Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00997555

Prophylactic Bronchoscopy After Inhalation Injury in Burn Patients

The investigators hypothesize that the scheduled use of bronchoscopy on a regular basis after inhalation injury in burn patients will improve outcome by providing pulmonary hygiene, decrease the incidence of pneumonia, and detect pneumonia earlier than standard treatment without bronchoscopy.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Hurley Medical Center

Flint, Michigan, 48503, United States

About this study

The role of bronchoscopy in most hospitals has been limited to obtaining lavage fluid for culture and assessing the degree of airway injury, which has been shown to be predictive of outcome. Severe inhalation injury, which is characterized by pulmonary edema, bronchial edema, and secretions, can occlude the airway and lead to atelectasis and pneumonia. Aggressive use of bronchoscopy is highly effective in removing foreign particles and accumulated secretions that worsen the inflammatory response and impede ventilation. While it seems intuitive that bronchoscopy would improve pulmonary hygiene by removing secretions and denuded epithelial slough in burn patients, there has not been any published data to support or deter the use of bronchoscopy for inhalation injury nor document an improvement in morbidity or mortality secondary to bronchoscopy as a therapeutic intervention.

Recent research has shown that the process of intubation for mechanical ventilation provides a portal for bacterial contamination, after which the damaged tracheobronchial mucosa quickly becomes colonized with pathogenic organisms in over 50% of the patients. Furthermore, within 15 minutes of smoke inhalation, there is significant airway edema and thickening, more prominently in the lower trachea than the upper portion. These factors place the patient with inhalation injury at high risk for pneumonia.

We have used the National Burn Repository data to previously show that patients who receive aggressive use of bronchoscopy after inhalation injury have an improved outcome in terms of decreased ventilator days, decreased ICU length of stay, decreased incidence of pneumonia, and a trend towards improved mortality. However, that data was unable to document why. It was also unable to confirm that the findings were not due to institutional bias. Therefore, one of the conclusions from that study was that a prospective trial is needed to confirm the findings.

Our hypothesis is that a scheduled and sequential use of bronchoscopy after inhalation injury as a therapeutic tool to remove secretions, slough, carbonaceous material, and screen for the early detection of pneumonia by bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) will improve outcome. We will attempt to document this improvement by using the following endpoints: length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, ventilator days, incidence of pneumonia, overall morbidity and mortality with and without bronchoscopy.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Any burned patient arriving intubated on mechanical ventilation OR requiring mechanical ventilation within 48 hours of admission AND
  • > 18 years old AND
  • patient believed to be able to survive more than 48 hours after arrival (not likely to be made DNR or comfort care) including:
  • any methamphetamine explosion or
  • any burn associated with fire (not chemical) of the face or blast injury to the face or
  • confined in a burning space for more than 10 minutes or
  • any burn with carbonaceous material around the nose or mouth or
  • any burn > 15% TBSA associated with fire (not chemical) or
  • any burn associated with an explosion in a confined space.

Exclusion criteria

  • Likely to die within 48 hours based upon severity of injury.
  • Less than 18 years old.
  • Burned patient transferred to our facility already on mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours.
  • Patient already on antibiotics for another reason.

Treatment and study plan

Bronchoscopy

Procedure

Scheduled bronchoscopy.

Primary outcomes

  1. All Cause Mortality

    Time frame: until death or discharge from hospital, data reviewed every 6 months

    Bronchoscopy group deaths n=0. Control group deaths n=1.

  2. Respiratory Associated Mortality

    Time frame: until death or discharge from hospital, data reviewed every 6 months

    Bronchoscopy group deaths n=0. Control group deaths n=1.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Incidence of Pneumonia

    Time frame: until discharge from the hospital, data reviewed every 6 months

    Bronchoscopy group- 4/13 (31%) Control group- 6/15 (40%)

  2. Length of Mechanical Ventilation

    Time frame: until discharge from hospital, data reviewed every 6 months

    Days of mechanical ventilation (bronchoscopy 5.1 days, 95% CI +/- 3.6 days versus control 6.7 days, 95% CI +/- 6.3 days, p = 0.7).

  3. Length of ICU Stay

    Time frame: until discharge from hospital, data reviewed every 6 months

    Number of ICU days (bronchoscopy 10 days, 95% CI +/- 10 days versus control 18 days, 95% CI +/- 12 days, p = 0.4).

  4. Length of Hospital Stay

    Time frame: until discharge from hospital, data reviewed every 6 months

    Number of hospital days (bronchoscopy 21 days, 95% CI +/- 12 days versus control 26 days, 95% CI +/- 12 days, p = 0.5).

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Hurley Medical Center

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2009
Primary completion
2012
Study completion
2012
First posted
Oct 19, 2009
Registry last updated
Jan 31, 2013

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.