The Use of Midazolam and Remifentanil During Dialysis Access Procedures

NCT ID: NCT04226443

Last Updated: 2020-01-13

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

99 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-08-28

Study Completion Date

2016-04-30

Brief Summary

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

BACKGROUND: Sedation and analgesia are related to unexpected adverse events in chronic renal failure patients undergoing arteriovenous fistula placement procedures under monitored anesthesia care (MAC).

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to investigate and compare the sedation and analgesia related effects and adverse effects of continuous intravenous use of midazolam and intermittent bolus doses of midazolam while intravenous remifentanil is used as a rescue medication in patients with chronic renal failure.

Detailed Description

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

BACKGROUND: Sedation and analgesia are related to unexpected adverse events in chronic renal failure patients undergoing arteriovenous fistula placement procedures under monitored anesthesia care (MAC).

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to investigate and compare the sedation and analgesia related effects and adverse effects of continuous intravenous use of midazolam to intermittent bolus doses of midazolam while intravenous remifentanil is used as a rescue medication in patients with chronic renal failure.

DESIGN: From a total of 116 patients, 99 patients with chronic renal failure undergoing arteriovenous fistula procedures were included in a prospective randomized study.

SETTINGS: Two tertiary care hospitals. PATIENTS: The patients were divided into Group 1 (continuous)(n=50); patients receiving intravenous midazolam infusion at a dose of 0.02 to 0.04 mg/kg/h and Group 2 (intermittent)(n=49); patients receiving intermittent intravenous bolus doses of 0.015 mg/kg every 10 minutes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were; 1- The total amount of doses of the use of midazolam and remifentanil in both groups of patients, 2- The evaluation of satisfaction of patient and surgeon at the end of the operation, in the recovery room during the period of recovery from sedation and before discharge. Other outcome measures include; the sedative, analgesic and hemodynamical effects of sedative medications that were compared in both groups of patients during the operation time period. The hospital stay duration was recorded and compared between groups. The maximum dose of midazolam was limited to 4 mg intravenously. The intensity of pain was assessed using a verbal numerical sedation scale (range 1 to 10) (VNRS) and the sedation level was recorded by Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOSS/A) (range 0 to 6). MOSS/A Scale includes; Score 0: Does not respond to deep stimulus, Score 1: Does not respond to mild prodding or shaking, Score 2: Responds only after mild prodding or shaking, Score 3: Responds only after name is called loudly and/or repeatedly, Score 4: Lethargic response to name spoken in normal tone, Score 5: Responds readily to name spoken in normal tone, Score 6: Agitated. An intravenous bolus dose of remifentanil as a rescue medication was administered for pain scores greater than 3 at a dose of 5µg/mL. Adverse events were recorded. Patient satisfaction level depending on the experience in general were evaluated at discharge from 0 to 4 point numerical scale: 0 = extremely dissatisfied; 1 = dissatisfied; 2 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3 = satisfied; 4 = extremely satisfied. Surgeon satisfaction level depending on the experience in general were evaluated at discharge from five-point numerical scale: 0 = extremely poor; 1 = poor; 2 = fair; 3 = good; 4 = excellent.

SAMPLE SIZE: The sample size was calculated based on a power of 80% and a 5% type-I error and for each group, thirty patients were required.

Conditions

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

Sedative Adverse Reaction Analgesic Adverse Reaction Midazolam Adverse Reaction Adverse Reaction to Drug Patient Satisfaction Chronic Kidney Diseases Arteriovenous Fistula

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

This is a prospective, randomized clinical study. The patients were divided into two groups with a 1: 1 allocation and sealed envelope randomization method. Both groups of patients received intravenous midazolam, in Group 1, intravenous midazolam was administered continuously whereas, in Group 2, intravenous midazolam was administered as intermittent bolus doses. Both groups received intravenous remifentanil bolus doses as a rescue medication.
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Caregivers
This study was a single-blinded controlled study because the sedation and analgesia were administered by anesthesiology residents who were unaware of the technique and the study protocol, however, the protocol was known by the experienced anesthesiologist who was attending the case and collecting the data during the procedure. The preparation of midazolam and remifentanil solutions and installation of the infusion devices were done by an anesthesiologist who was blinded for the study groups.

