Intercostobrachial Nerve Block (ICBN) for Tourniquet Pain: Is it Necessary?

NCT ID: NCT03797924

Last Updated: 2022-05-24

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

EARLY_PHASE1

Total Enrollment

46 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-04-25

Study Completion Date

2021-12-13

Brief Summary

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

In this study the investigators would like to show that when patients undergo upper limb surgery under supraclavicular brachial plexus block, additional blocking of the Intercostobrachial Nerve Block (ICBN) does not affect the incidence or course of tourniquet pain.

Detailed Description

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

The ICBN is a cutaneous sensory nerve that supplies the medial aspect of the upper arm. Traditionally this nerve is blocked to alleviate tourniquet pain. The etiology of tourniquet pain is complex and the study team hypothesize that blocking the ICBN has no impact on tourniquet pain. Patients will receive a supraclavicular block and be divided into two groups; ICBN with local anesthetic or ICBN with saline. All patients in this study will receive a supraclavicular block as their primary anesthetic and then be divided into two groups; those who receive ICBN and those who do not. Amount of intraoperative analgesics, conversion to deep sedation or general anesthesia, and onset of time to tourniquet pain will be the primary measures of this study.

Conditions

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

Nerve Block 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

Patients will be randomized to receive ICBN with ropivacaine or no ICBN or ropivacaine.
Primary Study Purpose

BASIC_SCIENCE

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Caregivers
In order to blind anesthesia providers in the room and nurses in Post-op Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU), the site of injection for ICBN will be prepped with tinted chlorhexidine in all patients.

Study Groups

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

ICBN with ropivacaine

Participants will receive ICBN with ropivacaine. In order to blind anesthesia providers in the room and nurses in PACU, the site of injection for ICBN will be prepped with tinted chlorhexidine in all patients.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Receive ICBN with ropivacaine

Intervention Type DRUG

ICBN block will be performed using US guidance depositing 10 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine in the plane between pectoralis minor and serratus anterior over the 2nd and 3rd intercostal space.

No ICBN block

Participants will have the site prepped, but no ICBN block given. In order to blind anesthesia providers in the room and nurses in PACU, the site of injection for ICBN will be prepped with tinted chlorhexidine in all patients.

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

No ICBN block

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

The site of injection will be prepped with tinted chlorhexidine

Interventions

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

Receive ICBN with ropivacaine

ICBN block will be performed using US guidance depositing 10 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine in the plane between pectoralis minor and serratus anterior over the 2nd and 3rd intercostal space.

Intervention Type DRUG

No ICBN block

The site of injection will be prepped with tinted chlorhexidine

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

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

* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 1-3
* Distal upper extremity surgery with anticipated use of tourniquet
* Outpatient surgery
* Patients who desire regional anesthesia as primary anesthetic

Exclusion Criteria

* ASA 4 or greater
* Allergies to local anesthetic
* Refusal of regional anesthesia
* History of chronic pain syndromes
* Patients who do not desire regional anesthesia as primary anesthetic
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

University of Florida

OTHER

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.

Linda Le-Wendling, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Florida

Locations

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

University of Florida

Gainesville, Florida, 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.

Satsumae T, Yamaguchi H, Inomata S, Tanaka M. Magnesium sulfate attenuates tourniquet pain in healthy volunteers. J Anesth. 2013 Apr;27(2):231-5. doi: 10.1007/s00540-012-1493-4. Epub 2012 Oct 7.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 23053464 (View on PubMed)

Hagenouw RR, Bridenbaugh PO, van Egmond J, Stuebing R. Tourniquet pain: a volunteer study. Anesth Analg. 1986 Nov;65(11):1175-80.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 3767015 (View on PubMed)

Valli H, Rosenberg PH, Kytta J, Nurminen M. Arterial hypertension associated with the use of a tourniquet with either general or regional anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1987 May;31(4):279-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1987.tb02566.x.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 3591250 (View on PubMed)

Crews JC, Cahall M, Behbehani MM. The neurophysiologic mechanisms of tourniquet pain. The activity of neurons in the rostroventral medulla in the rat. Anesthesiology. 1994 Sep;81(3):730-6. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199409000-00027.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 8092519 (View on PubMed)

MacIver MB, Tanelian DL. Activation of C fibers by metabolic perturbations associated with tourniquet ischemia. Anesthesiology. 1992 Apr;76(4):617-23. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199204000-00020.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 1550287 (View on PubMed)

Tschaikowsky K, Hemmerling T. Comparison of the effect of EMLA and semicircular subcutaneous anaesthesia in the prevention of tourniquet pain during plexus block anaesthesia of the arm. Anaesthesia. 1998 Apr;53(4):390-3. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1998.00301.x.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 9613307 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

OCR19802

Identifier Type: OTHER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

IRB201802525

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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