare the degree of respiratory asynchronies during NIV using different ventilators (Turbine-driven ventilator vs. compressed air-driven ICU ventilators) and different setups (single circuit vs. double circuit) in children with acute respiratory failure.

Read the detailed description

After having obtained the signed informed consent from the parents of the patient, a 6 Fr pediatric esophageal balloon-catheter will be placed through a nostril in the distal third of the esophagus.

This minimally invasive procedure, will allow to monitor and record esophageal pressure swings, which are strongly correlated to pleural pressure variations and therefore allow to detect accurately patients' inspiratory efforts. Furthermore, surface electrodes will be placed in order to record the electrical activity of the diaphragm non-invasively.

In every patient, three breathing trials (30 minutes each) will be performed in randomized order:

  1. NIV performed with a double limb circuit and expiratory valve incorporated in the ventilator, delivered with a pediatric/neonatal ICU ventilator (Babylog VN500, Draeger).
  2. NIV performed with a single limb circuit and intentional leak (vented mask) delivered with a turbine-driven ventilator (Astral 150 [ResMed] ).
  3. NIV performed with a double limb circuit and expiratory valve incorporated in the ventilator, delivered with the same turbine-driven ventilator of point 2 (Astral 150 [ResMed]).

The NIV setting decided clinically will not be modified for the study and will be held constant throughout the different study phases. Similarly, if sedative drugs are being delivered to the patient, the attending physician will decide their dose and it will be kept constant throughout the study phases. The Comfort scale will be assessed for each study phase, in order to evaluate and describe the comfort/distress of the patients during the different ventilatory strategies. Esophageal pressure tracings, inspiratory/expiratory air flows, airway pressure measured at the patient-ventilator interface and electrical activity of the diaphragm (measured with surface electrodes) will be continuously recorded with a dedicated software throughout the study in order to compute, offline, the asynchrony index (see below).

Asynchronies will be defined according to previous studies on the subject:

  1. Auto-triggering (AT): a cycle delivered by the ventilator in the absence of a typical esophageal swing;
  2. Ineffective Effort (IE): a deflection on the esophageal pressure monitoring not followed by an assisted cycle;
  3. Late cycling (LC): a cycle with a ventilator inspiratory time greater than twice the esophageal time;
  4. Premature cycling (PC): a cycle with a ventilator inspiratory time shorter than the neural inspiratory time;
  5. Double triggering (DT): two ventilator-delivered cycles separated by a very short inspiratory time, during the same inspiratory Eadi signal.

The entity of asynchronies can be numerical summarized in the Asynchrony Index (AI), which is calculated as the total number of asynchrony events divided by the total number of non-triggered and triggered ventilatory cycles (expressed as percentage).

Asynchrony Index (%) = [(AT + IE + LC + PC + DT) / (RRpes + AT)]×100 Where AT refers to Auto-triggering, IE to ineffective triggering, LC to late cycling, PC to premature cycling, DT to double triggering and RRpes to the respiratory rate as measured using the esophageal pressure tracing.

Furthermore, the number of each type of asynchrony will be assessed (number of events per minute), in order to identify the most relevant types of asynchronies.

Randomization The randomization of the three NIV-phases will be performed with an online randomization software called "Research Randomizer" (https://www.randomizer.org). No risk of bias is foreseen, as all patients will undergo the three interventions (cross-over study).

Blinding. The respiratory traces registered during the different study phases and analyzed offline in order compute the "Asynchrony Index" will be evaluated by an investigator blinded to the type of intervention.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT Primary endpoint of the present study is the difference in Asynchrony Index (expressed as %) obtained during NIV performed with an ICU ventilator using a double limb circuit and the value obtained during NIV performed with single limb circuit with intentional leak with a turbine-driven ventilator.

Secondary endpoint Secondary endpoint of the present study is the difference in Asynchrony Index (expressed as %) obtained during NIV performed with an ICU ventilator using a double limb circuit and the value obtained with the same type of circuit, but with a turbine-driven ventilator.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Sample size calculation. The sample size for the primary endpoint of the study has been calculated using the software G*Power 3.1.9.2 using a paired t-test and using as outcome parameter the difference in Asynchrony Index (AI) during NIV performed with ICU ventilators and with turbine-driven ventilators applied with single limb circuit and intentional leaks. Based on available data the investigators estimated in our population an AI of 59±13% and considered a 20% reduction of its value as clinically relevant (AI=47±13%). Considering a two-tailed alfa error of 0.05 and a desired power of 0.8, with an effect size of 0.923 the investigators calculated a sample size of 12 patients.

