Skip to content

Nutrition Monitoring and Feeding Optimization With the smART+ System - Comparative Study

Nutrition Monitoring and Feeding Optimization With the smART+ System

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04098224
Enrollment
100
Registered
2019-09-23
Start date
2020-01-12
Completion date
2022-11-07
Last updated
2025-05-29

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

Conditions

Aspiration Pneumonia, Malnutrition

Brief summary

The smART+ is a comprehensive modular patient care system intended for ICU patients. The main purpose of the study is the optimization of the delivery of nutrition. The use of the smART+ Feeding tube includes a feature of facilitating correct tube placement and alerting when the tube is displaced during ongoing use. The system will automatically stop feeding if displacement is detected. If a massive reflux episode is detected by the system, a balloon located on the tube will automatically inflate and automatic GRV (Gastric Residual Volume) feature will open to prevent gastric content from regurgitating to the esophagus. In addition to tube placement, the system allows to obtain REE (Resting Energy Expenditure) measurements and calculates the optimized nutritional values required by the patient. Furthermore, the system optimizes feeding by compensating for any lost feeding time or discarded nutritional content that was discarded via the GRV (Gastric Residual Volume). Study participants will be randomly assigned to a study group: Group A- ICU patients receiving the investigational device (Treated). Group B- Control group.

Detailed description

Mechanically ventilated patients are unable to take food orally and therefore are dependent on enteral nutrition for provision of both energy and protein requirements. The conditions of ICU patients dramatically change throughout their ICU stay; diseases, like particularly sepsis, trauma and burns, cause clinically relevant increase in resting energy expenditure (REE) of between 40% - 80%, and most patients do not reach their required protein and caloric targets. The American association for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) recommends that for patients who are at high risk for malnutrition, efforts should be made to provide \>80% of the estimated or calculated energy and protein goal within 48-72 hours, starting with half the patient's calorie goal with the rate slowly increasing over time, in order to achieve the clinical benefit of enteral nutrition over the first week of hospitalization. However, studies have shown that more than 74% of ICU patients failed to receive at least 80% of their prescribed nutrition. Predictive equations (such as Harris-Benedict equation) or a simple weight-based formula (48.1% and 48.7% respectively) have therefore been the most practiced methods of determining energy needs; however, the literature clearly indicates that each equation has a large potential for error. This makes it difficult to accurately predict an individual patient's energy requirements during critical illness. In general, predictive equations estimate accurately only 50% of the time in ICU patients, leading to over or under evaluation of the nutritional needs and inducing over or underfeeding. Numerous meta-analyses have demonstrated the poor value of predictive equations variability that is increased because body weight remains a value difficult to accurately assess. To overcome the inaccuracy in determining the patient's energy consumption and the accompanying problems, the European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ESPEN) guidelines recommend to determine patients' REE based on indirect calorimetry or VCO2-based equation (VCO2 x 8.19). Unfortunately, this is not performed continuously during the course of enteral feeding to assess the ever-changing nutritional needs of the patient. Estimations showed that only 2% of ICUs were regularly using REE / indirect calorimetry,11 and therefore they must resort to performing a one-time calculation of the patient's energy consumption to manually calculate the caloric intake, food type and feeding rate. This study aims to assess the accuracy of the smART+ System's REE module, compared to (1) the FDA-cleared COSMED device, and (2) nutritional calculations conducted with predictive equations regularly used by the clinical staff at the site.

Interventions

DEVICEsmART+ System

Utilizing the smART+ System to provide feeding optimization to the patient

Sponsors

ART Medical Ltd.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Males and females 18 years or older * Patient that have already been admitted to the ICU (no more than 48 hours before enrollment) * Expected to be ventilated at least 48 hours after enrollments. * Patient requires enteral feeding (by naso/oro-gastric feeding tube)

Exclusion criteria

* Pregnant women * Known anatomical anomalies of the nose, oral cavity esophagus or the stomach that may prevent/hinder the ability to insert the feeding tube

