Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT04839445
Other study ID # 2909
Secondary ID
Status Completed
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date February 22, 2021
Est. completion date August 31, 2022

Study information

Verified date April 2022
Source AUSL Romagna Rimini
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The anesthetic techniques for videolaparoscopic surgery include general anesthesia, and locoregional anesthesia in association with general anesthesia in order to reduce or abolish post-operative pain with a simultaneous reduction in the use of opioids and days of hospital stay. From the studies published so far on videolaparoscopic surgery in general, it is clear that the transversus abdominal plane (TAP) block could have a role in reducing the stretch wall pain secondary to pneumoperitoneum and incisional, although its role in this regard is not yet clear, nor significant statistically results have been produced. The use of erector spinae plane (ESP) block for the management of visceral pain is finding more and more space in the literature, with promising results. For videolaparoscopic gynecological surgery, the techniques of locoregional anesthesia studied in association with general anesthesia, up to now, include wall blocks, TAP block and ESP block, while neuraxial anesthesia has no indications in this regard. Although videolaparoscopic hysterectomy is considered less painful than the open-abdomen technique, it requires careful management of post-operative pain. The pain of this surgery is the result of the sum of incisional pain, at the insertion points of the laparoscopic trocars, pain due to pneumoperitoneum usually referred to the shoulder, and visceral pain purely dependent on surgical maneuvers. There is currently no strong evidence to support the use of locoregional anesthesia techniques in videolaparoscopic gynecological surgery. Few studies have been produced about this topic, and they are mostly case series or randomized controlled trials that take into consideration only one technique among those possible. To date, no study compares the various techniques to evaluate the possible superiority of one over the other. In our hospital anesthesists carry out, in normal clinical practice, all the aforementioned local anesthesia techniques. The purpose of our work is to evaluate, with a randomized non-sponsored study, the efficacy of the ESP block and the TAP block for intra and post-operative pain control in videolaparoscopic hysterectomy, and to compare the two techniques. Based on the evidence available in the literature, the two techniques are already part of the current clinical practice of the Anesthesia Unit of our hospital and the choice of one technique over the other is based on anesthetist clinical evaluation to date. The anesthetists involved in the study are adequately trained on both anesthetic procedures.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 78
Est. completion date August 31, 2022
Est. primary completion date August 31, 2022
Accepts healthy volunteers No
Gender Female
Age group 18 Years to 85 Years
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: - American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) I-III risk - no contraindication to the execution of the peripheral nerve block - signature of the informed consent - total videolaparoscopic surgery (no conversion to open-abdomen) Exclusion Criteria: - allergies and / or contraindications to the administration of the drugs used in the study - infections and injuries at the puncture site - BMI =40 - history of opioid abuse or use of opioids in chronic therapy

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Procedure:
General anesthesia + TAP block
Post induction TAP block for intra and postoperative analgesia.
General anesthesia + ESP block
Pre induction ESP block for intra and postoperative analgesia.

Locations

Country Name City State
Italy AUSL Romagna M. Bufalini Hospital Cesena Emilia Romagna

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
AUSL Romagna Rimini

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Italy, 

References & Publications (2)

Bagaphou CT, Santonastaso DP, Rispoli M, Piraccini E, Fusco P, Gori F. Bilateral continuous erector spinae plane block: an alternative to epidural catheter for major open abdominal surgery. Minerva Anestesiol. 2020 Sep;86(9):993-994. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9 — View Citation

Jones JH, Aldwinckle R. Interfascial Plane Blocks and Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery: A Narrative Review. Local Reg Anesth. 2020 Oct 23;13:159-169. doi: 10.2147/LRA.S272694. eCollection 2020. Review. — View Citation

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Postoperative pain control Evaluate the difference between the two groups regarding post-operative pain using Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 0= better outcome; 10=worse outcome Score will be measured on the numeric rating scale (NRS), an NRS = 4 will be considered as effective antalgic coverage. 12 hours
Secondary Intra operative use of opioids. Mcg of Remifentanil consumed during surgery. Surgery time.
Secondary Post operative use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs Mg of ketorolac or any others anti-inflammatory drugs administered after surgery. 2-6-12-24-36 postoperative hours
Secondary Post operative use of opioids Mg of opioids administered after surgery. 2-6-12-24-36 postoperative hours
Secondary Postoperative nausea and / or vomiting Quantity of antiemetic drugs required to control nausea and vomiting episodes 2-6-12-24-36 postoperative hours
Secondary Days of hospital stay The number of days of hospitalization after surgery will be assessed 3 days
Secondary Assessment of patient satisfaction with the anesthesiological technique Patients is requested to fill out a pre-printed sheet on their judgment of the anesthesiological procedure, in which they can express a value from 0 to 5, where 0 indicates "entirely dissatisfied" and 5 indi- cates "very satisfied"expressed by the patient according to the following scale: satisfied, very satisfied, not at all satisfied 36 hours
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Active, not recruiting NCT04580030 - Tricuapid Annular Plane Sistolic Excursion Before General Anesthesia Can Predict Hypotension After Induction
Active, not recruiting NCT04279054 - Decreased Neuraxial Morphine After Cesarean Delivery Early Phase 1
Completed NCT03640442 - Modified Ramped Position for Intubation of Obese Females. N/A
Recruiting NCT04099693 - A Prospective Randomized Study of General Anesthesia Versus Anesthetist Administered Sedation for ERCP
Terminated NCT02481999 - Pre- and Postoperative EEG-Monitoring for Children Aged From 0,5 to 8 Years
Completed NCT04235894 - An Observer Rating Scale of Facial Expression Can Predict Dreaming in Propofol Anesthesia
Recruiting NCT05525104 - The Effect of DSA on Recovery of Anaesthesia in Children (Het Effect Van DSA op Het Herstel na Anesthesie Bij Kinderen). N/A
Recruiting NCT05024084 - Desflurane and Sevoflurane Minimal Flow Anesthesia on Recovery and Anesthetic Depth Phase 4
Completed NCT04204785 - Noise in the OR at Induction: Patient and Anesthesiologists Perceptions N/A
Completed NCT03277872 - NoL, HR and MABP Responses to Tracheal Intubation Performed With MAC Blade Versus Glidescope N/A
Terminated NCT03940651 - Cardiac and Renal Biomarkers in Arthroplasty Surgery Phase 4
Terminated NCT02529696 - Measuring Sedation in the Intensive Care Unit Using Wireless Accelerometers
Completed NCT05346588 - THRIVE Feasibility Trial Phase 3
Terminated NCT03704285 - Development of pk/pd Model of Propofol in Patients With Severe Burns
Recruiting NCT05259787 - EP Intravenous Anesthesia in Hysteroscopy Phase 4
Completed NCT02894996 - Does the Response to a Mini-fluid Challenge of 3ml/kg in 2 Minutes Predict Fluid Responsiveness for Pediatric Patient? N/A
Completed NCT05386082 - Anesthesia Core Quality Metrics Consensus Delphi Study
Terminated NCT03567928 - Laryngeal Mask in Upper Gastrointestinal Procedures N/A
Recruiting NCT06074471 - Motor Sparing Supraclavicular Block N/A
Completed NCT04163848 - CARbon Impact of aNesthesic Gas