Comparing Bupivacaine, Lidocaine, and a Combination of Bupivacaine and Lidocaine for Labor Epidural Activation

NCT ID: NCT03103100

Last Updated: 2020-08-31

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

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

75 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2015-10-08

Study Completion Date

2019-09-09

Brief Summary

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

This study will compare and determine the most ideal local anesthetic (LA) solution to activate a labor epidural: lidocaine, bupivacaine, or a combination of bupivacaine plus lidocaine.

Detailed Description

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

The most common and effective method for controlling labor pains is a local anesthetic (LA) infusion through a lumbar epidural. To achieve adequate pain control during the first stage of labor - onset of contractions to complete cervical dilation - nerve fibers up to the T10 dermatome must be anesthetized. When a patient is in active labor and an epidural catheter is placed, the anesthesiologist must activate the epidural by administering LA through the epidural to promote spread of the LA in the epidural space to anesthetize the nerve fibers involved in the conduction of labor pains. The ideal LA to achieve this goal is one that would allow for the fastest onset to achieve quick pain relief with the fewest side effects.

Two commonly used LA to provide labor analgesia are bupivacaine and lidocaine. When low concentrations - 0.25% bupivacaine and 1% lidocaine - are used for labor analgesia, both of these LA can be administered safely with very little concern of major adverse effects associated with LA toxicity. Given that there is limited and conflicting evidence for the usefulness of the bupivacaine and lidocaine mixture especially as it relates to labor epidural activation, we hope to readdress these questions in an effort to determine whether or not the LA combination offers any distinct advantage over the individual LA. The investigators intend to determine the time it takes to achieve an adequate level (T10) for labor analgesia, the total spread of local anesthetic, and the degree of motor block as these factors will be important in determining the most optimal LA solution to activate a labor epidural. With the results from this study, the investigators hope to recommend a LA solution that will allow for the fastest pain relief in the laboring mother with the fewest side effects.

Conditions

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

Labor Pain

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

PREVENTION

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.

1% Lidocaine

Patients randomized into the lidocaine group will receive 10 mL of 1% lidocaine

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

1% Lidocaine

Intervention Type DRUG

10 mL of 1% lidocaine

0.25% Bupivacaine

Patients randomized into the bupivacaine group will receive 10 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

0.25% Bupivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

10 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine

Bupivacaine plus Lidocaine

Patients randomized into the bupivacaine group will receive 5 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine and 5 mL of 1% lidocaine.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Bupivacaine plus Lidocaine

Intervention Type DRUG

5 mL of 1% lidocaine and 5 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine

Interventions

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

1% Lidocaine

10 mL of 1% lidocaine

Intervention Type DRUG

0.25% Bupivacaine

10 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

Bupivacaine plus Lidocaine

5 mL of 1% lidocaine and 5 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

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

Lidoderm, Xylocaine, Recticare, Anecream, Solarcaine, Anestacon, Cutiecaine, Lidocoll, Marcaine and Sensorcaine Lidoderm, Xylocaine, Recticare, Anecream, Lmx4, Akten, Marcaine and Sensorcaine

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Pregnant patients over the age of 19 who are scheduled for an induction of labor and request an epidural are eligible for the study

Exclusion Criteria

* age \<19
* allergy to the drug or drug class
* preexisting neuropathy
* history of back pain prior to pregnancy or history of back surgery
* history of chronic opioid use
* history of hypertension or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy
* congenital or acquired cardiac disease
* contraindication to epidural placement (patient refusal, severe coagulopathy, infection at site of epidural needle insertion, severe hypovolemia)
Minimum Eligible Age

19 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

60 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

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

University of Alabama at Birmingham

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Mark Powell

Assistant Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Mark F Powell, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Locations

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

UAB Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine

Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

Provided Documents

Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.

Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan

View Document

Other Identifiers

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

F140903008

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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