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Nutrition Optimization2 days-14 daysOptimization of the delivery of nutrition by the smART+ System as compared to standard of care, by automatically calculating and administering enteral feeding better than standard of care (REE or Calorimeter). The primary endpoint was the average feeding deviation between Days 2-14. Feeding deviation percentage was defined as the percentage of deviation from the nutrition target, calculated as the absolute value of 100 X (volume of nutrition delivered (mL) / the volume intended to be delivered (VTBD; mL))

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Decrease in Intensive Critical Unit Length of Stayfrom admission to discharge from ICU ('ICU length of stay')Measured from admission to Intensive Critical Unit until the decision to discharge is ordered.
Reduction of Number of Patients With VAE (Ventilation Associated Events)2 days-14 daysVentilated associated events (VAE) was evaluated by modifications of FIO2 fraction of inspired oxygen (above .2) or PEEP Positive end-expiratory pressure (above 3 cm H20) requirements that were longer than 48 hours \[per the CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition and clinical judgment of the interpreting physician\]
Decrease in ICU Ventilation Daysfrom admission to discharge from ICU ('ICU length of stay') up to 14 days.Evaluated by the number of hours of End-tidal CO2 from the hospital electronic records
Device Safety According to Occurrence or Absence of Related AE Adverse Event or SAE Serious Adverse Events2 days-14 daysSafe use of the entire system will be assessed based on the occurrence of device-related AE adverse event or SAE Serious Adverse Events.
Assessment of Urine Flow Monitoring Related to Patient Condition2 days-14 daysPatient lab results obtained through the hospital's electronic records will be analyzed against smART+ system urine alerts to determine if the alerts will be useful in the diagnosis
Convenience of Use of the System and the User Interface (by Subjective Staff Questionnaire)Throughout the studySubjective staff questionnaire to be completed by all personnel involved in the study, to assess usability. In order to assess this endpoint a larger sample size is required. This secondary endpoint was omitted from the study because the study enrollment was stopped after the primary endpoint of feeding efficוency was achieved (100 patients enrolled).
Decrease in Workload Related to Nurse Gastric Residual Volume (GRV) Time2 days-14 daysThe change in workload could be estimated by using the estimated nursing time that was expended for GRV activities, and the amounts of GRV removed from the patient obtained through the hospital's electronic records.

Countries

Israel

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Interventional Device - Treated
Subjects connected to the investigational device smART+ smART+ System: Utilizing the smART+ System to provide feeding optimization to the patient
50
Control Group
treated according to local Standard of Care.
50
Total100

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event10
Overall StudyPatient early extubation13
Overall StudyPatient failure nasogastric tube10
Overall StudyPatient not required enteral feeding10
Overall StudyPhysician Decision10

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicControl GroupTotalInterventional Device - Treated
Age, Continuous62.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16
60.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.7
59.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.5
APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Healthy Evaluation II22.3 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7
22.4 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.9
22.4 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.9
BMI body mass index29.5 KG/M^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.8
29.3 KG/M^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.1
29.2 KG/M^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.3
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
50 Participants100 Participants50 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Israel
50 participants100 participants50 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
16 Participants27 Participants11 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
34 Participants73 Participants39 Participants
Time to Intensive Care Unit administration28.3 Hours
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.4
26.4 Hours
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.6
24.5 Hours
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.7

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
3 / 503 / 50
other
Total, other adverse events
35 / 5039 / 50
serious
Total, serious adverse events
3 / 503 / 50

Outcome results

Primary

Nutrition Optimization

Optimization of the delivery of nutrition by the smART+ System as compared to standard of care, by automatically calculating and administering enteral feeding better than standard of care (REE or Calorimeter). The primary endpoint was the average feeding deviation between Days 2-14. Feeding deviation percentage was defined as the percentage of deviation from the nutrition target, calculated as the absolute value of 100 X (volume of nutrition delivered (mL) / the volume intended to be delivered (VTBD; mL))

Time frame: 2 days-14 days

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Interventional Device - TreatedNutrition Optimization89.5 percentage of feeding efficiencyStandard Deviation 13
Control GroupNutrition Optimization65 percentage of feeding efficiencyStandard Deviation 18
Secondary

Assessment of Urine Flow Monitoring Related to Patient Condition

Patient lab results obtained through the hospital's electronic records will be analyzed against smART+ system urine alerts to determine if the alerts will be useful in the diagnosis

Time frame: 2 days-14 days

Population: In order to assess this endpoint a larger sample size is required. This secondary endpoint was omitted from the study because the study enrollment was stopped after the primary endpoint of feeding efficiency was achieved (100 patients enrolled).

