Acute Respiratory Distress SyndromeHELPNCT00435110
Effects of PEEP and FIO2 in ALI and ARDS
An observational study of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Acute Lung Injury, run by Instituto Canario de Investigacion Biomedica at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Current American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) definitions for ALI and ARDS are inadequate for inclusion into clinical trials due to the lack of standardization for measuring the oxygenation defect. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 14 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Acute Lung Injury, Acute Respiratory Failure
- What is being tested?
- standard ventilatory settings and PEEP and FiO2
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 178 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- May 2004to Oct 2005
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 14 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- All patients meeting American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) ARDS criteria were approached for enrollment regardless of their current status or past medical history.
Who cannot join
- The only patients excluded were those in which >24 hrs had pasted after initially meeting the AECC ARDS criteria before consent and results of initial standard ventilator settings could be obtained.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Spain1 site
Hospital Universitario NS de Candelaria
Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Canary Islands, 38010
About this study
Official title: Effects of PEEP and FiO2 in the Evaluation of Severity of ALI and ARDS
Current American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) definitions for ALI and ARDS are inadequate for inclusion into clinical trials due to the lack of standardization for measuring the oxygenation defect. We questioned whether an early assessment of oxygenation on specific ventilator settings would identify patients with established ARDS (persisting over 24h).
Read the detailed description
We designed this study to determine whether standard ventilator settings applied on the day ARDS is identified (Day 0) or 24 hours (Day 1) later: (1) would have an impact on the reclassification of patients into ALI or ARDS, and (2) would identify groups with different clinical outcomes. Our hypothesis was that the assessment of PaO2/FiO2 on standard ventilator settings 24 hours after patients originally met the AECC definition of ARDS would identify patients with established ARDS (persisting over 24 h) from others with different degrees of lung injury. If this hypothesis is supported, it would suggest that patients with a better outcome could have been preferentially entered into one group of previously conducted clinical trials, resulting in a viable therapy being proved useless or useless therapy proven viable.
- Being tested
- standard ventilatory settings, PEEP and FiO2
- Keywords
- ARDS, ALI, Mechanical Ventilation, Outcome
- Medical subject headings
- Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Acute Lung Injury
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
standard ventilatory settingsProcedure or surgery
PEEP and FiO2Procedure or surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Feb 2007 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2004
- Study completionOct 2005
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Acute Respiratory Distress SyndromeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 178 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Instituto Canario de Investigacion Biomedica
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Asociación Científica Pulmón y Ventilación Mecánica
- Investigators
- Jesus Villar, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Instituto Canario de Investigación Biomédica
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00435110
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 22
- Acronym
- HELP
- Status last verified
- Oct 2018
- First submitted
- 12 Feb 2007
- Last updated
- 11 Oct 2018
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Villar J, Ambros A, Mosteiro F, Martinez D, Fernandez L, Ferrando C, Carriedo D, Soler JA, Parrilla D, Hernandez M, Andaluz-Ojeda D, Anon JM, Vidal A, Gonzalez-Higueras E, Martin-Rodriguez C, Diaz-Lamas AM, Blanco J, Belda J, Diaz-Dominguez FJ, Rico-Feijoo J, Martin-Delgado C, Romera MA, Gonzalez-Martin JM, Fernandez RL, Kacmarek RM; Spanish Initiative for Epidemiology, Stratification and Therapies of ARDS (SIESTA) Network. A Prognostic Enrichment Strategy for Selection of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Clinical Trials. Crit Care Med. 2019 Mar;47(3):377-385. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003624.
PubMed 30624279Villar J, Martinez D, Mosteiro F, Ambros A, Anon JM, Ferrando C, Soler JA, Montiel R, Vidal A, Conesa-Cayuela LA, Blanco J, Arrojo R, Solano R, Capilla L, Del Campo R, Civantos B, Fernandez MM, Aldecoa C, Parra L, Gutierrez A, Martinez-Jimenez C, Gonzalez-Martin JM, Fernandez RL, Kacmarek RM; Stratification and Outcome of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (STANDARDS) Network. Is Overall Mortality the Right Composite Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome? Crit Care Med. 2018 Jun;46(6):892-899. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003022.
PubMed 29420341Villar J, Blanco J, del Campo R, Andaluz-Ojeda D, Diaz-Dominguez FJ, Muriel A, Corcoles V, Suarez-Sipmann F, Tarancon C, Gonzalez-Higueras E, Lopez J, Blanch L, Perez-Mendez L, Fernandez RL, Kacmarek RM; Spanish Initiative for Epidemiology, Stratification & Therapies for ARDS (SIESTA) Network. Assessment of PaO(2)/FiO(2) for stratification of patients with moderate and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. BMJ Open. 2015 Mar 27;5(3):e006812. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006812.
PubMed 25818272Villar J, Perez-Mendez L, Lopez J, Belda J, Blanco J, Saralegui I, Suarez-Sipmann F, Lopez J, Lubillo S, Kacmarek RM; HELP Network. An early PEEP/FIO2 trial identifies different degrees of lung injury in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Oct 15;176(8):795-804. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200610-1534OC. Epub 2007 Jun 21.
