Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Can a different suctioning order cut pneumonia risk in ventilated patients?

NCT ID NCT01807884

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed This study
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Sep 17, 2026 · Last updated Sep 18, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

Researchers compare two ways of clearing secretions from the mouth and windpipe in patients on breathing machines. One routine adds subglottic suctioning in a specific sequence; the other uses standard oral suction and mouth care. The trial measures a marker of fluid leaking into the lungs to see if the optimized routine lowers that risk.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
optimized oral and tracheal suctioning procedure using a subglottic drainage device
What this could lead to
If the optimized routine lowers microaspiration, it could inform a simple, low-cost way to reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care.
What could go wrong
This is a small pilot trial with 24 patients, so it may not show a clear difference or predict results in a larger, more diverse group. The amylase ratio is a surrogate marker, not a direct measure of pneumonia.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Phase

Not a phased trial

Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.

Participants

24 people

The number who actually took part.

Started

Nov 2014

Finished

Mar 2016

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Ages

18 years and older

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Not accepted

This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: * Intubated with a subglottic secretion drainage device * ventilated more than 48 hours * patients yielding a significant tracheal suctioning volume (on a semi-qualitative evaluation: ≥ ++ on a scale consisting of 0,+,++,+++) Exclusion Criteria: * paralysed patients * patients with Ramsay 1, 2 * patients breathing spontaneously * patients less than 18 years old * patients in a moribund state * contra-indication for suctioning procedure (risk of haemorrhage, bronchospasm, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome with P/F \< 100, malformation or tracheal fistula) * bronchiectasis, cystic fibrosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease * patients necessitating a closed-suctioning device (prevention of respiratory multiresistant bacteria transmission, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome with P/F ratio \< 100) * pregnant women

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Aspiration are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • Hospital Pellegrin

    Bordeaux, Gironde, 33000, France

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.