A Comparison of Bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine for Spinal Anesthesia

NCT ID: NCT00845962

Last Updated: 2010-01-27

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

106 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2009-02-28

Study Completion Date

2009-07-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacity and the readiness for discharge between two local anesthetics, bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine, used for spinal anesthesia.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Many surgeries are performed under spinal anesthesia, including ambulatory surgeries. The standard agent used for spinal anesthesia is called bupivacaine. It's safe and effective, but has a major disadvantage. It has a long duration of action (up to 4 hours), witch can prolong unnecessarily the patient's stay in the recovery room and in hospital.

Another local anesthetic available for spinal anesthesia is 2-chloroprocaine. It has been used since many years, but some serious cases of toxicity in the 80's led to an interruption of its utilization. Those cases have been proven to be associated with the preservative agent (bisulfite) that was added and to the low pH (\<3) of the drug.

Since then, 2-chloroprocaine exists in a preservative-free formulation and has been used in thousands of patients worldwide, without any problem. The major advantage of 2-chloroprocaine is its shorter duration of action, permitting a faster recovery from anesthesia, and also permitting a faster discharge from hospital (in a context of ambulatory surgery)

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacity and the readiness for discharge (from the recovery room, and from hospital) between two local anesthetics, bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine, used for spinal anesthesia in elective ambulatory surgeries.

Patients, after consenting for the study, will be randomly assigned to the following groups:

* spinal anesthesia with chloroprocaine 2% 40 mg (2 mL)
* spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine 0,75% 7,5 mg (1 mL)

An "executant anesthesiologist" will be responsible for performing the spinal anesthesia, with a 25 gauge Sprotte needle, at the level L2L3, L3L4 or L4L5. The "responsible anesthesiologist" will only take charge of the patient after the technique, so he stays double-blinded to the local anesthetic used. During surgery, if the patient feels pain, he may receive iv fentanyl, 25-100 µg at every 5 minutes.

Measures will start immediately after the spinal block:

Evaluation of the sensory block height (with ice):

* Every 3 minutes for 15 minutes (time to obtain a block a about T10)
* Every 5 minutes for 45 minutes (surgery)
* Every 10 minutes for 60 minutes, then every 15 minutes until the block regresses to S2 (recovery room and ambulatory surgery unit)

Evaluation of the motor block (using the Bromage scale):

* Every 3 minutes for 15 minutes
* At the beginning and at the end of the surgery
* After the surgery:every 10 minutes for 60 minutes, then every 15 minutes until the block regresses to S2 (recovery room and ambulatory surgery unit)

(Bromage scale: full flexion of feet and knee = 0; able to move knee and feet, not hip = 1; able to move feet only = 2; unable to move feet or knee = 3)

When the block will have regressed to S2, the patient will be asked to urinate. If he isn't able to urinate, this demand will be repeated every 15 minutes. (not applicable if the patient goes home with a urinary catheter)

In the context of an ambulatory surgery, the patient will go home when he will meet the usual discharge criteria. All patients will receive a phone call from the research team the day after surgery, and 7 days later, to assess their satisfaction towards the analgesia and to inquire about potential complications of the spinal anesthesia.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Spinal Anesthesia

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Chloroprocaine

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

chloroprocaine

Intervention Type DRUG

spinal administration of chloroprocaine 2%, 40 mg (2 mL)

Bupivacaine

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

bupivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

spinal administration of bupivacaine 0,75% 7,5 mg (1 mL)

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

chloroprocaine

spinal administration of chloroprocaine 2%, 40 mg (2 mL)

Intervention Type DRUG

bupivacaine

spinal administration of bupivacaine 0,75% 7,5 mg (1 mL)

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Nesacaine Marcaine

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* patients aged 18 years and older
* urologic elective ambulatory procedure. For example:cystoscopy, circumcision,transurethral bladder tumor resection, varicocele and hydrocele surgery
* gynecologic elective ambulatory procedure. For example: hysteroscopy, vulvar ou vaginal biopsy
* general surgery elective ambulatory procedure. For example:inguinal herniorraphy, short ano-rectal procedure

Exclusion Criteria

* INR \> 1,3
* platelet \< 75 000
* concomitant drugs: clopidogrel (last dose \< 7 days), iv heparin, low molecular weight heparin (last dose \< 24 hours)
* neurologic disease: spinal stenosis, symptomatic lumbar herniated disc, multiple sclerosis
* liquid restriction (cardiac or renal insufficiency)
* allergy or intolerance to chloroprocaine, bupivacaine or PABA
* atypical plasma cholinesterase or deficiency
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM)

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Université de Montréal

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Centre hospitalier de l'université de Montréal (CHUM) / University of Montreal

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Jean-Denis Roy, MD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

St-Luc hospital, CHUM, University of Montreal

Luc Massicotte, MD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

St-Luc Hospital, CHUM, University of Montreal

Marie-Andrée Lacasse, MD, resident

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

St-Luc hospital, CHUM, University of Montreal

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

St-Luc Hospital CHUM

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Kouri ME, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: a comparison with lidocaine in volunteers. Anesth Analg. 2004 Jan;98(1):75-80. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000093228.61443.EE.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14693590 (View on PubMed)

Smith KN, Kopacz DJ, McDonald SB. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: a dose-ranging study and the effect of added epinephrine. Anesth Analg. 2004 Jan;98(1):81-88. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000093361.48458.6E.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14693591 (View on PubMed)

Vath JS, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: the effect of added fentanyl. Anesth Analg. 2004 Jan;98(1):89-94. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000093360.02058.ED.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14693593 (View on PubMed)

Warren DT, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: the effect of added dextrose. Anesth Analg. 2004 Jan;98(1):95-101. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000093362.95618.89.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14693594 (View on PubMed)

Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: minimum effective dose. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2005 Jan-Feb;30(1):36-42. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2004.09.008.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15690266 (View on PubMed)

Davis BR, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: the effect of added clonidine. Anesth Analg. 2005 Feb;100(2):559-565. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000143381.30409.62.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15673894 (View on PubMed)

Yoos JR, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: a comparison with small-dose bupivacaine in volunteers. Anesth Analg. 2005 Feb;100(2):566-572. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000143356.17013.A1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15673895 (View on PubMed)

Gonter AF, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: a comparison with procaine in volunteers. Anesth Analg. 2005 Feb;100(2):573-579. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000143380.36298.4A.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15673896 (View on PubMed)

Yoos JR, Kopacz DJ. Spinal 2-chloroprocaine for surgery: an initial 10-month experience. Anesth Analg. 2005 Feb;100(2):553-558. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000130397.38849.4A.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15673893 (View on PubMed)

Casati A, Danelli G, Berti M, Fioro A, Fanelli A, Benassi C, Petronella G, Fanelli G. Intrathecal 2-chloroprocaine for lower limb outpatient surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, clinical evaluation. Anesth Analg. 2006 Jul;103(1):234-8, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000221441.44387.82.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16790659 (View on PubMed)

Casati A, Fanelli G, Danelli G, Berti M, Ghisi D, Brivio M, Putzu M, Barbagallo A. Spinal anesthesia with lidocaine or preservative-free 2-chlorprocaine for outpatient knee arthroscopy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison. Anesth Analg. 2007 Apr;104(4):959-64. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000258766.73612.d8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17377114 (View on PubMed)

Lacasse MA, Roy JD, Forget J, Vandenbroucke F, Seal RF, Beaulieu D, McCormack M, Massicotte L. Comparison of bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine for spinal anesthesia for outpatient surgery: a double-blind randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2011 Apr;58(4):384-91. doi: 10.1007/s12630-010-9450-x. Epub 2011 Jan 4.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 21203878 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

118046

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: secondary_id

HD07.007

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Local Anesthesia for Facial Fractures
NCT06429501 RECRUITING PHASE2