Epidural Waveform Analysis for Thoracic Epidural Blocks

NCT ID: NCT03603574

Last Updated: 2019-02-06

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

120 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-07-30

Study Completion Date

2019-02-02

Brief Summary

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

Epidural waveform analysis (EWA) provides a simple confirmatory adjunct for loss-of-resistance (LOR): when the needle/catheter tip is correctly positioned inside the epidural space, pressure measurement results in a pulsatile waveform. Epidural waveform analysis can be carried out through the tip of the needle or the catheter. In this randomized trial, the objective is to compare epidural waveform analysis through the needle (EWA-N) and through the catheter (EWA-C) for thoracic epidural blocks.

Detailed Description

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

The epidural space is most commonly identified with loss-of-resistance (LOR). Though sensitive Epidural waveform analysis (EWA) provides a simple confirmatory adjunct for LOR. When the needle (or catheter) is correctly positioned inside the epidural space, pressure measurement at its tip results in a pulsatile waveform synchronized with arterial pulsations Currently, there exist two different methods for EWA. Since local anesthetic (LA) is administered through the catheter, pressure transduction through its tip ensures that it is properly positioned inside the epidural space prior to LA injection. Alternately, EWA can be performed through the needle prior to blind advancement of the epidural catheter.

Thus, in this randomized trial, the aim is to compare epidural waveform analysis through the needle (EWA-N) and through the catheter (EWA-C) for thoracic epidural blocks. The hypothesis is that, compared to EWA-C, EWA-N will result in a shorter performance time.

Conditions

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

Surgical Procedure, Unspecified

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

Randomized trial
Primary Study Purpose

OTHER

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors
The outcome assessment will not be present during the performance of the epidural block and waveform analysis.

Study Groups

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

EWA through the needle

EWA through the needle group, 5 mL of normal saline are injected through the epidural needle after the occurrence of LOR. The needle is subsequently connected to the pressure transducer (leveled with the heart) via the sterile, rigid extension tubing. A satisfactory endpoint is defined as the presence of waveforms synchronized with arterial pulsations.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

EWA through the needle

Intervention Type DEVICE

In the EWA-N group, 5 mL of normal saline are injected through the epidural needle after the occurrence of loss-of-resistance (LOR). The needle is connected to the pressure transducer. A satisfactory endpoint is defined as the presence of waveforms synchronized with arterial pulsations. In the absence of pulsatile waveforms, the operator injects an additional 2.5 mL-bolus of normal saline through the epidural needle and reconnects the latter to the pressure transducer. If no waveforms are detected after the second injection, the operator removes the needle and reattempts the epidural block at a different intervertebral level. A maximum of 3 levels is permitted: if waveforms are still absent at the third level, the operator simply accepts LOR as the technical endpoint.

EWA through the catheter

EWA through the catheter group, the epidural catheter is advanced 5 cm beyond the needle tip after the occurrence of LOR. Subsequently, the operator injects 5 mL of normal saline through the catheter and the latter is connected to the pressure transducer via the sterile, rigid extension tubing. A satisfactory endpoint is defined as the presence of waveforms synchronized with arterial pulsations.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

EWA through the catheter

Intervention Type DEVICE

In the EWA-C group, the epidural catheter is advanced 5 cm beyond the needle tip after the occurrence of LOR. Subsequently, the operator injects 5 mL of normal saline through the catheter and the latter is connected to the pressure transducer via the sterile, rigid extension tubing. A satisfactory endpoint is defined as the presence of waveforms. In the absence of pulsatile waveforms, the operator injects an additional 2.5 mL-bolus of saline through the catheter and reconnects the latter to the pressure transducer. If no waveforms are detected after the second injection are still absent at the third level, the operator simply accepts this position for catheter placement (intent-to-treat analysis).

Interventions

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

EWA through the needle

In the EWA-N group, 5 mL of normal saline are injected through the epidural needle after the occurrence of loss-of-resistance (LOR). The needle is connected to the pressure transducer. A satisfactory endpoint is defined as the presence of waveforms synchronized with arterial pulsations. In the absence of pulsatile waveforms, the operator injects an additional 2.5 mL-bolus of normal saline through the epidural needle and reconnects the latter to the pressure transducer. If no waveforms are detected after the second injection, the operator removes the needle and reattempts the epidural block at a different intervertebral level. A maximum of 3 levels is permitted: if waveforms are still absent at the third level, the operator simply accepts LOR as the technical endpoint.

Intervention Type DEVICE

EWA through the catheter

In the EWA-C group, the epidural catheter is advanced 5 cm beyond the needle tip after the occurrence of LOR. Subsequently, the operator injects 5 mL of normal saline through the catheter and the latter is connected to the pressure transducer via the sterile, rigid extension tubing. A satisfactory endpoint is defined as the presence of waveforms. In the absence of pulsatile waveforms, the operator injects an additional 2.5 mL-bolus of saline through the catheter and reconnects the latter to the pressure transducer. If no waveforms are detected after the second injection are still absent at the third level, the operator simply accepts this position for catheter placement (intent-to-treat analysis).

