Evaluation of a Novel Closed-loop Propofol and Remifentanil System Guided by Bispectral Index Compared to a TCI Open-loop System

Anesthesia, General Clinical Trial

Official title:

Evaluation of a Novel Closed-loop Propofol and Remifentanil System Guided by Bispectral Index Compared to a TCI Open-loop System: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT02492282
• Other study ID #: TIVA-15517889
• Status: Completed
• Phase: Phase 3
• First received: July 4, 2015
• Last updated: June 17, 2016
• Start date: June 2015
• Est. completion date: April 2016

Study information

• Verified date: June 2016
• Source: Universidad de Antioquia
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Health authority: Colombia: Institutional Review BoardColombia: Ethics Committee
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Closed loop system in intravenous anesthesia is more effective to maintain depth of anesthesia compared with manual system open, it is unclear what driver and variables to achieve this goal be more physiological; in the literature doesn´t exist studies showing that the closed-loop system for both hypnotic and opioid is better than the controlled pharmacokinetic models and open loop system (target controlled infusion-TCI) to maintain anesthetic depth. In addition, the infusion of the opioid lacks physiological controllers in closed loop. Thus, a system was designed for intravenous anesthesia in closed loop for propofol as hypnotic based on neuromonitoring bispectral index as anesthetic depth, and was integrated an additional closed system for remifentanil using hemodynamic variables and control algorithm associated with bispectral index.

The purpose of this study is to determine the therapeutic effectiveness of a new system of administration of intravenous anesthesia in closed loop to maintain a depth of anesthesia compared to an open loop system TCI.

Description:

Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) is a technique in which general anesthesia is administered intravenously, exclusively, a combination of drugs in the absence of any anesthetic agent inhaled1. TIVA development is closely linked to that of perfusion systems; these make total intravenous anesthesia enjoy several advantages as high hemodynamic stability, anesthetic depth more balanced, rapid and predictable recovery, less medication administered, less pollution and lower toxicity , not only for the patient also for the surgical equipment 2,3, 4 .

Two methods for controlling drug administration can be distinguished: open-loop and closed-loop control.

Open loop control applies pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) models based on the estimation of concentration of the drug in certain parts of the body, without measuring these concentrations in real time. The inaccuracy resulting from the absolute concentration requires the clinician to manually titrate dosage and objective observation based on the concentration of the desired therapeutic effect. This titration requires high clinical experience and a process of intensive monitoring, which may divert the attention from critical situations which in turn leads to suboptimal therapy or even to put safety at risk patient5, 6.

The application of closed-loop systems for the administration of an anesthetic requires a perfect balance of all the basic components of a system of this type: a variable control of the specific therapeutic effect; a target value for this variable (usually called set point); an actuator control (in this case, the drug infusion pump); a system (in this case the patient); and control algorithm7. This system excludes the control anesthesiologist drug infusion which is determined by one or more clinical variables that directly reflect the relationship PK / PD which previously established the attending anesthesiologist. The controller automatically calculates the optimal rate of infusion based on the current value and the desired value of the controlling variable and previously established mathematical models.

With the appearance of electroencephalographic monitoring practice as a control variable, began to conduct studies to assess the cerebral effect of anesthetics. Linear model two compartments is used to describe the relationship of drug concentration and an adaptive controller and this system was used subsequently using EEG to study the interaction of opioid and propofol 8,9. After marketing bispectral index derived from the EEG, began to evaluate closed loop systems using the BIS technology in several studies concluding that such systems not only makes more predictable anesthetic depth, but provides greater intraoperative hemodynamic stability and early recovery of the sedative and hypnotic effects of propofol 10,11,12,13,14.

Closed loop system in intravenous anesthesia is more effective to maintain the depth of anesthesia compared with manual system open, it is unclear what the driver and the variables to achieve this goal be more physiological and accurately; in the literature doesn´t exist studies showing that the closed-loop system for both hypnotic and opioid is better than the controlled pharmacokinetic models and open loop system to maintain anesthetic depth. In addition, the infusion of the opioid lacks physiological controllers in closed loop. Thus, a system was designed for intravenous anesthesia in closed loop for propofol as hypnotic based on neuromonitoring bispectral index as anesthetic depth, and was integrated an additional closed system for remifentanil using hemodynamic variables and control algorithm associated with bispectral index.

The purpose of this study is to determine the therapeutic effectiveness of a new system of administration of intravenous anesthesia in closed loop to maintain a depth of anesthesia compared to an open loop system TCI.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 150
• Est. completion date: April 2016
• Est. primary completion date: December 2015
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: Both
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Older than 18 years

• Scheduled for noncardiac surgery elective low-risk or intermediate

• Expected surgery time greater than 1 hour

• Procedure requiring general anesthesia

• Classification of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) as I or II

Exclusion Criteria:

• Pregnant women

• Surgery scheduled urgent or emergency

• Personal history of allergy to eggs or any other part of propofol

• Personal history of abnormalities or congenital or acquired cognitive sequels:

infantile cerebral palsy, Down syndrome, cerebral ischemic disease, traumatic brain injury, brain tumor, autism.

