Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus pressure support ventilation: a randomized controlled feasibility trial performed in patients at risk of prolonged mechanical ventilation

Daniel J Hadfield, Louise Rose, Fiona Reid, Victoria Cornelius, Nicholas Hart, Clare Finney, Bethany Penhaligon, Jasmine Molai, Clair Harris, Sian Saha, Harriet Noble, Emma Clarey, Leah Thompson, John Smith, Lucy Johnson, Phillip A Hopkins, Gerrard F Rafferty, Daniel J Hadfield, Louise Rose, Fiona Reid, Victoria Cornelius, Nicholas Hart, Clare Finney, Bethany Penhaligon, Jasmine Molai, Clair Harris, Sian Saha, Harriet Noble, Emma Clarey, Leah Thompson, John Smith, Lucy Johnson, Phillip A Hopkins, Gerrard F Rafferty

Abstract

Background: The clinical effectiveness of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) has yet to be demonstrated, and preliminary studies are required. The study aim was to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of NAVA versus pressure support ventilation (PSV) in critically ill adults at risk of prolonged mechanical ventilation (MV).

Methods: An open-label, parallel, feasibility RCT (n = 78) in four ICUs of one university-affiliated hospital. The primary outcome was mode adherence (percentage of time adherent to assigned mode), and protocol compliance (binary-≥ 65% mode adherence). Secondary exploratory outcomes included ventilator-free days (VFDs), sedation, and mortality.

Results: In the 72 participants who commenced weaning, median (95% CI) mode adherence was 83.1% (64.0-97.1%) and 100% (100-100%), and protocol compliance was 66.7% (50.3-80.0%) and 100% (89.0-100.0%) in the NAVA and PSV groups respectively. Secondary outcomes indicated more VFDs to D28 (median difference 3.0 days, 95% CI 0.0-11.0; p = 0.04) and fewer in-hospital deaths (relative risk 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9; p = 0.032) for NAVA. Although overall sedation was similar, Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) scores were closer to zero in NAVA compared to PSV (p = 0.020). No significant differences were observed in duration of MV, ICU or hospital stay, or ICU, D28, and D90 mortality.

Conclusions: This feasibility trial demonstrated good adherence to assigned ventilation mode and the ability to meet a priori protocol compliance criteria. Exploratory outcomes suggest some clinical benefit for NAVA compared to PSV. Clinical effectiveness trials of NAVA are potentially feasible and warranted.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01826890. Registered 9 April 2013.

Keywords: Critical care; Interactive ventilatory support; NAVA studies; Randomized controlled trial; Weaning.

Conflict of interest statement

D.J.H. has received funds from Maquet/Getinge to cover the travel, accommodation, and registration for conferences and meetings prior to 2016. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the clinical trial. NAVA = neurally adjusted 155 ventilatory assist; PSV = pressure support ventilation; NGT = naso-gastric tube; MV = mechanical ventilation; TBI = traumatic brain injury
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Kaplan-Meier estimates of probability of unassisted breathing and live discharge from ICU from randomization to D28. In keeping with previous trials [21, 22], unassisted breathing is defined as (1) extubated with supplemental oxygen or room air, or (2) open T-tube breathing, or (3) tracheostomy mask breathing, or (4) continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ≤ 5 cm H20 without pressure support and with no return to assisted breathing or death within 48 h. Participants receiving pressure support via non-invasive ventilation or CPAP > 5 cm H2O via any medium were defined as receiving assisted ventilation. NAVA = neurally adjusted ventilatory assist; PSV = pressure support ventilation

