Skip to content

Volatile Sedation for Patients With the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Effect of Volatile Sedation on Spontaneous Breathing During Mechanical Ventilation for Patients With the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06014138
Acronym
ISO-DRIVE
Enrollment
20
Registered
2023-08-28
Start date
2023-11-01
Completion date
2027-07-31
Last updated
2026-06-04

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

Conditions

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Mechanical Ventilation Complication, Sedation Complication

Brief summary

This study will investigate how different types of routine sedation may affect patient's breathing whilst on a ventilator in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). There are different approaches to sedation which may have advantages and disadvantages. During the study patients will receive both intravenous and inhaled volatile sedation (similar to anaesthetic 'gases' used for general anaesthesia) and the drive to breath, breathing efforts and function of the lung will be assessed.

Detailed description

It is routine for patients to be sedated for their comfort and safety whilst on a ventilator in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Conventionally sedatives are given intravenously, however inhaled volatile sedation is becoming more popular. Inhaled sedation has recently been approved by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom (UK). Whilst being on a ventilator can be life-saving, it can cause potential problems. It is important that the patient interacts well with the ventilator and that their own breathing efforts are well regulated. There is evidence that inhaled sedation can specifically help the lungs when patients have the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and in particular, inhaled sedation does not appear to suppress patient's own breathing as much as conventional sedation. Greater spontaneous breathing by the patient is usually positive but needs to be carefully understood to ensure it is not excessive or damaging to the patient's already injured lungs. This study of 20 patients is designed to carefully measure the impact of inhaled sedation on the patient's breathing and lung function, in comparison to intravenous sedation. Measurements will be taken whilst on intravenous sedation before the patient is switched to an equivalent level of inhaled sedation for six hours, when the measurements will be repeated. Finally, the patient will go back to their original intravenous sedation and the measurements taken again. This is called a 'cross-over' study and is a good way to evaluate the effect of the drug.

Interventions

DRUGPropofol

Standard care, propofol sedation - 2 hour periods of observation before and after inhaled volatile sedation

DRUGIsoflurane

Inhaled volatile sedation for 6 hours - 2 hours wash in / wash out, followed by 4 hours of observations

Sponsors

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
Lead SponsorOTHER
Sedana Medical
CollaboratorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
NONE

Masking description

None, open label, physiological study

Intervention model description

Prospective, cross-over trial design comparing intravenous versus inhaled volatile sedation

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Adult patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) * ARDS * Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) * Spontaneous breathing in pressures support mode (PSV) for less than or equal to 48 hours * Sedated with intravenous sedation (ie. propofol and / or midazolam and fentanyl or alternate short acting opioid) * Anticipated to remain on IMV and PSV and with a stable sedation score for a further 24 hours without planned sedation interruption / spontaneous breathing trial or other significant change in the level of ventilator support * Not receiving / anticipated to receive paralysis * In supine position

Exclusion criteria

* Personal or family history of malignant hyperpyrexia * Known or suspected elevated intracranial pressure * High dose vasopressors (ie. Noradrenaline \> 0.3mcg/kg/min or equivalent) * Contra-indication to oesophageal balloon (i.e. oesophageal / upper gastro-intestinal pathology) * Pregnancy * High dose oral sedatives (e.g. benzodiazepines) or opioids (e.g. oxycodone / oral morphine) which may affect respiratory drive

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Respiratory drive (P0.1)8 hoursNegative pressure in the first 100milliseconds of inspiration (P0.1) - Physiological parameter

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Respiratory effort (Pmus)8 hoursEnd expiratory occlusion pressure (Pmus) - Physiological parameter
Respiratory effort (PMI)8 hoursPressure Muscle Index (PMI) - Physiological parameter
Respiratory effort (Oesophageal pressure swings)8 hoursOesophageal pressure swings - Physiological parameter
Gas exchange (PaO2:FiO2 ratio)8 hoursRatio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fractional inspired concentration of oxygen (PaO2:FiO2) - Physiological parameter
Gas exchange (pulmonary shunt fraction (Qs/Qt))8 hoursPulmonary shunt fraction (Qs/Qt) - Physiological parameter
Gas exchange ( ratio of ventilatory 'dead space' to tidal volume (Vd/Vt))8 hoursratio of ventilatory 'dead space' to tidal volume (Vd/Vt) - Physiological parameter
Gas exchange (volume of carbon dioxide breathed out (VCO2))8 hoursvolume of carbon dioxide breathed out (VCO2) - Physiological parameter

Countries

United Kingdom

Contacts

CONTACTGuy Glover
guy.glover@gstt.nhs.uk00447879696250
CONTACTGill Radcliffe
gillian.radcliffe@gstt.nhs.uk02071887188
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORGuy Glover

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jun 5, 2026