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* age between 18 and 80 years
* American Society of Anesthesiologists classification 1-3
* body mass index between 20 and 35

Exclusion Criteria

* adults who are unable to give their own consent
* coagulopathy
* renal failure
* hepatic failure
* allergy to local anesthetic
* pregnancy
* prior surgery in the thoracic spine
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

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

Ramathibodi Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Chile

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

McGill University Health Centre/Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

De Tran

Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

De Q Tran, MD, FRCPC

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

McGill University Health Centre/Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre

Locations

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

Hospital ClĂ­nico Universidad de Chile

Santiago, RM, Chile

Site Status

Ramathibodi Hospital

Bangkok, , Thailand

Site Status

Countries

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

Chile Thailand

References

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

Tran DQ, Gonzalez AP, Bernucci F, Finlayson RJ. Confirmation of loss-of-resistance for epidural analgesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2015 Mar-Apr;40(2):166-73. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000217. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25642911 (View on PubMed)

Sharrock NE. Recordings of, and an anatomical explanation for, false positive loss of resistance during lumbar extradural analgesia. Br J Anaesth. 1979 Mar;51(3):253-8. doi: 10.1093/bja/51.3.253.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 435350 (View on PubMed)

BONICA J. Continuous peridural block. Anesthesiology. 1956 Jul-Aug;17(4):626-30. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 13327296 (View on PubMed)

Lirk P, Kolbitsch C, Putz G, Colvin J, Colvin HP, Lorenz I, Keller C, Kirchmair L, Rieder J, Moriggl B. Cervical and high thoracic ligamentum flavum frequently fails to fuse in the midline. Anesthesiology. 2003 Dec;99(6):1387-90. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200312000-00023.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14639154 (View on PubMed)

Lirk P, Moriggl B, Colvin J, Keller C, Kirchmair L, Rieder J, Kolbitsch C. The incidence of lumbar ligamentum flavum midline gaps. Anesth Analg. 2004 Apr;98(4):1178-1180. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000101486.41355.35.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15041621 (View on PubMed)

Chayen D, Nathan H, Chayen M. The psoas compartment block. Anesthesiology. 1976 Jul;45(1):95-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-197607000-00019. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 937760 (View on PubMed)

Eason MJ, Wyatt R. Paravertebral thoracic block-a reappraisal. Anaesthesia. 1979 Jul-Aug;34(7):638-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1979.tb06363.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 517716 (View on PubMed)

Leurcharusmee P, Arnuntasupakul V, Chora De La Garza D, Vijitpavan A, Ah-Kye S, Saelao A, Tiyaprasertkul W, Finlayson RJ, Tran DQ. Reliability of Waveform Analysis as an Adjunct to Loss of Resistance for Thoracic Epidural Blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2015 Nov-Dec;40(6):694-7. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000313.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26469364 (View on PubMed)

Tran DQ, Van Zundert TC, Aliste J, Engsusophon P, Finlayson RJ. Primary Failure of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Training Centers: The Invisible Elephant? Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 May-Jun;41(3):309-13. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000394.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27035462 (View on PubMed)

Arnuntasupakul V, Van Zundert TC, Vijitpavan A, Aliste J, Engsusophon P, Leurcharusmee P, Ah-Kye S, Finlayson RJ, Tran DQ. A Randomized Comparison Between Conventional and Waveform-Confirmed Loss of Resistance for Thoracic Epidural Blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 May-Jun;41(3):368-73. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000369.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26894628 (View on PubMed)

de Medicis E, Tetrault JP, Martin R, Robichaud R, Laroche L. A prospective comparative study of two indirect methods for confirming the localization of an epidural catheter for postoperative analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2005 Dec;101(6):1830-1833. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000184130.73634.BE.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16301268 (View on PubMed)

de Medicis E, Pelletier J, Martin R, Loignon MJ, Tetrault JP, Laroche L. Technical report: optimal quantity of saline for epidural pressure waveform analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2007 Oct;54(10):818-21. doi: 10.1007/BF03021709.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17934163 (View on PubMed)

Tangjitbampenbun A, Layera S, Arnuntasupakul V, Apinyachon W, Venegas K, Godoy J, Aliste J, Bravo D, Blanch A, Webar J, Saadawi M, Owen A, Finlayson RJ, Tran DQ. Randomized comparison between epidural waveform analysis through the needle versus the catheter for thoracic epidural blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 May 14:rapm-2019-100478. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-100478. Online ahead of print.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 31092706 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

2019-4669

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Effects of WB-EMS in Runners.
NCT03425981 COMPLETED NA
ESWT for Primary Lipedema
NCT07240415 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA