Shoulder Dislocation Clinical Trial
Official title:
Propofol Target-controlled Infusion Versus Usual Care for the Sedation of Adult Patients With Acute Shoulder Dislocation in the Emergency Department
There exists continued controversy over the use of propofol in Emergency Department
procedural sedation, this is despite its widespread existence in clinical practice for at
least a decade. These concerns are not limited to the ED setting and are primarily related to
the pharmacological properties of the drug itself and its potential for harm. The bolus
administration of propofol, aimed at a target of sedation, offers several advantages over
more traditional agents, yet these advantages are also its limitations. The use of a
target-controlled infusion may provide the sedationist with greater control over the
pharmacokinetics of propofol and thus reduce the rate of adverse incidents.
This feasibility study aims to use a pragmatic design to test the safety and efficacy of
propofol TCI whilst assessing the practicalities of it's use in the ED. If it proves to be
feasible then the researchers plan to proceed to a multi centre pilot study to gather
information to adequately power a larger randomised multi centre trial.
Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) has long been a core skill of the Emergency
Physician, although over the last decade, developments in patient monitoring and the use of
newer sedative and analgesic agents have served to improve both safety and efficacy. Despite
these advances and their consolidation into well-designed guidelines concern regarding the
safety of ED PSA persists.
More specifically, concerns have been raised regarding the use of propofol, an ultra-short
acting anaesthetic agent. The practice of using sub-anaesthetic doses of propofol to achieve
sedation in ED PSA originated around the turn of the millennium and has since become the most
common choice of sedative in the ED. Propofol offers a number of advantages as a sedative
agent, including; a short onset and recovery time, amnesiac properties and good efficacy. The
cost of these properties is in part, a narrow therapeutic range.
When given as a bolus, propofol will induce a spectrum of states up to and including general
anaesthesia, dependent on the dosage. The correlation between dose and effect varies based on
several patient factors. Whilst targeting a state of sedation it is possible for the operator
to 'overshoot' moving rapidly from Conscious Sedation to Deep Sedation to General
Anaesthesia. The inadvertent induction of general anesthesia may result in unanticipated
complication.
The principle complications associated with accidental over-sedation or general anesthesia
relate to the patency of the patient's airway. The reported frequency of airway complications
during ED PSA with propofol range from 5.0% to 9.4%7, this includes a rate of supplemental
ventilation of between 3.0% and 9.4%, with oxygen desaturation occurring in between 5% and 7%
of cases12. In addition, the bolus administration of propofol may result in transient
hypotension. Despite being a relatively short lived effect, this may be pronounced in those
with intravascular volume depletion or in the elderly, and in some may be profound, with one
series demonstrating that 3.5% of those undergoing PSA with propofol experience ≥ 20% falls
in blood pressure. At first inspection the reported rate of complication may appear low, and
has by some been interpreted as evidence of the relative safety of ED PSA, however
alternative views have been expressed in the context of much lower rates of adverse events
seen in elective painful procedures requiring conscious sedation. This is compounded by the
non-standard way in which adverse events have been reported across studies.
A potential solution to the adverse events experienced with the bolus administration of
propofol is the use of a target-controlled infusion (TCI). This method is widely used in
anaesthetic practice and whilst the PK remains the same irrespective of if you give a bolus
or infusion of propofol, TCI allows the titration in perhaps a more controlled manner.
The aim when administering propofol, as with any drug, is to induce a desired clinical
effect, in this context a level of sedation. As previously alluded to, when administering
propofol in a bolus fashion or as a fixed rate infusion, without regard to those factors
which cause biologic variability (e.g. age, gender, weight), it is difficult to accurately
and consistently predict clinical effect. The development, in the early 1990's, of computer
assisted infusion devices, for the first time, allowed the clinician to target a plasma
concentration, with the pump automatically altering the rate of infusion based on a
pre-programmed pharmacokinetic model. These target-controlled infusion (TCI) devices have
undergone significant development and are now in widespread clinical use. Their operation
uses a mathematical mode that reflects a theoretical 'three-compartment' model that may
comprise the central compartment (plasma), and two peripheral compartments (highly perfused
tissue e.g. brain and poorly perfused tissue e.g. adipose). In a state of equilibrium,
propofol will diffuse between compartments at a constant rate. These rate constants have been
used in pharmacokinetic models to mathematically predict the plasma concentration and
latterly the effect site concentration, in this case that in the brain.