DATA ANALYSIS All data will be tested for homogeneity of variance and normality of distribution using the Shapiro- Wilk test. Normally distributed data will be expressed as mean ± standard deviation, while nonnormally distributed data as median and interquartile range. The presence of outliers will be carefully assessed during evaluation of distribution of data; however, no action is foreseen to exclude outliers.

Variables (Asynchrony Index, respiratory rate, tidal volume, minute ventilation, esophageal pressure variation, etc.) recorded during the different NIV modalities will be compared via paired t-test or Signed Rank Sum test, as appropriate. Mean difference and its 95% CI will be calculated for normally distributed data. For non-normally distributed variables, median difference and its 95% CI will be estimated by Hodges-Lehmann's median analysis. All tests will be two tailed and statistical significance is defined as p\<0.050. Analysis will be performed with SigmaPlot v.12.0 (Systat Software Inc., San Jose, CA) and SAS 9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).

Of note, the above-noted statistical procedures are appropriate but will not exclude other procedures that may also be used in addition to or in lieu of the stated procedures in order to best analyze the data. No control subjects will be needed, as each patient will serve as its own control for the subsequent measurements (cross-over study).

02

Conditions studied

  • Pediatric Respiratory Diseases

Keywords

  • Noninvasive Ventilation
  • Acute Respiratory Failure
  • Pediatrics
03

In context

Respiratory Tract Diseases

617 studies on the registry are indexed under Respiratory Tract Diseases; 111 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 12 is below the median of 80 across 381 interventional studies indexed under Respiratory Tract Diseases.

Browse Respiratory Tract Diseases studies →

Lead sponsor

Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico is the lead sponsor of 214 studies on the registry; 71 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
1 Month to 4 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with acute hypoxic (SpO2/FIO2 ratio \< 315) or hypercapnic (PvCO2 > 52 mmHg and venous pH \<7.28) respiratory failure in which non-invasive respiratory support is clinically indicated
  • Age: > 28 days and \< 4 years
  • Patients whose parents provided signed informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age > 4 years or \< 28 days
  • Patients whose parents did not provide signed informed consent
  • Clinical contraindications to non-invasive ventilation
  • Clinical contraindication to the placement of an esophageal balloon
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
12 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Single-limb circuit with turbine-driven ventilator

    Non invasive ventilation delivered with a turbine-driven ventilator, single limb with intentional leaks.

    Device: Single-Limb Turbine-Driven Ventilator

  • Experimental
    Double-limb circuit with Intensive Care Unit ventilator

    Non invasive ventilation delivered with an intensive care unit ventilator with a double limb circuit.

    Device: Double-Limb Intensive Care Unit ventilator

  • Experimental
    Double-limb circuit with turbine-driven ventilator

    Non invasive ventilation delivered with a turbine-driven ventilator with a double limb circuit.

    Device: Double-Limb Turbine-Driven Ventilator

Interventions

  • DeviceSingle-Limb Turbine-Driven Ventilator

    Non invasive ventilation performed with a single limb circuit and intentional leak (vented mask) delivered with a turbine-driven ventilator (Astral 150 \[ResMed\]).

  • DeviceDouble-Limb Intensive Care Unit ventilator

    Non invasive ventilation performed with a double limb circuit and expiratory valve incorporated in the ventilator, delivered with a pediatric/neonatal intensive care unit ventilator (Babylog VN500, Draeger).

  • DeviceDouble-Limb Turbine-Driven Ventilator

    Non invasive ventilation performed with a double limb circuit and expiratory valve incorporated in the ventilator, delivered with a turbine-driven ventilator (Astral 150 \[ResMed\]).

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Asynchrony Index

    Difference in Asynchrony index \[expressed as percentage\] between different modalities of Non-invasive ventilation.

