Sc Ricerca Clinica, Sviluppo E Innovazione
Bergamo, Italy, 24100
Location status: Recruiting
NCT Number: NCT07687628
The investigators aim to compare rigid tracheoscopy versus flexible tracheo-video-endoscopy in neonates requiring diagnostic assessment before undergoing a congenital tracheoesophageal fistula repair.
Interested in participating?
Request Info0 day–28 day
All sexes
Observational
Bergamo, Italy, 24100
Location status: Recruiting
Tracheoesophageal fistula, with or without esophageal atresia, is a rare congenital malformation which may be included in a wider spectrum of congenital abnormalities (VACTERL: vertebral, anorectal, cardiac, tracheoesophageal, renal and limb abnormalities). This condition presents challenging airway management due to the risk of gastric distension during positive pressure ventilation. ERNICA guidelines suggest that a tracheoscopy should be routinely performed preoperatively to evaluate the fistula position, rule out a double fistula, and identify other tracheal pathology; however, the optimal setting and approach remains controversial. Rigid tracheoscopy, performed in paralyzed neonates, can provide superior visualization of the trachea, but with a risk of gastric distension; moreover, the learning curve is steep. Flexible tracheoscopy using conventional fiberoptic bronchoscopes could allow maintenance of spontaneous breathing, but image quality is poor. New-generation disposable video-endoscopes come equipped with a miniaturized camera that replaces traditional fiberoptic technology, enabling enhanced visualization. The goal of this observational ambispective study is to compare the outcomes of two different airway management approaches in neonates and infants undergoing congenital tracheoesophageal fistula repair: rigid tracheoscopy with flexible video-endoscopy. The main questions the investigators aim to answer are: Is the tracheal flexible video-endoscopy performed in spontaneously breathing neonates effective, regarding optimal tracheal visualization and therefore for accurate diagnosis? Does it allow the successful detection and eventually rigid wire cannulation of the fistula? Are there differences between the two approaches, regarding the procedure length, or the incidence of complications (desaturation, gastric distension, respiratory depression, major cardiopulmonary complications)? Do the two approaches differ in learning curve shape? The investigators will compare a historical cohort of neonates who underwent rigid tracheoscopy with positive pressure ventilation, with a prospective group of neonates that will receive spontaneous breathing flexible tracheoscopy.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Rigid tracheoscopy is performed with rigid 3.0 or 3.5 mm optical device under general anesthesia and positive pressure ventilation
Flexible tracheoscopy is performed with Ambu 2.7 flexible video-endoscopy under sedation in spontaneously breathing neonates
Time frame: Intraoperative (at the time of the preoperative tracheoscopy procedure)
Percentage of procedures in which the technique allowed correct visualization of the tracheoesophageal fistula, including identification of secondary fistulas, out of total procedures performed with each method (rigid vs flexible bronchoscopy)
Time frame: Intraoperative
Rate of preoperative or intraoperative anesthetic complications (respiratory, cardiovascular) during tracheoscopy and surgical repair
Time frame: From the first procedure to the achievement of autonomous competence with each technique, assessed over the total study duration (up to 5 years)
Number of supervised procedures required before the operator achieved adequate autonomous proficiency with rigid vs flexible bronchoscopy
Time frame: Perioperative (at initiation of the surgical procedure)
Presence of gastric distension (yes/no) at the beginning of the surgical phase
Time frame: Baseline (immediately before tracheoscopy)
Arterial blood gas parameters (pH, PCO2, PO2, lactate, base excess) at baseline (prior to tracheoscopy)
Time frame: Perioperative (at initiation of the surgical procedure)
Arterial blood gas parameters (pH, PCO2, PO2, lactate, base excess) at beginning of the surgical procedure
Time frame: At conclusion of the surgical procedure (up to 30 minutes)
Description: Arterial blood gas parameters (pH, PCO2, PO2, lactate, base excess) at conclusion of the surgical procedure
Time frame: At conclusion of the surgical procedure (up to 30 minutes)
Presence of gastric distension (yes/no), assessed at conclusion of the surgical procedure
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital
Other
Acronym: CBESB
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT03730454
Congenital Abnormalities, Congenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02033772
Congenital Abnormalities, Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia
Columbus, Ohio, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07100379
Congenital Abnormalities, Congenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05957562
Anastomotic Leak, Azygos Vein Preservation Versus Disconnection
Cairo, Egypt
View Trial Details