CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05630079Updated Nov 29, 2022

Variation of Atelectasis Score After High-frequency Percussions in Severe Acquired Brain Injury

An observational study in Atelectasis, Acquired Brain Injury and Respiratory Rehabilitation, sponsored by Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus. Completed at 1 site in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-11-29.

Sponsored by Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
15
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Investigators conduced in the Neurological Rehabilitation Unit of the IRCCS "S.Maria Nascente - Fondazione Don Gnocchi", (Milan) a retrospective study on 19 patients hospitalized between September 2018 and February 2021, with the aim of comparing the efficacy of the two devices, MetaNeb® and Intrapulmonary Percussion Ventilation (IPV®).

The efficacy was evaluated considering the change of various measures after two weeks of treatment. The main outcome considered is the atelectasis score, assigned by two radiologists who blindly and retrospectively evaluated it on high-resolution computed tomography (HRTC) images

Read the detailed description

Patients with severe acquired brain injury (sABI) frequently exhibit pulmonary complications, with atelectasis and/or consolidation of the lower lobes. The atelectasis in critically ill patients is a risk factor for pneumonia and increase the possibility to develop dysventilation syndrome with consequent negative impacts on gas exchanges.

To the best of our knowledge, there is no study investigating the use of the two devices for the treatment of atelectasis in the specific population of non-cooperative tracheostomized patients with sABI who had been spontaneously breathing with no mechanical ventilation support.

02

Conditions studied

  • Atelectasis
  • Acquired Brain Injury
  • Respiratory Rehabilitation
03

In context

Pulmonary Atelectasis

301 studies on the registry are indexed under Pulmonary Atelectasis; 80 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 15 is below the median of 72 across 73 observational studies indexed under Pulmonary Atelectasis.

Browse Pulmonary Atelectasis studies →

Lead sponsor

Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus is the lead sponsor of 146 studies on the registry; 37 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients admitted for severe acquired brain injury (sABI) in Neurological Rehabilitation Unit of IRCCS "Santa Maria Nascente - Fondazione Don Gnocchi" from September 2018 to February 2021

Inclusion criteria

  • Spontaneous breathing 24h/24h
  • Presence of tracheostomy cannula
  • Presence of atelectasis diagnosed through High Resolution Computed Tomography
  • Levels of Cognitive Functioning (LCF) ≤ 5
  • No pneumothorax
  • Consent signed

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age under 18 years old
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
15 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Metaneb®

    Patients admitted for severe acquired brain injury (sABI) in Neurological Rehabilitation Unit of IRCCS "Santa Maria Nascente - Fondazione Don Gnocchi" received the MetaNeb® system treatment. It consist of simultaneous combination of positive pressure, continuous high frequency oscillations and aerosol delivery

    Device: Treatment with Metaneb®

  • IPV®

    Patients with severe acquired brain injury from Neurological Rehabilitation Unit of IRCCS Fondazione Don Gnocchi, S.M. Nascente received the IPV® treatment. The principle of IPV® is to open collapsed airways and mobilize intrabronchial secretions through the delivery of small tidal volume at high frequency. IPV® adjusts the percussions to the changes in the mechanical properties of the patient's respiratory system: in case of high resistance, it produces small tidal volume at high pressure and low frequency; vice versa in case of low resistance, it produces large tidal volume at low pressure and high frequency

    Device: Treatment with IPV®

Interventions

  • DeviceTreatment with Metaneb®

    Every patient of this group receive 3 daily treatments of 20 minutes each, performed at approximately 4-hour intervals. Each treatment with MetaNeb system consists of four cycles: : 5 minutes of Continuous Positive Expiratory Pressure (CPEP) for lung re-expansion (Cycle I), 5 minutes of Chest High Frequency Oscillation (CHFO) for secretion clearance (Cycle II), 5 min of CPEP (Cycle III), 5 minutes of CHFO (Cycle IV). Treatments are performed by respiratory physiotherapists and the pressure setted was the highest tolerated by the patient. It's associated with the administration of aerosols with 10 ml of saline solution 0.9% and are carried out by connecting the tracheostomy cannula cuffed to the catheter mount.

  • DeviceTreatment with IPV®

    Each treatment with IPV provides 3 daily treatments of 20 minutes with the high percussion frequency tolerated by the patient. and I/E ratio: 1/1.2. Treatments are performed by respiratory physiotherapists and the pressure setted was the highest tolerated by the patient. It is associated with the administration of aerosols with 10 ml of saline solution 0.9% \[-\] and are carried out by connecting the tracheostomy cannula cuffed to the catheter mount.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Variation of atelectasis score after treatment

    The aim is to compare the effect of the two devices, IPV® and MetaNeb® in the treatment of atelectasis. The atelectasis score is assigned by two radiologists who blindly and retrospectively evaluated it on high-resolution computed tomography (HRTC) images

    Time frame: 15 days

  2. Automatic score by Siemens

    Comparing the atelectasis score using an automatic score generated by Siemens (syngo.via CT Pneumonia Analysis), in case of discrepancy between all radiologists

    Time frame: 15 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Blood Gas Analysis

    Changes of respiratory parameters in terms of normalization of oxyemia (Arterial Pressure of oxygen 80-100 mmHg) and normalization of capnia (Arterial Pressure of carbon dioxide 35-45 mmHg), assessed by blood gas analysis

    Time frame: 15 days

  2. Peripheral Oxygen Saturation (SpO2) at night

    Average SpO2, Lowest SpO2, \<90% (lenght of time SpO2 dropped below 90%), Average Heart Rate

    Time frame: 15 days

07

Study locations

1 site
  • IRCCS Santa Maria Nascente, Fondazione Don Gnocchi
    Milano, 20148, Italy
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 29, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05630079
Lead sponsor
Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus
Responsible party
Paolo Banfi (Head of Pneumological Rehabilitation, Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus) — Principal investigator
First posted
Nov 29, 2022
Start date
Feb 22, 2021
Primary completion
Jul 31, 2021
Completion
Feb 22, 2022
Last update
Nov 29, 2022

Oversight

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 Nov 2022. 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