Skip to content

Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy and Bronchoalveolar Lavage in Critically Ill Ventilated Patients

Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy and Bronchoalveolar Lavage in Critically Ill Ventilated Patients: Impact on Respiratory Mechanics and Gas Exchange

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04502368
Enrollment
15
Registered
2020-08-06
Start date
2020-09-01
Completion date
2021-04-30
Last updated
2021-02-08

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

Conditions

Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy (FOB), Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL), Respiratory Disease

Keywords

Respiratory Insufficiency, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Mechanical Ventilation, COVID-19, Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy (FOB), Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL)

Brief summary

Fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) is widely used as a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure in intensive care units. Patients with ARDS or COVID-19 disease often undergoes to these procedures. However, intensive care patients might suffer from serious side effects such as prolonged oxygen desaturation and adverse change in lung compliance and resistance. This study aims to evaluate these changes and determine their impact on patient stability.

Detailed description

Fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) is widely used in intensive care units as a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. FOB in respiratory failure patients supported by mechanical ventilation may worsen hypoxemia and hypercapnia, therefore FOB requires careful consideration in this patient population. The generally accepted indications for FOB in ventilated patients are removal of retained secretions, resolution of atelectasis and evaluation of hemoptysis. A diagnostic indication is the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), to sample the lower respiratory tract without contamination. Studies of FOB performed in mechanically ventilated patients suggest an acceptable safety profile, except for the occurrence of hypoxemia as the main adverse event. Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL) in normal volunteers is reported to be safe and does not lead to measurable changes in pulmonary function parameters. However, in intensive care patients may suffer from serious side effects such as prolonged oxygen desaturation. Moreover, reductions in arterial oxygen tension (PaO2) have been reported to persist in some patients for 4 h and more after the procedure. Authors reported the BAL procedure is associated to a worsening of PaO2/FiO2 ratio, in several ARDS patients the drop in PaO2 was higher than 30%. Moreover a physiological study in patients undergoing FOB and BAL showed adverse change in lung compliance and resistance. The purpose of this prospective study is to determine the alterations in respiratory mechanics (regional compliance and resistance) and gas exchange induced by FOB and BAL up to 6 hours after the procedure. The lung regional ventilation evaluation will be made by electrical impedance tomography (EIT).

Interventions

FOB under full sedation (RASS sedation scale -5) and full paralysis.

BAL under full sedation (RASS sedation scale -5) and full paralysis. Lavage: NaCl 0,9% 50ml x 3 in lung region targetted according to RX/CT scan.

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTElectrical Impedance Tomography (EIT)

Realtime thoracic impedance coupled with ventilation parameters recording.

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTArterial Blood Gas test (ABG)

Multiples Arterial Blood Gas test (ABG) via arterial catheter.

Sponsors

Erasme University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_ONLY
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

Mechanically ventilated ICU patients requiring a FOB or FOB + BAL

Exclusion criteria

* PaO2/FiO2 ratio \<100 * Age \< 18 years * Pregnancy * Unstable angina and recent (less than 1 week) myocardial infarction * Uncontrolled cranial hypertension * Major hemodynamic instability * Any previous lung surgery (except for lung transplantation) * Obesity (BMI \> 50) * Chest circumference \> 150 cm * Electronic implanted device (pacemaker, neurostimulator, etc.) Patients who had undergone several bronchoscopy procedures could not be included twice.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Regional Compliance VariationFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterThe variation of regional compliance, calculated by electrical impedance

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Regional Compliance and FOB durationFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterRelation between regional compliance variation and FOB duration
Regional Compliance and PaO2From FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterRelation between regional compliance variation and PaO2 variation
Atelectasis areas and BAL flooded areasFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterRelation between atelectasis impedance-detected areas and BAL flooded impedance-detected areas
Regional Resistance VariationFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterThe variation of regional resistance, calculated by electrical impedance
PaCO2From FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterVariation of PaCO2 post FOB/BAL
Endotracheal tube size and Fiberscope sizeFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterRelation between the endotracheal tube/fiberscope size ratio and gas exchanges
Hemodynamic variationsFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterHeart rate (HR), Blood Pressure (BP)
PaO2 and PaO2/FiO2 ratioFrom FOB/BAL to 6 hours laterVariation of PaO2 and PaO2/FiO2 ratio post FOB/BAL

Countries

Belgium

Contacts

Primary ContactFrancesco Ricottilli, MD
francesco@ricottilli.eu+32(02)5553344

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026