Skip to content

Physiology of Helmet vs. Facemask Noninvasive Ventilation

Physiological Effects of Helmet vs. Facemask Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06210386
Enrollment
20
Registered
2024-01-18
Start date
2024-01-19
Completion date
2025-09-15
Last updated
2025-09-30

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

Conditions

Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

Brief summary

The optimal noninvasive management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is debated. Helmet noninvasive ventilation may be more effective than facemask noninvasive ventilation for these patients. Putatitve benefits of helmet use are the possibility to apply significantly higher positive end-expiratory pressure without air leaks and with good patient's comfort. In this randomized crossover study, the investigators will assess the physiological effects of helmet compared to facemask noninvasive ventilation, with the latter applied with different ventilator settings (similar to or different from helmet settings).

Interventions

DEVICENoninvasive ventilation

noninvasive ventilation

Sponsors

Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Crossover randomized trial

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and PaO2/FiO2\<200 mmHg * PaCO2\<45 mmHg * Respiratory failure not caused by exacerbation of chronic pulmonary disease, cardiac failure or fluid overload

Exclusion criteria

* Pregnancy * Contraindication to helmet or facemask noninvasive ventilation * Contraindication to esophageal manometry * Contraindication to electrical-impedance tomography monitoring * Recent surgery involving the abdomen or the thorax * Pneumothorax or documented barotrauma

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Inspiratory effort1 hournegative deflection in esophageal pressure
End-expiratory lung impedance1 hourElectrical-impedance derived end-expiratory lung volume

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Respiratory rate1 hourRespiratory rate per minute
Dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure1 hourTidal change in transpulmonary pressure
Compliance1 hourRatio of tidal volume to transpulmonary driving pressure
Dyspnea1 hourDyspnea rated through a visual analog scale (ranging from 0 to 10, with representing most severe dyspnea) adapted for critically ill patients
Discomfort1 hourDevice-related discomfort (ranging from 0 to 10, with representing most severe dyspnea) rated through a visual analog scale adapted for critically ill patients
Tidal volume1 hourElectrical-impedance derived tidal volume size
Pendelluft extent1 hourPendelluft extent, expressed in % of the total tidal volume
Corrected minute ventilation1 hourThe product of tidal volume and respiratory rate, normalized to PaCO2. This value is expressed in Arbitrary units per minute divided by mmHg and is a proxy of dead space
Arteria Carbon dioxide tension1 hourPaCO2
Tidal volume distribution1 hourTidal volume distribution, assessed with electrical impedance tomography in 4 regions of interest (ventral, mid-ventral, mid-dorsal, dorsal)
Oxygenation1 hourPaO2/FiO2 ratio
Work of breathing1 hourEsophageal pressure simplified pressure-time product

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

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