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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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