Comparing ventilation strategies for patients with de novo hypoxemic respiratory failure

Noninvasive mechanical ventilation with guaranteed support pressure with medium volume (AVAPS) vs BiPAP S/T in Novo hypoxemic respiratory failure

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN17904857

Enrollment

Registered

2019-07-11

Start date

2013-03-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2022-08-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

"de novo" hypoxemic respiratory failure Respiratory Respiratory failure, not elsewhere classified

Interventions

PAIRING Patients with BiPAP S/T were paired with those of BiPAP AVAPS, according to age, within 5 points, their arterial pH 2 points APACHE II 5 points and PaO2 / FiO2 10 points and pC

the rise time was 300 to 400 ms

The inspiratory time was 0.8 to 1.2 s. Inspired fraction of oxygen was programmed to maintain a SaO2 above 90%. The maximum IPAP, exhaled tidal volume (Vtexh), Vmin and leaks were controlled through t

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Age, 18 years or older. 2. Showed signs of acute respiratory failure in the emergency room (RR,> 25 breaths per minute, use of accessory muscles) for "de novo" hypoxemic respiratory failure (not produced by acute exacerbations of COPD, disease chronic pulmonary, or congestive heart failure), with PaO2 / FIO2 from mild to moderate according to the thresholds defined by the Berlin criteria for ARDS (9,10).

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Facial deformity. 2.Obstruction in the upper airway by surgery or trauma. 3. Alterations in the central nervous system. 5. Hypercapnia encephalopathy. 6. Cardiogenic pulmonary edema, pneumothorax, pulmonary embolism thrombus, hemoptysis or shock septic. 7. Urgent intubation due to cardiorespiratory arrest and hemodynamic instability with systolic pressure less than 80 mmHg. 8. Demonstrated hemodynamic instability. 9. Demonstrated excess respiratory secretions. 10. Did not cooperate or were agitated. 11. Could not use the interface device. 12. Had recently undergone upper airway surgery. 13. Had received NIV with "Do not resuscitate" orders.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
1. Superiority of the ventilatory strategy with BiPAP S/T–AVAPS compared to the noninvasive ventilatory strategy with BiPAP S/T is measured using the percentage of success or failure for each strategy. 2. Mortality.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
1. Percentage of patients that undergo intubation. 2. Days of hospital stay. 3. Days of mechanical ventilation using the ventilatory strategy with BiPAP S/T–AVAPS vs noninvasive ventilatory strategy with BiPAP S/T.	—

Countries

Ecuador

Contacts

Public ContactKillen Harold Claudett

killen.brionesc@ug.edu.ec+593977102550

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 11, 2026