Cargando…
Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial
BACKGROUND: INTELLiVENT–Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a fully automated closed-loop mode of ventilation for use in critically ill patients. Evidence for benefit of INTELLiVENT–ASV in comparison to ventilation that is not fully automated with regard to duration of ventilation and quality of b...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9034629/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35461264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06286-w |
_version_ | 1784693150167597056 |
---|---|
author | Botta, Michela Tsonas, Anissa M. Sinnige, Jante S. De Bie, Ashley J. R. Bindels, Alexander J. G. H. Ball, Lorenzo Battaglini, Denise Brunetti, Iole Buiteman–Kruizinga, Laura A. van der Heiden, Pim L. J. de Jonge, Evert Mojoli, Francesco Robba, Chiara Schoe, Abraham Paulus, Frederique Pelosi, Paolo Neto, Ary Serpa Horn, Janneke Schultz, Marcus J. |
author_facet | Botta, Michela Tsonas, Anissa M. Sinnige, Jante S. De Bie, Ashley J. R. Bindels, Alexander J. G. H. Ball, Lorenzo Battaglini, Denise Brunetti, Iole Buiteman–Kruizinga, Laura A. van der Heiden, Pim L. J. de Jonge, Evert Mojoli, Francesco Robba, Chiara Schoe, Abraham Paulus, Frederique Pelosi, Paolo Neto, Ary Serpa Horn, Janneke Schultz, Marcus J. |
author_sort | Botta, Michela |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: INTELLiVENT–Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a fully automated closed-loop mode of ventilation for use in critically ill patients. Evidence for benefit of INTELLiVENT–ASV in comparison to ventilation that is not fully automated with regard to duration of ventilation and quality of breathing is largely lacking. We test the hypothesis that INTELLiVENT–ASV shortens time spent on a ventilator and improves the quality of breathing. METHODS: The “Effects of Automated Closed–loop VenTilation versus Conventional Ventilation on Duration and Quality of Ventilation” (ACTiVE) study is an international, multicenter, two-group randomized clinical superiority trial. In total, 1200 intensive care unit (ICU) patients with an anticipated duration of ventilation of > 24 h will be randomly assigned to one of the two ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older at start of invasive ventilation in the ICU. Patients either receive automated ventilation by means of INTELLiVENT–ASV, or ventilation that is not automated by means of a conventional ventilation mode. The primary endpoint is the number of days free from ventilation and alive at day 28; secondary endpoints are quality of breathing using granular breath-by-breath analysis of ventilation parameters and variables in a time frame of 24 h early after the start of invasive ventilation, duration of ventilation in survivors, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality rates in the ICU and hospital, and at 28 and 90 days. DISCUSSION: ACTiVE is one of the first randomized clinical trials that is adequately powered to compare the effects of automated closed-loop ventilation versus conventional ventilation on duration of ventilation and quality of breathing in invasively ventilated critically ill patients. The results of ACTiVE will support intensivist in their choices regarding the use of automated ventilation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTiVE is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (study identifier: NCT04593810) on 20 October 2020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06286-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9034629 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90346292022-04-24 Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial Botta, Michela Tsonas, Anissa M. Sinnige, Jante S. De Bie, Ashley J. R. Bindels, Alexander J. G. H. Ball, Lorenzo Battaglini, Denise Brunetti, Iole Buiteman–Kruizinga, Laura A. van der Heiden, Pim L. J. de Jonge, Evert Mojoli, Francesco Robba, Chiara Schoe, Abraham Paulus, Frederique Pelosi, Paolo Neto, Ary Serpa Horn, Janneke Schultz, Marcus J. Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: INTELLiVENT–Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a fully automated closed-loop mode of ventilation for use in critically ill patients. Evidence for benefit of INTELLiVENT–ASV in comparison to ventilation that is not fully automated with regard to duration of ventilation and quality of breathing is largely lacking. We test the hypothesis that INTELLiVENT–ASV shortens time spent on a ventilator and improves the quality of breathing. METHODS: The “Effects of Automated Closed–loop VenTilation versus Conventional Ventilation on Duration and Quality of Ventilation” (ACTiVE) study is an international, multicenter, two-group randomized clinical superiority trial. In total, 1200 intensive care unit (ICU) patients with an anticipated duration of ventilation of > 24 h will be randomly assigned to one of the two ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older at start of invasive ventilation in the ICU. Patients either receive automated ventilation by means of INTELLiVENT–ASV, or ventilation that is not automated by means of a conventional ventilation mode. The primary endpoint is the number of days free from ventilation and alive at day 28; secondary endpoints are quality of breathing using granular breath-by-breath analysis of ventilation parameters and variables in a time frame of 24 h early after the start of invasive ventilation, duration of ventilation in survivors, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality rates in the ICU and hospital, and at 28 and 90 days. DISCUSSION: ACTiVE is one of the first randomized clinical trials that is adequately powered to compare the effects of automated closed-loop ventilation versus conventional ventilation on duration of ventilation and quality of breathing in invasively ventilated critically ill patients. The results of ACTiVE will support intensivist in their choices regarding the use of automated ventilation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTiVE is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (study identifier: NCT04593810) on 20 October 2020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06286-w. BioMed Central 2022-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9034629/ /pubmed/35461264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06286-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Botta, Michela Tsonas, Anissa M. Sinnige, Jante S. De Bie, Ashley J. R. Bindels, Alexander J. G. H. Ball, Lorenzo Battaglini, Denise Brunetti, Iole Buiteman–Kruizinga, Laura A. van der Heiden, Pim L. J. de Jonge, Evert Mojoli, Francesco Robba, Chiara Schoe, Abraham Paulus, Frederique Pelosi, Paolo Neto, Ary Serpa Horn, Janneke Schultz, Marcus J. Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
title | Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
title_full | Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
title_fullStr | Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
title_short | Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
title_sort | effect of automated closed-loop ventilation versus conventional ventilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (active) – study protocol of a randomized clinical trial |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9034629/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35461264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06286-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bottamichela effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT tsonasanissam effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT sinnigejantes effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT debieashleyjr effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT bindelsalexanderjgh effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT balllorenzo effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT battaglinidenise effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT brunettiiole effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT buitemankruizingalauraa effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT vanderheidenpimlj effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT dejongeevert effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT mojolifrancesco effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT robbachiara effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT schoeabraham effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT paulusfrederique effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT pelosipaolo effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT netoaryserpa effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT hornjanneke effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT schultzmarcusj effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial AT effectofautomatedclosedloopventilationversusconventionalventilationondurationandqualityofventilationincriticallyillpatientsactivestudyprotocolofarandomizedclinicaltrial |