Which airway device saves more lives? large hospital trial aims to find out
NCT ID NCT05520762
First seen Jun 25, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time
Summary
This trial compares two ways to help patients breathe during a cardiac arrest in the hospital: a supraglottic airway (a tube placed in the throat) versus endotracheal intubation (a tube placed into the windpipe). About 1,060 adults who suffer cardiac arrest while hospitalized will be randomly assigned to one method. The main goal is to see which approach leads to more days alive without a breathing machine.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.
- What this could lead to
- If it works, this could show that one airway method is better for survival and recovery after cardiac arrest.
- What could go wrong
- This is a pragmatic trial comparing existing procedures, not a new treatment. Results may not apply to all hospital settings.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for CARDIAC ARREST are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Montefiore Medical Center
RECRUITINGNew York, New York, 10467, United States
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- Spinal zaps could reboot breathing after brain injury
- Can cooling after cardiac arrest change how the body burns fuel?
- Spinal cord zap may help people breathe again after neck injury
- Double shocks: could two defibrillators save more cardiac arrest patients?
- Could a smarter breathing machine boost survival after cardiac arrest?
- Balloon in the aorta could boost CPR success in cardiac arrest