Evaluation of a Standard Epidural Catheter During Clinical Practice
NCT ID: NCT00396903
Last Updated: 2015-04-08
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
100 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2003-04-30
2005-11-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Reported incidences for paraesthesia vary widely between about 0.2% and 50% in different articles, depending on the catheter (catheter material, soft-tipped or firm-tipped catheter), the applied technique (lumbar or thoracic epidural anesthesia, depth of catheter insertion), the approach (midline or paramedian) and the included patients (obstetrical or non-obstetrical). Furthermore, the inconsistent definition of "paraesthesia" makes it difficult to compare the results of different studies. Paraesthesia are not supposed to lead to permanent neurological sequelea, but are unpleasant and perturbing sensations for the patient.
For inadvertent venous cannulation during epidural catheter placement, incidences between 1% and 14% have been reported. As for the paraesthesia rate, catheter material, technique, approach and included patients are determinants for the incidence of vessel puncture.
Main objective of this study is to determine the incidence of paraesthesia with this catheter.
Secondary objectives are to record
* the frequency of inadvertent venous cannulation
* difficulties involved in insertion and removal of the catheter
* data on additional complications
* data for the evaluation of handling characteristics
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Complications and Adverse Effects in Continuous Peripheral Regional Anesthesia
NCT00251654
Thoracic Paravertebral Catheters
NCT01009398
Duration of Sciatic Nerve Block After Injection of Local Anesthetic In or Around the Nerve
NCT01981291
Nylon Versus Polyurethane Epidural Catheters In Patients Undergoing Major Orthopedic Surgery
NCT05168943
Detection of Intravascular Penetration During Cervical Transforaminal Epidural Block
NCT03040648
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
This study is a prospective, uncontrolled, open, non-randomised study ("Observational Study") with a CE-certified medical device.
Patients
Information and consent Information of the procedure and oral consent of epidural anaesthesia for the surgery is obtained as usual. Oral consent for data collection has to be obtained. No randomisation or blinding is performed and no non-standard procedures are necessary.
Inclusion criteria 100 patients scheduled for Epidural Anaesthesia will be included in this study. Eligible patients are ASA class I-III, between 18 and 75 years of age and are scheduled for EA, with or without general anaesthesia.
Exclusion criteria Anamnestic exclusion criteria are all contraindications for epidural anaesthesia (e.g. neurological deficit, skin infection of the puncture site, diseases leading to neurological impairment such as diabetes, coagulation impairment). Non-competent and non-cooperative patients as well as pregnant and breast-feeding women are also to be excluded. Same applies for patients with medicament- and drug abuse or problems in communication or those participating in parallel in another clinical study with experimental drugs or devices.
Randomisation and Blinding No randomization is required. An independent observer who is not performing the epidural will record occurrence, incidence and intensity of paraesthesia.
Definition of the main and the secondary criteria
Main criteria
\- Frequency of paraesthesia during catheter insertion
Secondary criteria
* Frequency of inadvertent venous cannulation (aspiration of blood)
* Intensity of paraesthesia (VAS)
* description: - pain
* electric shock
* burning sensation
* shooting effect
* motor reactions (right/left)
* discomfort
* others
* Frequency and kind of difficulties during insertion of the catheter (rating of "easiness of insertion": 0 = no resistance, 1 = minor difficulties, 2 = serious difficulties, 3 = impossible)
* Facultative: Documentation of paraesthesia/difficulties during catheter removal at 48 hours after surgery (or earlier, if appropriate)
Concomitant parameters
* Patient data (age, height, weight, sex, diagnosis, kind of intervention, ASA class, relevant co-diagnosis, relevant co-medication)
* Epidural anaesthesia and -analgesia related data
• Data that relate to the description of the puncture process and method chosen in case of difficulties during puncture, catheter insertion and removal
* Level of sensory blockade
* Indwelling time of epidural catheter by recording the time of insertion
* Dose/kind of anaesthetic used for epidural anaesthesia, type of general anaesthesia if relevant
* Kind of analgesia done by epidural catheter
* Adequacy of epidural anaesthesia (yes / no)
* Further complications/side effects related to epidural anaesthesia/analgesia (i.e. dural puncture, haematoma, etc)
* Judgement of the anaesthesiologist concerning handling features (0 = no resistance, 1 = minor difficulties, 2 = serious difficulties)
* Catheter damages
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
PROSPECTIVE
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
catheter
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* ASA class I-III
* between 18 and 75
Exclusion Criteria
* Non-competent and non-cooperative
* pregnant and breast-feeding women
* medicament- and drug abuse or problems in communication
* participating in parallel in another clinical study with experimental drugs or devices
18 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Maastricht University Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Marco Marcus, MD, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Maastricht University Medical Center
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University Hospital Maastricht
Maastricht, , Netherlands
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Bouman EA, Gramke HF, Wetzel N, Vanderbroeck TH, Bruinsma R, Theunissen M, Kerkkamp HE, Marcus MA. Evaluation of two different epidural catheters in clinical practice. narrowing down the incidence of paresthesia! Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2007;58(2):101-5.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
O-H-0403
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.