NCT04035915

Comparison Between Limited Driving Pressure Ventilation and Conventional Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure

• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 126 (actual)
• Sponsor: Mahidol University · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

Background An appropriated mechanical ventilator setting for acute respiratory failure results of ventilator associated lung injury. Limited driving pressure and low tidal volume ventilation strategies show benefits decreasing mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome, but there are no data in simple acute respiratory failure.

Detailed description

Background An appropriated mechanical ventilator setting for acute respiratory failure results of ventilator associated lung injury. Limited driving pressure and low tidal volume ventilation strategies show benefits decreasing mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome, but there are no data in simple acute respiratory failure. To compare lung injury score (LIS, Murray score) after invasive mechanical ventilation 7 days between groups of limited driving pressure ventilation versus low tidal volume ventilation strategies.

Conditions

• on Invasive Mechanical Ventilation
• ARDS
• Respiratory Failure

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	Limited driving pressure	Keep driving pressure \<15 cmH2O
PROCEDURE	Conventional mechanical ventilation strategies	Keep tidalvolume \</= 8

Timeline

• Start date: 2019-07-25
• Primary completion: 2020-12-31
• Completion: 2021-03-31
• First posted: 2019-07-29
• Last updated: 2021-09-24

Locations

1 site across 1 country: Thailand