Trial reportTrials2016
Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in patients with acute respiratory failure: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01730794 (A Comparative, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study of Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Comparative, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study of Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) vs. Conventional Lung Protective Ventilation in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated versus non-automated weaning for reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation for critically ill adults and children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist vs. Conventional Mechanical Ventilation in Adults and Children With Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in acute respiratory failure: a randomized controlled trial.Intensive care medicine · 2020Trial
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-ventilator asynchrony is a common problem in mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory failure. It is assumed that asynchronies worsen lung function and prolong the duration of mechanical ventilation (MV). Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) is a novel approach to MV based on neural respiratory center output that is able to trigger, cycle, and regulate the ventilatory cycle. We hypothesized that the use of NAVA compared to conventional lung-protective MV will result in a reduction of the duration of MV. It is further hypothesized that NAVA compared to conventional lung-protective MV will result in a decrease in the length of ICU and hospital stay, and mortality. METHODS/
designThis is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in 306 mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory failure from several etiologies. Only patients ventilated for less than 5 days, and who are expected to require prolonged MV for an additional 72 h or more and are able to breathe spontaneously, will be considered for enrollment. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated to two ventilatory arms: (1) conventional lung-protective MV (n = 153) and conventional lung-protective MV with NAVA (n = 153). Primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days, defined as days alive and free from MV at day 28 after endotracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes are total length of MV, and ICU and hospital mortality. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized clinical trial examining, on a multicenter scale, the beneficial effects of NAVA in reducing the dependency on MV of patients with acute respiratory failure.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov website ( NCT01730794 ). Registered on 15 November 2012.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.