PubMed 17585106
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Oct 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of PEEP and FiO2 in the Evaluation of Severity of ALI and ARDS
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00435110
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HELP / 22
- Keywords
- ARDS, ALI, Mechanical Ventilation, Outcome
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 178 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Instituto Canario de Investigacion BiomedicaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Asociación Científica Pulmón y Ventilación Mecánica
- Study start
- May 2004
- Study completion
- Oct 2005
- First posted
- 14 Feb 2007 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Current American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) definitions for ALI and ARDS are inadequate for inclusion into clinical trials due to the lack of standardization for measuring the oxygenation defect. We questioned whether an early assessment of oxygenation on specific ventilator settings would identify patients with established ARDS (persisting over 24h).
Detailed description
We designed this study to determine whether standard ventilator settings applied on the day ARDS is identified (Day 0) or 24 hours (Day 1) later: (1) would have an impact on the reclassification of patients into ALI or ARDS, and (2) would identify groups with different clinical outcomes. Our hypothesis was that the assessment of PaO2/FiO2 on standard ventilator settings 24 hours after patients originally met the AECC definition of ARDS would identify patients with established ARDS (persisting over 24 h) from others with different degrees of lung injury. If this hypothesis is supported, it would suggest that patients with a better outcome could have been preferentially entered into one group of previously conducted clinical trials, resulting in a viable therapy being proved useless or useless therapy proven viable.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 14 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- All patients meeting American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) ARDS criteria were approached for enrollment regardless of their current status or past medical history.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- The only patients excluded were those in which >24 hrs had pasted after initially meeting the AECC ARDS criteria before consent and results of initial standard ventilator settings could be obtained.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| standard ventilatory settings | Procedure or surgery | – |
| PEEP and FiO2 | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Oct 2018.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30624279Villar J, Ambros A, Mosteiro F, Martinez D, Fernandez L, Ferrando C, Carriedo D, Soler JA, Parrilla D, Hernandez M, Andaluz-Ojeda D, Anon JM, Vidal A, Gonzalez-Higueras E, Martin-Rodriguez C, Diaz-Lamas AM, Blanco J, Belda J, Diaz-Dominguez FJ, Rico-Feijoo J, Martin-Delgado C, Romera MA, Gonzalez-Martin JM, Fernandez RL, Kacmarek RM; Spanish Initiative for Epidemiology, Stratification and Therapies of ARDS (SIESTA) Network. A Prognostic Enrichment Strategy for Selection of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Clinical Trials. Crit Care Med. 2019 Mar;47(3):377-385. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003624.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29420341Villar J, Martinez D, Mosteiro F, Ambros A, Anon JM, Ferrando C, Soler JA, Montiel R, Vidal A, Conesa-Cayuela LA, Blanco J, Arrojo R, Solano R, Capilla L, Del Campo R, Civantos B, Fernandez MM, Aldecoa C, Parra L, Gutierrez A, Martinez-Jimenez C, Gonzalez-Martin JM, Fernandez RL, Kacmarek RM; Stratification and Outcome of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (STANDARDS) Network. Is Overall Mortality the Right Composite Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome? Crit Care Med. 2018 Jun;46(6):892-899. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003022.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25818272Villar J, Blanco J, del Campo R, Andaluz-Ojeda D, Diaz-Dominguez FJ, Muriel A, Corcoles V, Suarez-Sipmann F, Tarancon C, Gonzalez-Higueras E, Lopez J, Blanch L, Perez-Mendez L, Fernandez RL, Kacmarek RM; Spanish Initiative for Epidemiology, Stratification & Therapies for ARDS (SIESTA) Network. Assessment of PaO(2)/FiO(2) for stratification of patients with moderate and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. BMJ Open. 2015 Mar 27;5(3):e006812. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006812.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 17585106Villar J, Perez-Mendez L, Lopez J, Belda J, Blanco J, Saralegui I, Suarez-Sipmann F, Lopez J, Lubillo S, Kacmarek RM; HELP Network. An early PEEP/FIO2 trial identifies different degrees of lung injury in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Oct 15;176(8):795-804. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200610-1534OC. Epub 2007 Jun 21.
Related trials for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Enrolling by invitation
Personalized Ventilator Settings for Patients on ECMO
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Active, not recruiting
CT for Personalized Mechanical Ventilation
Ventilator-Induced Lung Injury, Sepsis Syndrome
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Development and Multicenter Validation of an Explainable System for Neonatal ARDS-Compatible Phenotyping
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
RecruitingObservational study
Assessment of Blood Viscosity in ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome)
ARDS
Recruiting
Comparing Surfactant Administration Through Supraglottic Airway and Thin Catheter for Preterm Infants
Surfactant, Respiratory Distress Syndrome (Neonatal)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jesus Villar, MD, PhD principal investigator
Instituto Canario de Investigación Biomédica
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Acute Lung Injury, run by Instituto Canario de Investigacion Biomedica at 1 site in Spain.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Oct 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00435110, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Oct 2018.