Flexible Tip Bougie Vs Tube with Stylet for Intubation with a Videolaryngoscopy in ICU (VIDEOL-FLEXTIP)
VIFLEXTIPICU
A Randomized Comparison Between the Flexible Tip Bougie Vs Tube with Stylet for First-attempt Intubation Success with a Videolaryngoscopy in ICU Patients
1 other identifier
interventional
140
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Tracheal intubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with high incidence of difficult intubation and complications . Videolaryngoscopes (VLs) devices have been proposed to improve airway management, and the use of VLs are recommended as first-line or after a first-attempt failure using direct laryngoscopy in ICU airway management algorithms. Although two meta-analysis showed that videolaryngoscopy improves visualization of the glottis and the first-attempt success, other two meta-analysis reported that videolaryngoscopy didn´t improve first-attempt success rate. The reason may be that although VLs improve glottic visualization, on many occasions it may not be accompanied by intubation at the first attempt, because the endotracheal tube has to pass a sharp angle to enter the trachea. To avoid this limitation, a new flexible tip bougie is designed to flexibly navigate the distal tip and help facilitate precise insertion of the endotracheal tube in the trachea .
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started May 2022
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
May 17, 2022
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
June 17, 2022
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 23, 2022
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 31, 2024
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
May 31, 2024
CompletedOctober 22, 2024
October 1, 2024
2 years
June 17, 2022
October 18, 2024
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Difference in the first attempt success rate (percentage)
To compare the difference in the first attempt success rate (percentage) of different techniques for tracheal intubation.
during intubation
Secondary Outcomes (6)
Difference in the overall success rate (percentage)
during intubation
Difference in the incidence of complications related to intubation
Participants will be followed from the beginning of the intervention to 30 minutes after the intervention
Difficulty of intubation
during intubation
Modified Cormack-Lehane grade of glottic view
during intubation
Additional airway equipment
during intubation
- +1 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Endotracheal Tube with Stylet
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients randomised to Endotracheal Tube with Stylet will be intubated with a Videolaryngoscopy and with a endotracheal tube + stylet.
Flexible Tip Bougie
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients randomised to Flexible Tip Bougie will be intubated with a Videolaryngoscopy and with a Flexible Tip Bougie.
Interventions
Patients randomised to Flexible Tip Bougie will be intubated with a Videolaryngoscopy and with a Flexible Tip Bougie.
Patients randomised to Endotracheal Tube with Stylet will be intubated with a Videolaryngoscopy and with a endotracheal tube + stylet.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Patients admitted in the intensive care unit (ICU) and require mechanical ventilation through a tracheal tube.
- Adult (age ≥ 18 years)
You may not qualify if:
- Refusal of study participation or to pursue the study by the patient
- Pregnancy
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
University Clinical Hospital of Santiago de Compostela
Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, 15866, Spain
Related Publications (4)
Ruetzler K, Smereka J, Abelairas-Gomez C, Frass M, Dabrowski M, Bialka S, Misiolek H, Plusa T, Robak O, Aniolek O, Ladny JR, Gorczyca D, Ahuja S, Szarpak L. Comparison of the new flexible tip bougie catheter and standard bougie stylet for tracheal intubation by anesthesiologists in different difficult airway scenarios: a randomized crossover trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020 Apr 20;20(1):90. doi: 10.1186/s12871-020-01009-7.
PMID: 32312225BACKGROUNDDriver BE, Prekker ME, Klein LR, Reardon RF, Miner JR, Fagerstrom ET, Cleghorn MR, McGill JW, Cole JB. Effect of Use of a Bougie vs Endotracheal Tube and Stylet on First-Attempt Intubation Success Among Patients With Difficult Airways Undergoing Emergency Intubation: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2018 Jun 5;319(21):2179-2189. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.6496.
PMID: 29800096BACKGROUNDDriver BE, Semler MW, Self WH, Ginde AA, Trent SA, Gandotra S, Smith LM, Page DB, Vonderhaar DJ, West JR, Joffe AM, Mitchell SH, Doerschug KC, Hughes CG, High K, Landsperger JS, Jackson KE, Howell MP, Robison SW, Gaillard JP, Whitson MR, Barnes CM, Latimer AJ, Koppurapu VS, Alvis BD, Russell DW, Gibbs KW, Wang L, Lindsell CJ, Janz DR, Rice TW, Prekker ME, Casey JD; BOUGIE Investigators and the Pragmatic Critical Care Research Group. Effect of Use of a Bougie vs Endotracheal Tube With Stylet on Successful Intubation on the First Attempt Among Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Tracheal Intubation: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2021 Dec 28;326(24):2488-2497. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.22002.
PMID: 34879143BACKGROUNDJaber S, Rolle A, Godet T, Terzi N, Riu B, Asfar P, Bourenne J, Ramin S, Lemiale V, Quenot JP, Guitton C, Prudhomme E, Quemeneur C, Blondonnet R, Biais M, Muller L, Ouattara A, Ferrandiere M, Saint-Leger P, Rimmele T, Pottecher J, Chanques G, Belafia F, Chauveton C, Huguet H, Asehnoune K, Futier E, Azoulay E, Molinari N, De Jong A; STYLETO trial group. Effect of the use of an endotracheal tube and stylet versus an endotracheal tube alone on first-attempt intubation success: a multicentre, randomised clinical trial in 999 patients. Intensive Care Med. 2021 Jun;47(6):653-664. doi: 10.1007/s00134-021-06417-y. Epub 2021 May 25.
PMID: 34032882BACKGROUND
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Manuel Taboada Muñiz, Ph.D.
University Clinical Hospital of Santiago de Compostela
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Purpose
- SUPPORTIVE CARE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
June 17, 2022
First Posted
June 23, 2022
Study Start
May 17, 2022
Primary Completion
May 31, 2024
Study Completion
May 31, 2024
Last Updated
October 22, 2024
Record last verified: 2024-10
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will share
- Shared Documents
- STUDY PROTOCOL, SAP, CSR
- Time Frame
- When available: With publication
- Access Criteria
- Researchers whose proposed use of the data has been approved Types of analyses: For scientific purpose
Data types: Deidentified participant data How to access data: Requests must be sent to manutabo@yahoo.es When available: With publication Additional Information Who can access the data: Researchers whose proposed use of the data has been approved T ypes of analyses: For scientific purpose Mechanisms of data availability: With investigator support