Study Groups

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

Group 1

In Group 1(n=50); continuous infusion of intravenous midazolam (Dormicum, Deva Pharmaceutical, Turkey) at a dose of 0.02 to 0.04 mg/kg/h was started at the beginning of the operation and the dose was adjusted depending on pain level and sedation level using appropriate scales for monitoring throughout the surgical time period. An intravenous bolus dose of midazolam at a dose of 0.015 mg/kg was administered before the start of the surgery. A rescue medication of intravenous bolus dose of remifentanil at a concentration of 5 μg/mL was used every 5 to 10 minutes in doses of 1 to 3 mL if necessary for pain scores greater than 3. The medications were stopped prior to the end of the surgery.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Midazolam intravenous injection

Intervention Type DRUG

The midazolam was prepared as 5 mg midazolam in 20 mL syringe of 5% dextrose water solution (0.25 mg/mL) in both arms. Both groups of patients received an intravenous bolus dose of midazolam was administered before the start of the surgery. In Group 1, continuous infusion of intravenous midazolam was started and in Group 2, intravenous bolus doses of midazolam were administered. The doses were adjusted depending on pain level and sedation level using appropriate scales for monitoring during the surgical time period. The drip rate was adjusted according to pain intensity. The infusion of drugs was discontinued at the end of the procedure.

Remifentanil intravenous bolus dose

Intervention Type DRUG

A remifentanil infusion was prepared as follows; 0.5 mg remifentanil was added into 100 mL of 0.9% saline at a concentration of 5 μg/mL. The preparation of remifentanil solution and installation of the device was done by an anesthesiologist who was blinded for the study groups. The dose and number of patients that required remifentanil were recorded. The infusion of drugs was discontinued at the end of the procedure. A rescue medication of intravenous remifentanil bolus dose was used as 1 to 3 mL (5 μg or 15 μg) every 5 minutes if necessary for pain scores greater than 3. This infusion was prepared prior to the use during the study and was discontinued at the end of the procedure.

Group 2

in Group 2 (n=49), intravenous bolus doses of midazolam at a dose of 0.015 mg/kg every 10 minutes were administered at the beginning of the operation and the dose was adjusted depending on pain level and sedation level using appropriate scales for monitoring throughout the surgical time period. An intravenous bolus dose of midazolam at a dose of 0.015 mg/kg was administered before the start of the surgery. A rescue medication of intravenous bolus dose of remifentanil at a concentration of 5 μg/mL was used every 5 to 10 minutes in doses of 1 to 3 mL if necessary for pain scores greater than 3. The medications were stopped prior to the end of the surgery.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Midazolam intravenous injection

Intervention Type DRUG

The midazolam was prepared as 5 mg midazolam in 20 mL syringe of 5% dextrose water solution (0.25 mg/mL) in both arms. Both groups of patients received an intravenous bolus dose of midazolam was administered before the start of the surgery. In Group 1, continuous infusion of intravenous midazolam was started and in Group 2, intravenous bolus doses of midazolam were administered. The doses were adjusted depending on pain level and sedation level using appropriate scales for monitoring during the surgical time period. The drip rate was adjusted according to pain intensity. The infusion of drugs was discontinued at the end of the procedure.

Remifentanil intravenous bolus dose

Intervention Type DRUG

A remifentanil infusion was prepared as follows; 0.5 mg remifentanil was added into 100 mL of 0.9% saline at a concentration of 5 μg/mL. The preparation of remifentanil solution and installation of the device was done by an anesthesiologist who was blinded for the study groups. The dose and number of patients that required remifentanil were recorded. The infusion of drugs was discontinued at the end of the procedure. A rescue medication of intravenous remifentanil bolus dose was used as 1 to 3 mL (5 μg or 15 μg) every 5 minutes if necessary for pain scores greater than 3. This infusion was prepared prior to the use during the study and was discontinued at the end of the procedure.

Interventions

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

Midazolam intravenous injection

The midazolam was prepared as 5 mg midazolam in 20 mL syringe of 5% dextrose water solution (0.25 mg/mL) in both arms. Both groups of patients received an intravenous bolus dose of midazolam was administered before the start of the surgery. In Group 1, continuous infusion of intravenous midazolam was started and in Group 2, intravenous bolus doses of midazolam were administered. The doses were adjusted depending on pain level and sedation level using appropriate scales for monitoring during the surgical time period. The drip rate was adjusted according to pain intensity. The infusion of drugs was discontinued at the end of the procedure.

Intervention Type DRUG

Remifentanil intravenous bolus dose

A remifentanil infusion was prepared as follows; 0.5 mg remifentanil was added into 100 mL of 0.9% saline at a concentration of 5 μg/mL. The preparation of remifentanil solution and installation of the device was done by an anesthesiologist who was blinded for the study groups. The dose and number of patients that required remifentanil were recorded. The infusion of drugs was discontinued at the end of the procedure. A rescue medication of intravenous remifentanil bolus dose was used as 1 to 3 mL (5 μg or 15 μg) every 5 minutes if necessary for pain scores greater than 3. This infusion was prepared prior to the use during the study and was discontinued at the end of the procedure.

