Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

NCT number NCT06256900
Other study ID # 2023-02285
Secondary ID
Status Not yet recruiting
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date April 1, 2024
Est. completion date March 31, 2027

Study information

Verified date February 2024
Source Cantonal Hospital of St. Gallen
Contact Timur Yurttas, MD
Phone 0041714949158
Email timur.yurttas@kssg.ch
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The optimization of ventilation is especially important during general anaesthesia, when active, physiologic respiration suspends and is replaced by non-physiologic mechanical positive pressure ventilation. Aiming at preserving compliance of lung tissue to guarantee an effective gas exchange is to avoid an excessive pressure application, especially in extreme positioning of the patient (Trendelenburg positioning) and/or pneumoperitoneum resulting in additional non-physiologic intrathoracic pressure. Perioperative lung protection strategies have steadily improved in recent years to reduce complications from mechanical ventilation, but postoperative pulmonary complications remain a risk factor for increased morbidity and mortality.


Description:

Mechanical ventilation is crucial during general anesthesia, with ongoing efforts to refine strategies for optimal respiratory support. Important articles on perioperative ventilation explored key aspects, including PEEP application, tidal volume effects, PPC after major surgeries, and perioperative oxygen titration to mitigate oxidative stress. PEEP plays a pivotal role in enhancing oxygenation and preventing atelectasis during mechanical ventilation. Landmark studies by the ARDS Network highlight the importance of customizing PEEP application. This tailored approach not only improves respiratory mechanics but also reduces the risk of barotrauma, underscoring the crucial impact of personalized PEEP strategies. Concurrently, adopting a lung-protective strategy with low tidal volumes, has proven effective in mitigating ventilator-induced lung injury. These strategies aim to strike a balance between optimal oxygenation and minimizing potential complications associated with mechanical ventilation. Despite advancements in perioperative care, PPC remain a concern, particularly following major surgical procedures. Recent investigations emphasize the multifactorial nature of these complications. Early identification of risk factors and meticulous monitoring are crucial to reducing the incidence of complications such as atelectasis, pneumonia, and respiratory insufficiency. Understanding the interplay between mechanical ventilation strategies and postoperative outcomes is essential for improving patient recovery. The pursuit of optimal oxygenation must be balanced against the potential for oxygen toxicity and oxidative stress. Available studies shed light on the delicate equilibrium required in maintaining adequate oxygen delivery while avoiding the detrimental effects of hyperoxia. Clinicians must consider individual patient factors and tailor oxygen therapy to prevent oxidative stress, which can contribute to tissue damage and compromise overall patient well-being. FCV is a new ventilation strategy designed to minimize the mechanical effects of perioperative ventilation on lung tissue. Compared to traditionally employed ventilation strategies, gas flow is controlled during both inspiration and expiration in FCV. In particular, the almost linear pressure drop during the expiratory phase of FCV has been shown in various ex vivo/experimental and clinical studies to improve gas exchange and the proportion of ventilated lung tissue. Ongoing advancements in mechanical ventilation shape anesthesia practices with a focus on evidence-based approaches for patient safety. Building on prior findings, this study explores the benefits of the novel ventilation approach, FCV, aiming to reduce dissipative energy and alveolar stress. The investigators hypothesize positive impacts on perioperative ventilation, vital parameters, and a decreased incidence of PPC, contributing to overall postoperative morbidity and mortality reduction.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Not yet recruiting
Enrollment 774
Est. completion date March 31, 2027
Est. primary completion date March 31, 2027
Accepts healthy volunteers Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: - Patient undergoing elective robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (either abdominal, urologic or gynecologic surgery) with a duration of expected ventilation of = 90 minutes - Male or female aged = 18 years - ASA Physical Status Classification System score I - III - Must be willing and able to give written informed consent to participate in the study and agree to comply with the study protocol prior to initiation of any study-mandated procedure and study intervention Exclusion Criteria: - Patient with weight < 40 kg ideal body weight - ASA Physical Status Classification System score IV - VI - Previous enrolment into the current study - Enrolment of study investigator, his/her family members, employees and other dependent persons - If female and of childbearing potential: known pregnancy or a positive urine pregnancy test (confirmed by a positive serum pregnancy test), or lactating

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Other:
Flow-controlled ventilation
FCV mode during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery
Pressure-controlled ventilation
PCVmode during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery

Locations

Country Name City State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Cantonal Hospital of St. Gallen

