Conventional Intubation Versus VivaSight™-SL
VivaITN
Prospective, Randomized Study in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Endotracheal Intubation: Comparison Between a Conventional Approach and Video Assisted Intubation by the VivaSight™-SL Tube
1 other identifier
interventional
54
1 country
1
Brief Summary
It has been shown that videolaryngoscopy may be superior to direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in intensive care. Recently, an endotracheal tube with an integrated camera at its tip has been introduced (VivaSight-SL) allowing for direct visual confirmation of the tube's passage through the vocal cords during intubation. Patients who are requiring urgent or endotracheal intubation in intensive care are randomized to receive either a conventional intubation with direct laryngoscopy or to receive intubation with the VivaSight-SL-Tube. Primary outcome measures are first attempt success rate and number of attempts to successful intubation.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable
Started Apr 2016
Typical duration for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
April 1, 2016
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
June 13, 2016
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
July 19, 2016
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
January 12, 2018
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
January 12, 2018
CompletedJanuary 23, 2018
January 1, 2018
1.8 years
June 13, 2016
January 19, 2018
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
first attempt success rate
after first attempt of intubation
day 1
total number of attempts to successful intubation
after successful intubation
day 1
Secondary Outcomes (7)
average number of attempts for intubation
day 1
time to successful intubation
day 1
time to successful intubation with one attempt
day 1
vomiting or aspiration during intubation
day 1
accidental esophageal intubation
day 1
- +2 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
VivaSight intubation
EXPERIMENTALPatients are intubated with the VivaSight-SL endotracheal tube
conventional intubation
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients are intubated with a conventional endotracheal tube
Interventions
patients are intubated with an endotracheal tube with an integrated camera
patients are intubated with a conventional endotracheal tube
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Patients receiving urgent or elective endotracheal intubation in the Dept. of Intensive Care Medicine.
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Informed consent
You may not qualify if:
- Age \< 18 years
- No consent
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
Hamburg, Hamburg, 20246, Germany
Related Publications (7)
Braune S, Kluge S. [Airway management]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2014 Oct;139(40):2003-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1387247. Epub 2014 Sep 25. No abstract available. German.
PMID: 25254395BACKGROUNDPothmann W, Kluge S. [Endotracheal intubation]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2010 May;135(3):94-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1244824. Epub 2010 Jan 14. No abstract available. German.
PMID: 20077384BACKGROUNDMosier JM, Whitmore SP, Bloom JW, Snyder LS, Graham LA, Carr GE, Sakles JC. Video laryngoscopy improves intubation success and reduces esophageal intubations compared to direct laryngoscopy in the medical intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2013 Oct 14;17(5):R237. doi: 10.1186/cc13061.
PMID: 24125064BACKGROUNDSilverberg MJ, Li N, Acquah SO, Kory PD. Comparison of video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy during urgent endotracheal intubation: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2015 Mar;43(3):636-41. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000751.
PMID: 25479112BACKGROUNDHuitink JM, Koopman EM, Bouwman RA, Craenen A, Verwoert M, Krage R, Visser IE, Erwteman M, van Groeningen D, Tijink R, Schauer A. Tracheal intubation with a camera embedded in the tube tip (Vivasight() ). Anaesthesia. 2013 Jan;68(1):74-8. doi: 10.1111/anae.12065. Epub 2012 Nov 5.
PMID: 23121322BACKGROUNDKurowski A, Szarpak L, Truszewski Z, Czyzewski L. Can the ETView VivaSight SL Rival Conventional Intubation Using the Macintosh Laryngoscope During Adult Resuscitation by Novice Physicians?: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 May;94(21):e850. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000850.
PMID: 26020389BACKGROUNDGrensemann J, Eichler L, Wang N, Jarczak D, Simon M, Kluge S. Endotracheal tube-mounted camera-assisted intubation versus conventional intubation in intensive care: a prospective, randomised trial (VivaITN). Crit Care. 2018 Sep 22;22(1):235. doi: 10.1186/s13054-018-2152-4.
PMID: 30241488DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Stefan Kluge, MD, PhD
Head of Dept. of Intensive Care Medicine
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
June 13, 2016
First Posted
July 19, 2016
Study Start
April 1, 2016
Primary Completion
January 12, 2018
Study Completion
January 12, 2018
Last Updated
January 23, 2018
Record last verified: 2018-01
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share