    Time frame: 90 minutes

Secondary outcomes

  1. Ineffective efforts

    Difference in ineffective respiratory efforts \[number/minute\] between different modalities of Non-invasive ventilation.

    Time frame: 90 minutes

  2. Auto-triggering

    Difference in auto-triggered respiratory acts \[number/minute\] between different modalities of Non-invasive ventilation.

    Time frame: 90 minutes

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico
    Milano, 20122, Italy
    • Thomas Langer · Contact · 0255033232
    • Giovanna Chidini · Contact
    • Cristina Villa, MD · Sub investigator
    • Giulia Spolidoro, MD · Sub investigator
    • Veronica Doria, MD · Sub investigator
    • Edi Prandi, MD · Sub investigator
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Ganu SS, Gautam A, Wilkins B, Egan J. Increase in use of non-invasive ventilation for infants with severe bronchiolitis is associated with decline in intubation rates over a decade. Intensive Care Med. 2012 Jul;38(7):1177-83. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2566-4. Epub 2012 Apr 18. PubMed 22527081 ↗
  • Ottonello G, Ferrari I, Pirroddi IM, Diana MC, Villa G, Nahum L, Tuo P, Moscatelli A, Silvestri G. Home mechanical ventilation in children: retrospective survey of a pediatric population. Pediatr Int. 2007 Dec;49(6):801-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-200X.2007.02463.x. PubMed 18045275 ↗
  • Carlucci A, Richard JC, Wysocki M, Lepage E, Brochard L; SRLF Collaborative Group on Mechanical Ventilation. Noninvasive versus conventional mechanical ventilation. An epidemiologic survey. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001 Mar;163(4):874-80. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.163.4.2006027. PubMed 11282759 ↗
  • Tobin MJ, Jubran A, Laghi F. Patient-ventilator interaction. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001 Apr;163(5):1059-63. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.163.5.2005125. No abstract available. PubMed 11316635 ↗
  • Rabec C, Rodenstein D, Leger P, Rouault S, Perrin C, Gonzalez-Bermejo J; SomnoNIV group. Ventilator modes and settings during non-invasive ventilation: effects on respiratory events and implications for their identification. Thorax. 2011 Feb;66(2):170-8. doi: 10.1136/thx.2010.142661. Epub 2010 Oct 14. PubMed 20947891 ↗
  • Meduri GU, Conoscenti CC, Menashe P, Nair S. Noninvasive face mask ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure. Chest. 1989 Apr;95(4):865-70. doi: 10.1378/chest.95.4.865. PubMed 2924616 ↗
  • Antonelli M, Conti G, Rocco M, Bufi M, De Blasi RA, Vivino G, Gasparetto A, Meduri GU. A comparison of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation and conventional mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure. N Engl J Med. 1998 Aug 13;339(7):429-35. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199808133390703. PubMed 9700176 ↗
  • Brochard L. Non-invasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of COPD: a new standard of care. Thorax. 2000 Oct;55(10):817-8. doi: 10.1136/thorax.55.10.817. No abstract available. PubMed 10992531 ↗
  • Masa JF, Corral J, Caballero C, Barrot E, Teran-Santos J, Alonso-Alvarez ML, Gomez-Garcia T, Gonzalez M, Lopez-Martin S, De Lucas P, Marin JM, Marti S, Diaz-Cambriles T, Chiner E, Egea C, Miranda E, Mokhlesi B; Spanish Sleep Network; Garcia-Ledesma E, Sanchez-Quiroga MA, Ordax E, Gonzalez-Mangado N, Troncoso MF, Martinez-Martinez MA, Cantalejo O, Ojeda E, Carrizo SJ, Gallego B, Pallero M, Ramon MA, Diaz-de-Atauri J, Munoz-Mendez J, Senent C, Sancho-Chust JN, Ribas-Solis FJ, Romero A, Benitez JM, Sanchez-Gomez J, Golpe R, Santiago-Recuerda A, Gomez S, Bengoa M. Non-invasive ventilation in obesity hypoventilation syndrome without severe obstructive sleep apnoea. Thorax. 2016 Oct;71(10):899-906. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-208501. Epub 2016 Jul 12. PubMed 27406165 ↗