References

    1. Sinderby CN, Navalesi P, Beck J, Skrobik Y, Comtois N, Friberg S, Gottfried SB, Lindstrom L. Neural control of mechanical ventilation in respiratory failure. Nat Med. 1999;5(12):1433–1436.
    1. Colombo DC, Cammarota G, Bergamaschi V, De Lucia M, Della Corte F, Navalesi P. Physiologic response to varying levels of pressure support and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in patients with acute respiratory failure. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34(11):2010–2018.
    1. Demoule AC, Clavel M, Rolland-Debord C, Perbet S, Terzi N, Kouatchet A, Wallet F, Roze H, Vargas F, Guerin C, Dellamonica J, Jaber S, Brochard L, Similowski T. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist as an alternative to pressure support ventilation in adults: a French multicentre randomized trial. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(11):1723–1732.
    1. Kuo NYT, Tu ML, Hung TY, Liu SF, Chung YH, Lin MC, Wu CC. A randomized clinical trial of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus conventional weaning mode in patients with COPD and prolonged mechanical ventilation. Int J Chronic Obstr. 2016;11:945–951.
    1. Terzi NP, Piquilloud L, Roze H, Mercat A, Lofaso F, Delisle S, Jolliet P, Sottiaux T, Tassaux D, Roesler J, Demoule A, Jaber S, Mancebo J, Brochard L, Richard JC. Clinical review: update on neurally adjusted ventilatory assist - report of a round-table conference. Crit Care. 2012;16(3):225.
    1. Chan A-WT, Jennifer M, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gøtzsche PC, Krleža-Jerić K, Hróbjartsson A, Mann H, Dickersin K, Berlin JA, Doré CJ, Parulekar WR, Summerskill WSM, Groves T, Schulz KF, Sox HC, Rockhold FW, Rennie D, Moher D. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Inter Med. 2013;158(3):200–207.
    1. Thabane L, Lancaster G. Improving the efficiency of trials using innovative pilot designs: the next phase in the conduct and reporting of pilot and feasibility studies. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2017;4:14.
    1. Writing Group for the PReVENT Investigators Effect of a low vs intermediate tidal volume strategy on ventilator-free days in intensive care unit patients without ARDS: a randomized clinical trial effect of low vs intermediate tidal volumes ventilation on patients without ARDS effect of low vs intermediate tidal volumes ventilation on patients without ARDS. JAMA. 2018;320(18):1872–1880.
    1. Shehabi Y, Howe BD, Bellomo R, Arabi YM, Bailey M, Bass FE, Bin Kadiman S, McArthur CJ, Murray L, Reade MC, et al. Early sedation with dexmedetomidine in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(26):2506–2517.
    1. Hadfield D, Hopkins PA, Hart N, Reid F, Finney C, Penhaligon B, Molai J, Rafferty GF, King’s college hospital ACET research group: Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus pressure support in prolonged mechanical ventilation: a randomised feasibility study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2018, 197:A2551; A2104.
    1. Hadfield D, Hopkins P, Hart N, Finney C, Penhaligon B, Molai J, Reid F, Rafferty G: ESICM LIVES 2018 : Paris, France. 20-24 October 2018. Intensive Care Med Exp 2018, 6(Suppl 2):40 (0052).
    1. Boles JMB, Bion J, Connors A, Herridge M, Marsh B, Melot C, Pearl R, Silverman H, Stanchina M, Vieillard-Baron A, Welte T. Weaning from mechanical ventilation. Eur Respir J. 2007;29(5):1033–1056.
    1. The Mental Capacity Act. In. London: HMSO; 2005.
    1. King’s College London: King’s Clinical Trials Unit Online Randomisation Service v1.2. . In. London; 2014.
    1. Hodges JLL, Lehmann EL. Estimates of location based on rank-tests. Ann Math Stat. 1963;34(2):598.
    1. Sessler CN, Gosnell MS, Grap MJ, Brophy GM, O'Neal PV, Keane KA, Tesoro EP, Elswick RK. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(10):1338–1344.
    1. Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios LP, Robson R, Thabane M, Giangregorio L, Goldsmith CH. A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:1.
    1. Schulz KFA, Altman DG, Moher D. Consort Group: CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(11):726–732.
    1. Gardner MJA, Altman DG. Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986;292(6522):746–750.
    1. Cole FL. Content analysis: process and application. Clin Nurse Spec. 1988;2(1):53–57.
    1. National Heart L, Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Clinical Trials N. Matthay MA, Brower RG, Carson S, Douglas IS, Eisner M, Hite D, Holets S, Kallet RH, et al. Randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of an aerosolized β2-agonist for treatment of acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;184(5):561–568.
    1. McAuley DF, Laffey JG, O'Kane CM, Perkins GD, Mullan B, Trinder TJ, Johnston P, Hopkins PA, Johnston AJ, McDowell C, et al. Simvastatin in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(18):1695–1703.
    1. Di Mussi RS, Spadaro S, Mirabella L, Volta CA, Serio G, Staffieri F, Dambrosio M, Cinnella G, Bruno F, Grasso S. Impact of prolonged assisted ventilation on diaphragmatic efficiency: NAVA versus PSV. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):1.