In practical terms, TCI allows the operator to more accurately target a specific clinical
effect. When propofol is administered as a bolus, the operator is likely to either
under-dose, delivering an insufficient effect site concentration, or over-dose, exceeding the
desired effect site concentration. TCI allows the operator to titrate to effect and then to
maintain a steady state, potentially eliminating the risk of 'over shooting' and reducing the
rate of adverse events. TCI is not without limitation. PK models are an estimate as they have
been derived from a healthy population but any inherent inaccuracy is consistent in different
populations and accounted for by careful titration.
The use of propofol TCI has been studied in a number of settings, including gastrointestinal
endoscopy, dental surgery, oocyte retrieval and bronchoscopy. To our knowledge propofol TCI
in sedation has not been studied in an ED setting. Trials have demonstrated a good safety
profile for propofol TCI, with at least one large randomised-controlled trial in an endoscopy
setting, showing a reduction in both respiratory and cardiovascular adverse events in
comparison to the bolus administration of propofol. Unfortunately, trials to date have
suffered from a high degree of heterogeneity, leading the Cochrane review, on the subject of
propofol TCI versus manually controlled infusion in both general anaesthesia and sedation, to
conclude that there was insufficient evidence to make firm recommendations regarding its use
in clinical practice.
;
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05635240 -
Chronic Anterior Shoulder Instability in the Military
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT02913352 -
Latarjet Versus Modified Eden-Hybinette for Anterior Shoulder Dislocation
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03154957 -
Management of Acute Dislocation of Emergency in the University Hospital of Strasbourg Shoulder: Retrospective Evaluation of Practices and Proposal of a Clinical Path
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT02510625 -
The Arthroscopic Treatment of Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00707018 -
Immobilization in External Rotation After First Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT04887337 -
Early arthroscoPic Stabilization veRsus rehabilitatiOn of the Shoulder in Adolescents With a trauMatic First-time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation ePisode
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04960137 -
Shoulder Dislocations Treated With Button Plates and Non-absorbable Suture Anchor
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05388942 -
Virtual Reality Hypnosis Versus Inhaled Nitrous Oxide in Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Reduction: an Open Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02725333 -
Does Shoulder Stabilizations Stabilize Shoulders?
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05705479 -
Shoulder Instability Trial Comparing Arthroscopic Stabilization Benefits Compared With Latarjet Procedure Evaluation - STABLE Definitive Trial
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05048303 -
Multicenter Clinical Cohort Study of Modified Flexible Fixation Latarjet Procedure for Recurrent Shoulder Dislocation
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03453710 -
Remplissage Versus Latarjet Coracoid Transfer for Recurrent Shoulder Instability
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT04952636 -
A Prospective Comparative Study of Arthroscopic and Open Surgery in Cuistow Procedure
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00251264 -
Arthroscopic Versus Open Stabilization for Traumatic Shoulder Instability
|
N/A | |
Terminated |
NCT02426996 -
The Latarjet-type Procedure Using the SEM Positioner: Using a Scan to Assess Consolidation
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04022629 -
ASSET 2 Study: Long-Term Follow-up of a Randomised Control Trial
|
Phase 2/Phase 3 | |
Terminated |
NCT04820491 -
Efficient Anterior Shoulder Ultrasound Reduction Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05443295 -
Improvement of Fatigue in Unstable Shoulder Through a Therapeutic Exercise Program in Physiotherapy
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT06459258 -
Throwing Velocity and Patient Reported Outcomes in Elite Level Handball Players After Completion of Shoulder-Pacemaker Strength Training
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04479397 -
Sling vs Nothing After Latarjet Procedure
|
N/A |