• Chronic use of benzodiazepines or antipsychotics

• A patient who does not consent to participate in the study prior to surgery or before randomization

• Need for anesthetic or analgesic blockade before surgery peripheral nerve

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Double Blind (Subject, Outcomes Assessor), Primary Purpose: Treatment

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Anesthesia, General
• Anesthesia, Intravenous

Intervention

Device:
• Closed-Loop propofol and remifentanil system by Bispectral Index

• Open-Loop propofol and remifentanil by Target Controlled Infusion

Drug:
• propofol

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Colombia	Hospital Universitario San Vicente Fundación	Medellin	Antioquia

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Universidad de Antioquia

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Colombia, 

References & Publications (9)

Carregal A, Lorenzo A, Taboada JA, Barreiro JL. [Intraoperative control of mean arterial pressure and heart rate with alfentanyl with fuzzy logic]. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2000 Mar;47(3):108-13. Spanish. — View Citation

De Smet T, Struys MM, Neckebroek MM, Van den Hauwe K, Bonte S, Mortier EP. The accuracy and clinical feasibility of a new bayesian-based closed-loop control system for propofol administration using the bispectral index as a controlled variable. Anesth Ana — View Citation

Hemmerling TM, Arbeid E, Wehbe M, Cyr S, Taddei R, Zaouter C. Evaluation of a novel closed-loop total intravenous anaesthesia drug delivery system: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth. 2013 Jun;110(6):1031-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet001. Epub 2013 Feb — View Citation

Janda M, Simanski O, Bajorat J, Pohl B, Noeldge-Schomburg GF, Hofmockel R. Clinical evaluation of a simultaneous closed-loop anaesthesia control system for depth of anaesthesia and neuromuscular blockade*. Anaesthesia. 2011 Dec;66(12):1112-20. doi: 10.111 — View Citation

Liu N, Chazot T, Trillat B, Pirracchio R, Law-Koune JD, Barvais L, Fischler M. Feasibility of closed-loop titration of propofol guided by the Bispectral Index for general anaesthesia induction: a prospective randomized study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2006 Jun; — View Citation

Ngan Kee WD, Khaw KS, Ng FF, Tam YH. Randomized comparison of closed-loop feedback computer-controlled with manual-controlled infusion of phenylephrine for maintaining arterial pressure during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery. Br J Anaesth. 2013 — View Citation

Puri GD, Kumar B, Aveek J. Closed-loop anaesthesia delivery system (CLADS) using bispectral index: a performance assessment study. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007 Jun;35(3):357-62. — View Citation

Sakai T, Matsuki A, White PF, Giesecke AH. Use of an EEG-bispectral closed-loop delivery system for administering propofol. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2000 Sep;44(8):1007-10. — View Citation

Struys MM, De Smet T, Versichelen LF, Van De Velde S, Van den Broecke R, Mortier EP. Comparison of closed-loop controlled administration of propofol using Bispectral Index as the controlled variable versus "standard practice" controlled administration. An — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Time in adequate anesthetic depth	Difference in therapeutic effectiveness determined by the time in state suitable anesthetic depth. The proper anesthetic depth is defined as the efficacy to maintain a Bispectral Index in the range of 40 - 60 during a surgery.	intraoperative	No
Secondary	Proportion of patients with adequate anesthetic depth	Difference in the proportion of patients with adequate depth of anesthesia. Anesthetic depth is defined as appropriate when the percentage of time the patient spends in this range (BIS between 40 and 60) is greater than 80%.	intraoperative	No
Secondary	Difference in technical performance drivers intravenous infusion	The performance will be determined using methods Varvel et al. Performance error (PE) is defined as the difference between the actual value and the target value. Median performance error (MDPE) and Error Performance Absolute Median (MDAPE) as measures of validity and accuracy, respectively. Wobble as a measure of variability in performance error.	intraoperative	No
Secondary	Difference in the proportion of patients with adequate intraoperative analgesia	Difference in the proportion of patients with adequate analgesia intraoperative defined according to the values of "analgoscore", a scale for the measurement of intraoperative pain developed and validated by Hemmerling et al. It is based on measuring the averagely nociception determined mean arterial pressure and heart rate, which generates a numerical range between -9 and 9. A value between -3 and +3 represents excellent pain control; a value between -6 to -3 and +3 to +6 indicates good pain control;-6 To -9 and +9 +6 it indicates inadequate pain control. Adequate intraoperative analgesia is considered when the percentage of time the patient spends in the range of values between - 6 and +6 is greater than 80%.	intraoperative	No
Secondary	Difference in the proportion of patients in which they have to perform manual modification of the drug infusion.	Any manual handling of the anesthesia system is considered one that performs different from the initial programming output.	intraoperative	No
Secondary	Difference in the rate of change of an intravenous anesthetic technique to a technique based on halogenated.		intraoperative	No
Secondary	Amount of anesthetic medications used during the anesthetic		intraoperative	No
Secondary	Proportion of patients with haemodynamic instability.	Hemodynamic instability any of the following events are considered: Reduction of more than 20% of the basal MAP and HR increased more than 10% of baseline; Decreased heart rate less than 10% increase in MAP and more than 5%; Need for vasopressor support with bolus or continuous infusion of drugs alpha and / or beta-agonists; Parasympatholytic need.	intraoperative	Yes
Secondary	Proportion of patients with intraoperative recall	Difference in the proportion of patients with intraoperative recall. Intraoperative recall will be measured with a validated scale as Michigan scale, which ranks intraoperative recall in 6 classes: Class 0, where there are no symptoms of memory; Class 1, isolated auditory perceptions; Class 2, tactile perceptions, such as surgical manipulation or endotracheal intubation; Class 3, Pain; Class 4, paralysis defined as the feeling of being unable to move, speak or breathe; Class 5, paralysis and pain. If any of these classes is associated with negative emotional impact (fear, anxiety, suffocation feeling of death, etc.) will be added to the letter D	2 hours after surgery	Yes
Secondary	Proportion of patients with awakening during anesthetic maintenance	It will be as any episode of patient movement during surgical painful stimulus including upper, lower or respiratory system (cough reflex to the presence of the endotracheal tube) extremities.	intraoperative	Yes