Secondary

Convenience of Use of the System and the User Interface (by Subjective Staff Questionnaire)

Subjective staff questionnaire to be completed by all personnel involved in the study, to assess usability. In order to assess this endpoint a larger sample size is required. This secondary endpoint was omitted from the study because the study enrollment was stopped after the primary endpoint of feeding efficוency was achieved (100 patients enrolled).

Time frame: Throughout the study

Secondary

Decrease in ICU Ventilation Days

Evaluated by the number of hours of End-tidal CO2 from the hospital electronic records

Time frame: from admission to discharge from ICU ('ICU length of stay') up to 14 days.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Interventional Device - TreatedDecrease in ICU Ventilation Days9.52 DaysStandard Deviation 7.32
Control GroupDecrease in ICU Ventilation Days12.78 DaysStandard Deviation 8.74
Secondary

Decrease in Intensive Critical Unit Length of Stay

Measured from admission to Intensive Critical Unit until the decision to discharge is ordered.

Time frame: from admission to discharge from ICU ('ICU length of stay')

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Interventional Device - TreatedDecrease in Intensive Critical Unit Length of Stay10.37 DaysStandard Deviation 7.01
Control GroupDecrease in Intensive Critical Unit Length of Stay13.65 DaysStandard Deviation 9.16
Secondary

Decrease in Workload Related to Nurse Gastric Residual Volume (GRV) Time

The change in workload could be estimated by using the estimated nursing time that was expended for GRV activities, and the amounts of GRV removed from the patient obtained through the hospital's electronic records.

Time frame: 2 days-14 days

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
Interventional Device - TreatedDecrease in Workload Related to Nurse Gastric Residual Volume (GRV) TimeMax GRV per event in one day [ml/d]33.3941 ml/day
Interventional Device - TreatedDecrease in Workload Related to Nurse Gastric Residual Volume (GRV) TimeDaily total amount of GRV [ml/day]124.25 ml/day
Control GroupDecrease in Workload Related to Nurse Gastric Residual Volume (GRV) TimeDaily total amount of GRV [ml/day]166.10 ml/day
Control GroupDecrease in Workload Related to Nurse Gastric Residual Volume (GRV) TimeMax GRV per event in one day [ml/d]114.95 ml/day
Secondary

Device Safety According to Occurrence or Absence of Related AE Adverse Event or SAE Serious Adverse Events

Safe use of the entire system will be assessed based on the occurrence of device-related AE adverse event or SAE Serious Adverse Events.

Time frame: 2 days-14 days

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Interventional Device - TreatedDevice Safety According to Occurrence or Absence of Related AE Adverse Event or SAE Serious Adverse EventsDeath not related to device3 Participants
Interventional Device - TreatedDevice Safety According to Occurrence or Absence of Related AE Adverse Event or SAE Serious Adverse EventsAdverse event related to device0 Participants
Control GroupDevice Safety According to Occurrence or Absence of Related AE Adverse Event or SAE Serious Adverse EventsAdverse event related to device0 Participants
Control GroupDevice Safety According to Occurrence or Absence of Related AE Adverse Event or SAE Serious Adverse EventsDeath not related to device3 Participants
Secondary

Reduction of Number of Patients With VAE (Ventilation Associated Events)

Ventilated associated events (VAE) was evaluated by modifications of FIO2 fraction of inspired oxygen (above .2) or PEEP Positive end-expiratory pressure (above 3 cm H20) requirements that were longer than 48 hours \[per the CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition and clinical judgment of the interpreting physician\]

Time frame: 2 days-14 days

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Interventional Device - TreatedReduction of Number of Patients With VAE (Ventilation Associated Events)1 Participants
Control GroupReduction of Number of Patients With VAE (Ventilation Associated Events)5 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 8, 2026