Uncuffed Endotracheal Tube vs. no Endotracheal Tube
Not Applicable
Not yet recruiting
- Conditions
- Multiple Pulmonary Diseases
- Registration Number
- NCT06799455
- Lead Sponsor
- University of Minnesota
- Brief Summary
This is a comparison of uncuffed endotracheal tube (UCETT) vs. no endotracheal tube (ETT) in endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) procedure under moderate sedation in terms of procedure tolerance, duration of the procedure, desaturation, amount of sedation medication usage.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- NOT_YET_RECRUITING
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 200
Inclusion Criteria
- Any patient that is scheduled for EBUS-TBNA procedure
Exclusion Criteria
- Those who are not safe to receive moderate sedation or flexible bronchoscopy
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Desaturation During the procedure Whether a patient will experience any desaturation
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Related Research Topics
Explore scientific publications, clinical data analysis, treatment approaches, and expert-compiled information related to the mechanisms and outcomes of this trial. Click any topic for comprehensive research insights.
How does UCETT impact airway protection mechanisms during EBUS-TBNA under moderate sedation compared to no ETT?
What is the comparative effectiveness of UCETT versus standard airway management in reducing desaturation during EBUS-TBNA?
Are there biomarkers predicting which pulmonary disease patients benefit most from UCETT during EBUS-TBNA?
What are the adverse event profiles of UCETT versus no ETT in EBUS-TBNA under moderate sedation?
How does UCETT compare to other airway devices in EBUS-TBNA procedural outcomes and sedation requirements?