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Other Number of patients developing events defined as safety events Determine number of patients with potential ventilation-related complications in the perioperative setting, which are not causally related to the surgical procedure and require a change in ventilation technique ((i.e., conversion from FCV to PCV/VCV; or conversion from PCV to VCV) in order to guarantee patient safety (based on sufficient oxygenation or sufficient elimination of CO2, respectively, and the decision of the responsible anesthesiologist). Further, the safety objective is to assess the occurrence of intervention-related serious adverse events. periprocedural
Primary Differences in the number of patients developing postoperative pulmonary complications Development of PPC (composite endpoint including pneumonia, bronchospasm, atelectasis, pulmonary congestion, respiratory failure, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, requirement for mechanical ventilation) within the first 5 postoperative days (or until discharge).
Constant postoperative monitoring of clinical features indicating PPC
EIT parameters indicating atelectasis (defined by EIT derived parameters Global Inhomogenity Index, Tidal Impedance Variation, end-expiratory lung impedance) measurement after arrival at the PACU.
Requirement of additional oxygen will be evaluated after transfer to the PACU/ICU. Air test indicating additional oxygen requirement, SpO2 <90% / <88% in case of risk of hypercapnic respiratory failure.
If unplanned and continued mechanical ventilation is required after surgery this will count as fulfilled primary endpoint.
to postoperative day 5/discharge
Secondary Differences in Clara-Cell 16 serum concentrations Presence and increase of blood biomarkers indicating alveolar shear stress compared between groups. Blood samples will be required to determine CC16 (3x during the course of the study, approx. 5ml blood each).
Baseline (during preoperative anaesthesia consultation or during preparations before induction of anaesthesia
During intervention: ca. 60 minutes after final adjustments of Trendelenburg positioning/pneumoperitoneum
After transfer to PACU/ICU respectively
periprocedural
Secondary Differences in area under the curve of postoperative modified Horovitz index maximal area under the curve of SpO2/FiO2 compared between groups during first hour after surgery/arrival at the PACU. Derived from data recorded in the electronic anesthesia protocol. first hour after surgery
Secondary Differences in end-tidal to capillary/arterial CO2 gradient Maximal end-tidal to capillary/arterial CO2 gradient compared between groups. (Capillary blood gases can accurately reflect arterial pH, pCO2 and Hb. Because arterial cannulation is not mandatory in the patient population, the investigators choose to determine the end-tidal to arterial CO2 gradient by assessing capillary blood gas, which has been shown to accurately reflect arterial CO2). Derived from data recorded in the electronic anesthesia protocol. periprocedural
Secondary Differences in minimal required intraoperative FiO2 concentration Minimal required intraoperative FiO2 to ensure an adequate perioperative oxygenation (defined as min. oximetric SpO2 of >94%). Derived from data recorded in the electronic anesthesia protocol. periprocedural
Secondary Differences in parameters derived from the electrical impedance tomography Comparison of spatial and regional ventilation patterns during intervention between groups. Comparison of respiratory system compliacen, end-expiratory lung volume between groups at baseline (before surgical procedures in supine position), during intervention (ca. 60 min after Trendelenburg/pneumoperitoneum) and after return to supine position/end of pneumoperitoneum.
Whether FCV has an influence on parameters visualized and measured by EIT, these data will be monitored and evaluated during (secondary outcome assessment) and after (primary outcome assessment) the intervention (measurements at: baseline - during intervention (60min after Trendelenburg/Pneumoperitoneum) - after Trendelenburg/Pneumoperitoneum - after arrival at PACU)
periprocedural
Secondary Differences in perioperative ventilation/oxygenation parameters Differences in perioperative ventilation and oxygenation parameters (minimal FiO2, min/max. PEEP, min/max. compliance), compared between groups. Data derived from the electronic anesthesia protocol. periprocedural
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Recruiting NCT05030337 - Optimising Ventilation in Preterms With Closed-loop Oxygen Control N/A
Completed NCT05144607 - Impact of Inspiratory Muscle Pressure Curves on the Ability of Professionals to Identify Patient-ventilator Asynchronies N/A
Recruiting NCT03697785 - Weaning Algorithm for Mechanical VEntilation N/A
Completed NCT05084976 - Parental Perception of COVID-19 Vaccine in Technology Dependent Patients
Active, not recruiting NCT05886387 - a Bayesian Analysis of Three Randomised Clinical Trials of Intraoperative Ventilation
Completed NCT04429399 - Lowering PEEP: Weaning From High PEEP Setting N/A
Completed NCT02249039 - Intravenous Clonidine for Sedation in Infants and Children Who Are Mechanically Ventilated - Dosing Finding Study Phase 1
Recruiting NCT02071524 - Evaluation of the Effects of Fluid Therapy on Respiratory Mechanics N/A
Completed NCT01114022 - Prevention Inhalation of Bacterial by Using Endotracheal Tube Balloon Polyvinyl Chloride or Polyurethane N/A
Completed NCT00893763 - Strategies To Prevent Pneumonia 2 (SToPP2) Phase 2
Terminated NCT05056103 - Automated Secretion Removal in ICU Patients N/A
Active, not recruiting NCT04558476 - Efficacy of CONvalescent Plasma in Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Mechanical Ventilation Phase 2
Recruiting NCT05295186 - PAV Trial During SBT Trial
Active, not recruiting NCT05370248 - The Effect of 6 ml/kg vs 10 ml/kg Tidal Volume on Diaphragm Dysfunction in Critically Mechanically Ventilated Patient N/A
Completed NCT04818164 - Prone Position Improves End-Expiratory Lung Volumes in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Completed NCT04589910 - Measuring Thickness of the Normal Diaphragm in Children Via Ultrasound. N/A
Completed NCT04193254 - LPP , MP and DP:Relation With Mortality and SOFA in Mechanically Ventilated Patients in ER, Ward and ICU
Not yet recruiting NCT03259854 - Non Invasive Mechanical Ventilation VERSUS Oxygen MASK N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT03245684 - Assisted or Controlled Ventilation in Ards (Ascovent) N/A
Completed NCT06332768 - NIV Versus HFO Versus Standard Therapy Immediately After Weaning From Mechanical Ventilation in ARDS Patients N/A