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

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

Dormicum, Deva Pharmaceutical, Turkey Ultiva, Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceutical, England

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

1. Age: Forty-three to eighty-one years of age,
2. ASA status: American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) status I-III,
3. The diagnosis: A diagnosis of chronic renal failure,
4. The operation type: An arteriovenous fistula procedure

Exclusion Criteria

1. Body mass index greater than 40 that are considered morbidly obese patients,
2. Lung disorders leading to severe respiratory insufficiency such as; severe asthma, chronic obstructive lung disease,
3. Severe cardiovascular insufficiency or dysfunction,
4. Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus,
5. Severe hepatic diseases,
6. ASA status of 4 and 5,
7. Neurologic disorders such as; the presence of epilepsy, arterial aneurysm, intracranial mass,
8. Patients complaining about intense pain before the procedure and patients with a history of long term opioid use or chronic pain,
9. Patients with a history of allergy to the study drugs,
10. Patients without written informed consent.
Minimum Eligible Age

43 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

81 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Trakya University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Kartal Kosuyolu Yuksek Ihtisas Education and Research Hospital

OTHER_GOV

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Ayse Baysal

Associate Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Gonul Sagiroglu, MD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Trakya University, Faculty of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey

References

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

Cole NM, Vlassakov K, Brovman EY, Heydarpour M, Urman RD. Regional Anesthesia for Arteriovenous Fistula Surgery May Reduce Hospital Length of Stay and Reoperation Rates. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2018 Aug;52(6):418-426. doi: 10.1177/1538574418772451. Epub 2018 Apr 29.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29706126 (View on PubMed)

Sa Rego MM, Inagaki Y, White PF. Remifentanil administration during monitored anesthesia care: are intermittent boluses an effective alternative to a continuous infusion? Anesth Analg. 1999 Mar;88(3):518-22. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199903000-00009.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10071997 (View on PubMed)

Sun GQ, Gao BF, Li GJ, Lei YL, Li J. Application of remifentanil for conscious sedation and analgesia in short-term ERCP and EST surgery. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Apr;96(16):e6567. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006567.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28422846 (View on PubMed)

Wyne A, Rai R, Cuerden M, Clark WF, Suri RS. Opioid and benzodiazepine use in end-stage renal disease: a systematic review. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011 Feb;6(2):326-33. doi: 10.2215/CJN.04770610. Epub 2010 Nov 11.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21071517 (View on PubMed)

Ahuja V, Mitra S, Kazal S, Huria A. Comparison of analgesic efficacy of flupirtine maleate and ibuprofen in gynaecological ambulatory surgeries: A randomized controlled trial. Indian J Anaesth. 2015 Jul;59(7):411-5. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.160937.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26257413 (View on PubMed)

Levey AS, Eckardt KU, Tsukamoto Y, Levin A, Coresh J, Rossert J, De Zeeuw D, Hostetter TH, Lameire N, Eknoyan G. Definition and classification of chronic kidney disease: a position statement from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int. 2005 Jun;67(6):2089-100. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00365.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15882252 (View on PubMed)

Boonstra AM, Stewart RE, Koke AJ, Oosterwijk RF, Swaan JL, Schreurs KM, Schiphorst Preuper HR. Cut-Off Points for Mild, Moderate, and Severe Pain on the Numeric Rating Scale for Pain in Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Variability and Influence of Sex and Catastrophizing. Front Psychol. 2016 Sep 30;7:1466. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01466. eCollection 2016.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27746750 (View on PubMed)

Beathard GA, Urbanes A, Litchfield T, Weinstein A. The risk of sedation/analgesia in hemodialysis patients undergoing interventional procedures. Semin Dial. 2011 Jan-Feb;24(1):97-103. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2011.00844.x.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 21338400 (View on PubMed)

Son A, Mannoia K, Herrera A, Chizari M, Hagdoost M, Molkara A. Dialysis Access Surgery: Does Anesthesia Type Affect Maturation and Complication Rates? Ann Vasc Surg. 2016 May;33:116-9. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2015.12.005. Epub 2016 Mar 8.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26965819 (View on PubMed)

Niscola P, Scaramucci L, Vischini G, Giovannini M, Ferrannini M, Massa P, Tatangelo P, Galletti M, Palumbo R. The use of major analgesics in patients with renal dysfunction. Curr Drug Targets. 2010 Jun;11(6):752-8. doi: 10.2174/138945010791170879.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 20041843 (View on PubMed)

Hatzidakis AA, Charonitakis E, Athanasiou A, Tsetis D, Chlouverakis G, Papamastorakis G, Roussopoulou G, Gourtsoyiannis NC. Sedations and analgesia in patients undergoing percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Clin Radiol. 2003 Feb;58(2):121-7. doi: 10.1053/crad.2002.1128.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 12623040 (View on PubMed)

Coyle TT, Helfrick JF, Gonzalez ML, Andresen RV, Perrott DH. Office-based ambulatory anesthesia: Factors that influence patient satisfaction or dissatisfaction with deep sedation/general anesthesia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005 Feb;63(2):163-72. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2004.10.003.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 15690283 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

2013.1/28(#)

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil in NORA
NCT06403670 COMPLETED PHASE4