Actively Recruiting

Phase Not Applicable
Age: 1Month - 18Years
All Genders
NCT05731024

Closed-loop Synchronization Versus Conventional Synchronization

Led by Dr. Behcet Uz Children's Hospital · Updated on 2025-03-19

15

Participants Needed

5

Research Sites

151 weeks

Total Duration

On this page

Sponsors

D

Dr. Behcet Uz Children's Hospital

Lead Sponsor

H

Hamilton Medical AG

Collaborating Sponsor

AI-Summary

What this Trial Is About

A prior research indicated that asynchrony between the patient and ventilator occurred in 33 percent of 19,175 breaths, and was seen in every patient. The most prevalent kind of asynchrony was ineffective triggering (68%), followed by delayed termination (19%), double triggering (4%) and premature termination (3%). Asynchrony between the patient and ventilator increased considerably with decreasing levels of peak inspiratory pressure, positive end-expiratory pressure, and set frequency.Despite this, more asynchrony categories exist, and there is no widely accepted categorization. Major asynchronies, however, include auto trigger, ineffective effort, and double trigger, while minor asynchronies include early/late cycle, trigger delay, and spontaneous breaths during a mandatory breath. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of a closed-loop synchronization controller with conventional control of synchronization during invasive mechanical ventilation of spontaneous breathing of pediatric patients in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU).

CONDITIONS

Official Title

Closed-loop Synchronization Versus Conventional Synchronization

Who Can Participate

Age: 1Month - 18Years
All Genders

Eligibility Criteria

Eligible

You may qualify if you...

  • Pediatric patients older than 1 month and younger than 18 years of age
  • Hospitalized at the PICU with the intention of treatment with mechanical ventilation at least for the upcoming 3 hours with spontaneous breathing activity
  • Written informed consent signed and dated by the patient or one relative in case that the patient is unable to consent, after full explanation of the study by the investigator and prior to study participation
Not Eligible

You will not qualify if you...

  • Formalized ethical decision to withhold or withdraw life support
  • Patient included in another interventional research study under consent
  • Patient already enrolled in the present study in a previous episode of respiratory failure
  • Pregnant woman
  • Patients deemed at high risk for the need of transportation from PICU to another ward, diagnostic unit or any other hospital
  • Hemodynamic instability defined as a need of continuous infusion of epinephrine or norepinephrine > 1 mg/h
  • Not being able to obtain reference waveform

AI-Screening

AI-Powered Screening

Complete this quick 3-step screening to check your eligibility

1
2
3
+1

Trial Site Locations

Total: 5 locations

1

Aydin Obstetric and pediatrics Hospital

Aydin, Turkey (Türkiye), 09020

Actively Recruiting

2

Erzurum Regional Research and Training Hospital

Erzurum, Turkey (Türkiye), 25180

Actively Recruiting

3

Erzurum Regional Research and Training Hospital

Erzurum, Turkey (Türkiye), 25180

Actively Recruiting

4

Cam Sakura Research and Training Hospital

Istanbul, Turkey (Türkiye), 34001

Actively Recruiting

5

The Health Sciences University Izmir Behçet Uz Child Health and Diseases Research and Training Hospital

Izmir, Turkey (Türkiye), 35200

Actively Recruiting

Loading map...

Research Team

H

Hasan Agin, Professor

CONTACT

How is the study designed?

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Masking

SINGLE

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Purpose

TREATMENT

Number of Arms

2

Not the Right Trial for You?

Explore thousands of other clinical trials that might be a better match.
Sign up to get personalized trial recommendations delivered to your inbox.

Already have an account? Log in here