Skip to content

Closed-loop Automatic Oxygen Control (CLAC-4) in Preterm Infants

Closed-loop Automatic Oxygen Control (CLAC-4) in Preterm Infants: a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Revised Algorithm

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03163108
Acronym
CLAC-4
Enrollment
19
Registered
2017-05-22
Start date
2017-03-15
Completion date
2018-01-12
Last updated
2018-05-15

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

Conditions

Infant Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Ventilator Lung; Newborn

Keywords

controller, hyperoxia, hypoxia, ventilation, cerebral oxygenation

Brief summary

Two-center, randomised controlled, cross-over clinical trial in preterm infants born at gestational age below 34+1/7 weeks receiving supplemental oxygen and respiratory support (Continous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or Non-invasive Ventilation (NIV) or Invasive Ventilation (IV)). Routine manual control (RMC) of the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) will be tested against RMC supported by closed-loop automatic control (CLAC) with slow-algorithm and RMC supported by CLAC with fast-algorithm. The primary hypothesis is, that the use of the faster algorithm results in more time within arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) target range compared to RMC only. The a-priori subordinate hypothesis is, that the faster algorithm is equally effective as the slower algorithm to maintain the SpO2 in the target range.

Detailed description

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE In preterm infants receiving supplemental oxygen, routine manual control (RMC) of the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) is often difficult and time consuming. The investigators developed a system for closed-loop automatic control (CLAC) of the FiO2 and demonstrated its safety and efficacy in a multi-center study. The objective of this study is to test a revised, faster algorithm with a shorter WAIT-interval of 30sec (= time between FiO2 changes) against the previously tested algorithm (WAIT of 180sec) and against RMC. The primary hypothesis is, that the application of CLAC with the faster algorithm in addition to RMC results in more time within arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) target range compared to RMC only. The a-priori subordinate hypothesis is, that the faster algorithm is equally effective as the slower algorithm to maintain the SpO2 in the target range. Further hypotheses for exploratory testing are, that the fast algorithm will achieve a higher proportion of time with SpO2 within target range and an improved stability of cerebral oxygenation (measured as rcStO2 and rcFtO2E determined by Near-infrared spectroscopy) compared with the slow algorithm. STUDY DESIGN The Study is designed as a two-center, randomized controlled, cross-over clinical trial in preterm infants receiving mechanical ventilation or nasal continuous positive airway pressure or non-invasive ventilation and supplemental oxygen (FiO2 above 0.21). Within a twenty-four-hour period the investigators will compare 8 hours of RMC with 8-hour periods of RMC supported by CLAC slow algorithm or fast algorithm, respectively.

Interventions

DEVICEClosed-loop automatic oxygen control (CLAC) fast in addition to RMC

Closed-loop automatic oxygen control is an automated, algorithm based adjustment of the fraction of inspired oxygen in relation to arterial saturation (WAIT-interval 30s).

DEVICEClosed-loop automatic oxygen control (CLAC) slow in addition to RMC

Closed-loop automatic oxygen control is an automated, algorithm based adjustment of the fraction of inspired oxygen in relation to arterial saturation (WAIT-interval 180s).

Sponsors

Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz
CollaboratorOTHER
Heinen und Löwenstein GmbH & Co. KG
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
University Hospital Tuebingen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* gestational age at birth \<34+1/7weeks * invasive mechanical ventilation OR noninvasive ventilation OR continous positive airway pressure support * Fraction of inspired oxygen above 0.21 before inclusion * more than 2 hypoxaemic events (arterial oxygen saturation below 80%) within 8 hours before inclusion * parental written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* congenital pulmonary anomalies * diaphragmatic hernia or other diaphragmatic disorders

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Proportion of Time with SpO2 within target range16 hoursComparison of proportion of time with SpO2 within target range if the infant requires supplemental oxygen and time above target range if the infant requires no supplemental oxygen between CLAC-fast and CLAC-slow (subordinate, non inferiority hypothesis).
Proportion of time with SpO2 within target range16 hoursComparison of proportion of time with SpO2 within target range if the infant requires supplemental oxygen and time above target range if the infant requires no supplemental oxygen between CLAC-fast and RMC (superiority hypothesis).

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Duration of hypoxaemia16 hoursTime with arterial oxygen saturation below 80% (hypoxaemia)
Duration of overshoot hyperoxaemia16 hoursComparison of proportion of time with SpO2 higher than 95% after an automated increase of FiO2 between CLAC-fast and CLAC-slow.
Stability of cerebral oxygenation24 hoursArea under the curve of cerebral tissue saturation or fraction of tissue oxygen extraction outside of the infants Median +- 5% or outside of the save interval of 55-80% rcStO2.
Number of overshoot hyperoxaemia16 hoursComparison of number of events with SpO2 higher than 95% after an automated increase of FiO2 between CLAC-fast and CLAC-slow.
Duration of hyperoxaemia16 hoursTime with arterial oxygen saturation above 95% if the infant requires supplemental oxygen (hyperoxaemia).

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Staff workload24 hoursnumber of manual adjustments of inspired oxygen per time

Countries

Germany

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 20, 2026