Comparison Between Limited Driving Pressure Ventilation and Conventional Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure
Last updated on July 2021Recruitment
- Recruitment Status
- Recruiting
- Estimated Enrollment
- Same as current
Summary
- Conditions
- ARDS
- on Invasive Mechanical Ventilation
- Respiratory Failure
- Type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Design
- Allocation: RandomizedIntervention Model: Parallel AssignmentMasking: Single (Participant)Primary Purpose: Treatment
Participation Requirements
- Age
- Between 18 years and 125 years
- Gender
- Both males and females
Description
Background An appropriated mechanical ventilator setting for acute respiratory failure results of ventilator associated lung injury. Limited driving pressure and low tidal volume ventilation strategies show benefits decreasing mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome, but there are no data i...
Background An appropriated mechanical ventilator setting for acute respiratory failure results of ventilator associated lung injury. Limited driving pressure and low tidal volume ventilation strategies show benefits decreasing mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome, but there are no data in simple acute respiratory failure. To compare lung injury score (LIS, Murray score) after invasive mechanical ventilation 7 days between groups of limited driving pressure ventilation versus low tidal volume ventilation strategies.
Tracking Information
- NCT #
- NCT04035915
- Collaborators
- Not Provided
- Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Surat Tongyoo, MD Mahidol University
Get Well Soon