  • Weese-Mayer DE, Silvestri JM, Menzies LJ, Morrow-Kenny AS, Hunt CE, Hauptman SA. Congenital central hypoventilation syndrome: diagnosis, management, and long-term outcome in thirty-two children. J Pediatr. 1992 Mar;120(3):381-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(05)80901-1. PubMed 1538284 ↗
  • Richard JC, Carlucci A, Breton L, Langlais N, Jaber S, Maggiore S, Fougere S, Harf A, Brochard L. Bench testing of pressure support ventilation with three different generations of ventilators. Intensive Care Med. 2002 Aug;28(8):1049-57. doi: 10.1007/s00134-002-1311-9. Epub 2002 May 30. PubMed 12185424 ↗
  • Thille AW, Lyazidi A, Richard JC, Galia F, Brochard L. A bench study of intensive-care-unit ventilators: new versus old and turbine-based versus compressed gas-based ventilators. Intensive Care Med. 2009 Aug;35(8):1368-76. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1467-7. Epub 2009 Apr 8. PubMed 19352622 ↗
  • Rice TW, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, Hayden DL, Schoenfeld DA, Ware LB; National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute ARDS Network. Comparison of the SpO2/FIO2 ratio and the PaO2/FIO2 ratio in patients with acute lung injury or ARDS. Chest. 2007 Aug;132(2):410-7. doi: 10.1378/chest.07-0617. Epub 2007 Jun 15. PubMed 17573487 ↗
  • Fagioli D, Evangelista C, Gawronski O, Tiozzo E, Broccati F, Rava L, Dall'Oglio I; Italian COMFORT-B Study Group. Pain assessment in paediatric intensive care: the Italian COMFORT behaviour scale. Nurs Child Young People. 2018 Sep 10;30(5):27-33. doi: 10.7748/ncyp.2018.e1081. Erratum In: Nurs Child Young People. 2018 Nov 12;30(5). doi: 10.7748/ncyp.2018.e1081_crt. PubMed 30457241 ↗
  • Ista E, van Dijk M, Tibboel D, de Hoog M. Assessment of sedation levels in pediatric intensive care patients can be improved by using the COMFORT "behavior" scale. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2005 Jan;6(1):58-63. doi: 10.1097/01.PCC.0000149318.40279.1A. PubMed 15636661 ↗
  • Vignaux L, Vargas F, Roeseler J, Tassaux D, Thille AW, Kossowsky MP, Brochard L, Jolliet P. Patient-ventilator asynchrony during non-invasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: a multicenter study. Intensive Care Med. 2009 May;35(5):840-6. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1416-5. Epub 2009 Jan 29. PubMed 19183949 ↗
  • Piquilloud L, Vignaux L, Bialais E, Roeseler J, Sottiaux T, Laterre PF, Jolliet P, Tassaux D. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist improves patient-ventilator interaction. Intensive Care Med. 2011 Feb;37(2):263-71. doi: 10.1007/s00134-010-2052-9. Epub 2010 Sep 25. PubMed 20871978 ↗
  • Vignaux L, Grazioli S, Piquilloud L, Bochaton N, Karam O, Levy-Jamet Y, Jaecklin T, Tourneux P, Jolliet P, Rimensberger PC. Patient-ventilator asynchrony during noninvasive pressure support ventilation and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in infants and children. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013 Oct;14(8):e357-64. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e3182917922. PubMed 23863816 ↗
  • Thille AW, Rodriguez P, Cabello B, Lellouche F, Brochard L. Patient-ventilator asynchrony during assisted mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med. 2006 Oct;32(10):1515-22. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0301-8. Epub 2006 Aug 1. PubMed 16896854 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 27, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04017780
Lead sponsor
Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 12, 2019
Start date
Sep 15, 2019
Primary completion
Jul 15, 2021 (estimated)
Completion
Jul 15, 2021 (estimated)
Last update
Nov 27, 2019

Study contacts

Thomas Langer, MD
Contact
thomas.langer@unimi.it
+39-2-55032242
Giovanna Chidini, MD
Contact
giovanna.chidini@policlinico.mi.it
+39-2-55032242
Edoardo Calderini, MD
study chair · Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Nov 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