Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04196361

Ultrasonography for Prediction of Extubation Success: a Holistic Approach

This study evaluates thickening fraction alone and together with other ultrasound parameters of heart and lungs as predictors for extubation outcome

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

About this study

Weaning patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) from the mechanical ventilator is a critical period and accounts for 40% of the duration of mechanical ventilation itself. Weaning failure includes failing the initial spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) and patients with extubation failure. Extubation failure is defined as reintubation or need for rescue non-invasive ventilation within 48 hours following extubation. Patients failing extubation experience increased time spent on the mechanical ventilator and even increased mortality rates. Given these risks, predicting readiness for extubation is of key importance in the ICU.

Studies have shown, that US is a viable tool for routine use due to its bedside availability and non-invasiveness, while still maintaining excellent predictive values for its respective applications. For this reason, over the past years, critical care ultrasonography (US) has become an important part of routine bedside assessment Lately, the diaphragm has been studied extensively, due to its strong role in sustaining spontaneous breathing. Especially predicting extubation outcomes

has become a great field of interest and different studies have been conducted on this topic. Currently, indices such as diaphragm thickening (Tdi), diaphragm thickness (Tdi%) and diaphragm motion are the most frequently used parameters. Of these, thickening fraction seems to be the most promising to predict successful extubation.

However, all of the studies conducted, solely looked at diaphragm function and compared them to current standards such as the rapid shallow breathing index, while disregarding other factors strongly correlated to extubation failure, e.g. respiratory and cardiac function, as proposed by Mayo et al. Taking heart and lung function into account as well seems to be an interesting approach, because additional measurements could possibly improve predictive value while putting no further burden on the patient. Furthermore, both heart and lungs can be assessed quickly and easily by ultrasound. Cardiac parameters that are potentially useful are left ventricular function, mitral diastolic inflow and cardiac output. Regarding the lungs, pleural effusion is associated with rate of success for extubation. Effusion is detected easily and recent studies have shown, that in an ICU setting a simple 8 region protocol is sufficient to detect extra vascular lung water.

The investigators hypothesise that a holistic US approach, including measurements of heart, lungs and diaphragm, will be superior to the core diagnostic parameters of the diaphragm in predicting extubation success in mechanically ventilated critical care patients.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Ventilated for > 72 hours
  • Passed spontaneous breathing trial

Exclusion criteria

  • Planned NIV
  • Palliative Extubation
  • Tracheostomy
  • Paraplegia above Th 8

Treatment and study plan

Ultrasound

Diagnostic Test

Point of care ultrasound as part of routine physical examination

Primary outcomes

  1. Sensitivity

    Time frame: 48 hours

    Sensitivity of thickening fraction for extubation failure

  2. Specificity

    Time frame: 48 hours

    Specificity of thickening fraction for extubation failure

  3. Area under the Curve

    Time frame: 48 hours

    Area under the receiver operator curve

  4. Correlation of ultrasound variables with extubation outcome

    Time frame: 48 hours

    Correlation of ultrasound variables with extubation outcome through (logistic)regression analysis.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc

Other

Registry information

Acronym: APEX

Important dates

Study start
2016
Primary completion
2019
Study completion
2019
First posted
Dec 12, 2019
Registry last updated
Dec 12, 2019

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.