Respiratory failure & ventilation
Closed-loop versus conventional synchronization in spontaneously breathing adult patients– a randomized controlled study
Authors' conclusion
Closed-loop synchronization using IS+ significantly improved patient-ventilator interaction and comfort during NIV in adults with acute respiratory failure with no adverse events observed during the study period.
Study context
- Population
- Spontaneously breathing adults receiving NIV for ARF, two tertiary hospitals, March 2024–May 2025
- Comparison
- IS+ vs Conventional synchronization
- Primary endpoint
- Asynchrony Index (AI): asynchronous events per 100 breaths
Methodological detailsmulticentre, prospective, single-blind, crossover
- Multicentre
- Prospective
- Single-blind
- Crossover
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Total AI
P < 0.001
Further findings
| Outcome | IS+ | Conventional synchronization | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Major asynchrony index | 8.3 (range 4.5–16.4) | 17.6 (range 7.5–25.6) | P < 0.001 |
| Minor asynchrony index | 3.4 (range 1.5–5.4) | 7.6 (range 3.4–13.6) | P < 0.001 |
| Dyspnea score | 3 ± 1 | 5 ± 1 | P = 0.0001 |
Safety
- No adverse events observed during the study period
Original publication
Closed-loop versus conventional synchronization in spontaneously breathing adult patients– a randomized controlled study. J Crit Care. Published 14 August 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →