Efficacy of Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Local Injection of Pain Medication

NCT ID: NCT02314104

Last Updated: 2015-04-14

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

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

220 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2011-05-31

Study Completion Date

2013-10-31

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 determine if there is a better method of administering pain medication prior to minimally invasive gynecological surgery so that postoperative pain and/or narcotic usage may be minimized. Currently, no standard of care exists regarding the use of local pain medications in minimally invasive gynecological surgery and practices vary widely among physicians, even within the same institution.

The two methods of preemptive pain medication that this study will be looking at is the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and the local injection of pain medication at the areas of the skin incisions. TAP block is a procedure performed by a specially trained pain management anesthesiologist in which there is an injection of a local pain medication into the abdominal wall, specifically in a space where the nerves that are responsible for postoperative pain reside. This procedure blocks the ability of the nerves to sense pain and has been found to be successful in decreasing postoperative pain in a number of procedures. The local injection of pain medications at the incision sites has also been found to be beneficial in decreasing postoperative pain. However, it is not known whether one method is superior to the other in decreasing postoperative pain or if the combination of both is best.

Patients that chose to participate are randomly (by chance) assigned to one of three groups: 1) TAP block with pain medication and local injection of normal saline (water) at the incision sites 2) TAP block with normal saline and local injection of pain medication at the incision sites or 3) TAP block with pain medication and local injection of pain medication at the port sites. These procedures are performed while the patient is asleep. Patients will be asked to record their level of pain on a standardized pain scale at one hour, six hours, and twenty-four hours after the surgery. All patients are provided with standard postoperative pain medications as needed.

The hypothesis is that patients receiving both TAP block and local injection of pain medication at the port sites will have less pain postoperatively and require a smaller amount of narcotics than those that receive either the TAP block or local injection of pain medication alone.

Detailed Description

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

This is a prospective, single center, double-blinded, multi-arm parallel group study conducted at a university affiliated medical center. Study approval was obtained from the Saint Barnabas Medical Center institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Patients were randomly assigned to one of three parallel groups in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive either: treatment transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and placebo local injection, placebo TAP block and treatment local injection, or treatment TAP block and treatment local injection. This study took place at Saint Barnabas Medical Center in Livingston, New Jersey from May 2011 to October 2013. Patients were recruited from the offices of ten different gynecological surgeons in private practice. Two of the surgeons were gynecological oncologists, and the remainder were general obstetricians/gynecologists that perform minimally invasive gynecological surgery. The TAP blocks were administered by one of four anesthesiologists.

Patients were consented and enrolled in the study by blinded obstetrical and gynecological residents while the patients were in the preoperative area. Each patient was given a standardized informed consent packet detailing the study. Once a patient gave informed consent and was enrolled in the study, independent pharmacists were notified of their enrollment. The pharmacists then assigned participants to one of three possible interventions based on a computer-generated randomization list that was created by the principal investigator prior to commencement of patient enrollment. The pharmacist assigned patients into their appropriate intervention based upon what number participant the patient was in the study. The pharmacist then dispensed the study medications into identical 30 mL syringes labeled study drug and placed them in brown paper bags. The study medication to be administered via TAP block was placed in two 30 mL syringes and placed in a brown paper bag. The study medication to be used for local injection was placed in a single 30 mL syringe and placed in a separate brown paper bag. These bags were then brought to the operating room where they were to be administered. The bag containing the two syringes was given to the anesthesiologists performing the TAP block and the bag with the single syringe was handed to the scrub tech that then later distributed it to the surgeons. The patients, all healthcare providers, and data collectors were blinded as to group allocation. Additionally, both ropivacaine and normal saline are clear and indistinguishable from one another.

The interventions were administered in the operating room once the patients had been placed under general anesthesia, prior to skin incisions. The TAP blocks were administered under ultrasound guidance.

Patients were then prepped and draped for surgery. Prior to proceeding to skin incisions the surgeons administered 2 mL of local injection subcutaneously at the intended port site locations. If additional port sites were deemed necessary during the procedure study drug was administered in a similar fashion prior to those skin incisions being made.

Postoperatively all patients received a standardized analgesia regimen. Specifically, for mild pain, oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg one tablet orally every four hours; for moderate pain, oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg two tablets orally every six hours, and for severe pain, hydromorphone 1 mg every 3 hours intravenously.

Conditions

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

Pain, Postoperative

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

TRIPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators

Study Groups

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

Treatment TAP, placebo local injection

Treatment TAP block was 30 mL 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally. Placebo local injection was 2 mL of 0.9% normal saline at each port site.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

ropivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

Treatment local injection was 2 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each port site. Treatment TAP was 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally.

Placebo TAP, treatment local injection

Placebo TAP was 30 mL of 0.9% normal saline bilaterally. Treatment local injection was 2 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each port site.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

ropivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

Treatment local injection was 2 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each port site. Treatment TAP was 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally.

Treatment TAP, treatment local injection

Treatment TAP was 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally. Treatment local injection was 2 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each port site.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

ropivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

Treatment local injection was 2 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each port site. Treatment TAP was 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally.

Interventions

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

ropivacaine

Treatment local injection was 2 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each port site. Treatment TAP was 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally.

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

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

Naropin

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Female
* Undergoing gynecological robotic and/or laparoscopic surgery
* Overnight hospitalization expected

Exclusion Criteria

* Fibromyalgia
* Chronic pelvic pain
* Relevant drug allergy
* Conversion to laparotomy
* Pregnant
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

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

Liberman, Eric, D.O.

INDIV

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

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

Eric C Liberman, D.O.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

St. Barnabas Medical Center

Thad Denehy, M.D.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

St. Barnabas Medical Center

Locations

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

Saint Barnabas Medical Center

Livingston, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

References

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

Carney J, McDonnell JG, Ochana A, Bhinder R, Laffey JG. The transversus abdominis plane block provides effective postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy. Anesth Analg. 2008 Dec;107(6):2056-60. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181871313.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19020158 (View on PubMed)

El Hachem L, Small E, Chung P, Moshier EL, Friedman K, Fenske SS, Gretz HF 3rd. Randomized controlled double-blind trial of transversus abdominis plane block versus trocar site infiltration in gynecologic laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;212(2):182.e1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.049. Epub 2014 Aug 1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25088860 (View on PubMed)

Hebbard P, Fujiwara Y, Shibata Y, Royse C. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007 Aug;35(4):616-7. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18020088 (View on PubMed)

Kane SM, Garcia-Tomas V, Alejandro-Rodriguez M, Astley B, Pollard RR. Randomized trial of transversus abdominis plane block at total laparoscopic hysterectomy: effect of regional analgesia on quality of recovery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Nov;207(5):419.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.052. Epub 2012 Jun 29.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 22840413 (View on PubMed)

Rafi AN. Abdominal field block: a new approach via the lumbar triangle. Anaesthesia. 2001 Oct;56(10):1024-6. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2001.02279-40.x. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11576144 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

11-02

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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