    1. Liu LX, Xia F, Yang Y, Longhini F, Navalesi P, Beck J, Sinderby C, Qiu H. Neural versus pneumatic control of pressure support in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases at different levels of positive end expiratory pressure: a physiological study. Crit Care. 2015;19:244.
    1. Berger DB, Bloechlinger S, Takala J, Sinderby C, Brander L. Heart-lung interactions during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist. Crit Care. 2014;18(5):499.
    1. Doorduin JS, Sinderby CA, Beck J, van der Hoeven JG, Heunks LM. Assisted ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: lung-distending pressure and patient-ventilator interaction. Anesthesiology. 2015;123(1):181–190.
    1. Goligher ECD, Douflé G, Fan E. Update in mechanical ventilation, sedation, and outcomes 2014. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;191(12):1367–1373.
    1. Vaschetto R, Cammarota G, Colombo D, Longhini F, Grossi F, Giovanniello A, Della Corte F, Navalesi P. Effects of propofol on patient-ventilator synchrony and interaction during pressure support ventilation and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist. Crit Care Med. 2014;42(1):74–82.
    1. Skorko A, Hadfield D, Shah A, Hopkins P. Advances in ventilation - neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) J Intensive Care Soc. 2013;14(4):317–323.
    1. Kallio MP, Peltoniemi O, Anttila E, Pokka T, Kontiokari T. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) in pediatric intensive care--a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2015;50(1):55–62.
    1. Ambuel B, Hamlett KW, Marx CM, Blumer JL. Assessing distress in pediatric intensive care environments: the COMFORT scale. J Pediatr Psychol. 1992;17(1):95–109.
    1. de la Oliva P, Schüffelmann C, Gómez-Zamora A, Villar J, Kacmarek RM. Asynchrony, neural drive, ventilatory variability and COMFORT: NAVA versus pressure support in pediatric patients. A non-randomized cross-over trial. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38(5):838–846.
    1. Piastra MDL, De Luca D, Costa R, Pizza A, De Sanctis R, Marzano L, Biasucci D, Visconti F, Conti G. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist vs pressure support ventilation in infants recovering from severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: nested study. J Crit Care. 2014;29(2):312.e1-5.
    1. De Jonghe B, Cook D, Griffith L, Appere-de-Vecchi C, Guyatt G, Theron V, Vagnerre A, Outin H. Adaptation to the Intensive Care Environment (ATICE): development and validation of a new sedation assessment instrument. Crit Care Med. 2003;31(9):2344–2354.
    1. Coisel YC, Chanques G, Jung B, Constantin JM, Capdevila X, Matecki S, Grasso S, Jaber S. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in critically ill postoperative patients: a crossover randomized study. Anesthesiology. 2010;113(4):925–935.
    1. Mauri TB, Bellani G, Confalonieri A, Bombino M, Grasselli G, Foti G, Patroniti N, Pesenti A. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) improves patient-ventilator interaction in severe ARDS patients undergoing ECMO. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183:Meeting abstract p. A1710.
    1. Moorhead KTP, Piquilloud L, Lambermont B, Roeseler J, Chiew YS, Chase JG, Revelly JP, Bialais E, Tassaux D, Laterre PF, Jolliet P, Sottiaux T, Desaive T. NAVA enhances tidal volume and diaphragmatic electro-myographic activity matching: a Range90 analysis of supply and demand. J Clin Monit Comput. 2013;27(1):61–70.
    1. Patroniti NB, Bellani G, Saccavino E, Zanella A, Grasselli G, Isgro S, Milan M, Foti G, Pesenti A. Respiratory pattern during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in acute respiratory failure patients. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38(2):230–239.
    1. Piquilloud LV, Vignaux L, Bialais E, Roeseler J, Sottiaux T, Laterre PF, Jolliet P, Tassaux D. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist improves patient-ventilator interaction. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(2):263–271.
    1. Schmidt MK, Kindler F, Cecchini J, Poitou T, Morawiec E, Persichini R, Similowski T, Demoule A. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist and proportional assist ventilation both improve patient-ventilator interaction. Crit Care. 2015;19:56.
    1. Spahija J, de Marchie M, Albert M, Bellemare P, Delisle S, Beck J, Sinderby C. Patient-ventilator interaction during pressure support ventilation and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(2):518–526.
    1. Thille AW, Cabello B, Galia F, Lyazidi A, Brochard L. Reduction of patient-ventilator asynchrony by reducing tidal volume during pressure-support ventilation. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34(8):1477–1486.
    1. de Wit MM, Miller KB, Green DA, Ostman HE, Gennings C, Epstein SK. Ineffective triggering predicts increased duration of mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(10):2740–2745.
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O'Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner