Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT05227729 |
Other study ID # |
264472 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
October 18, 2022 |
Est. completion date |
January 29, 2024 |
Study information
Verified date |
April 2024 |
Source |
Sykehuset Telemark |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Observational [Patient Registry]
|
Clinical Trial Summary
The investigators will perform a clinical observational study of patients undergoing
abdominal surgery. The study will be performed at Sykehuset Telemark, Skien. The aims of the
study are to compare suprasternal and transoesophageal Doppler (reference method) to measure
blood flow in the proximal descending aorta and to explore the variability of hemodynamic
variables during surgery.
Description:
Background and aim: The best validated method to estimate cardiac output with ultrasound
requires measuring the Doppler velocity time integral (VTI) in the left ventricular outflow
tract measured from the apical (lateral chest) window/ projection. However, this projection
is often out of reach for anaesthesiologists during many surgical procedures (e.g. abdominal
surgery) due to draping, and is often difficult to perform if the patient cannot be placed in
the left lateral decubitus position. Alternatively, VTI in the proximal descending aorta may
be measured via the suprasternal view, which is one of the standard projections in
transthoracic echocardiography. This view is often available for anaesthesiologists during
surgery on a patient in supine position. Assuming that changes in cardiac output are
associated with changes in VTI in proximal descending aorta, this may provide the
anaesthesiologist with a non-invasive measure of the response to a fluid challenge. The first
aim of this study is to evaluate the ability of suprasternal Doppler to measure blood flow in
the proximal descending aorta, and its agreement with the reference method oesophageal
Doppler, during ongoing abdominal surgery.
Fluid challenges are typically given when stroke volume is reduced by 10-15%, which is
considered a significant reduction. This is however dependent on the precision of the
measurements, which is estimated during hemodynamic stability. During surgery, on the other
hand, the variability may be larger, leading to erroneously concluding that stroke volume is
reduced due to volume loss, when in fact this may be due to other stimuli related to surgery
(mechanical, e.g. compression of large veins or the thoracic cavity, or stimuli affecting the
autonomic nervous system, e.g. pain). The proportion of potentially falsely measured
reduction may be calculated by performing repeated measurements during ongoing surgery. Thus,
an other aim with this study is to explore the variability of measurements of stroke volume
during surgery.
Study design: Clinical observational study.
Data collection: 30 patients scheduled to undergo laparoscopic or open abdominal surgical
procedures (gastrointestinal or gynecological) of at least 1.5 hrs estimated duration. The
patients should be of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1-3 and have no
contraindications to the use of oesophageal ultrasound. Hemodynamic data will be downloaded
to a PC continuously from the clinical monitoring equipment (Philips Intellivue) using the
VSCapture software (https://github.com/xeonfusion/VSCaptureMP) in VisualStudio (Microsoft).
"Landmarks" in the procedure (e.g. surgical incision, manipulation in the surgical field and
hemorrhage) will be recorded manually to relate the hemodynamic data to the different steps
in the procedure. Blood flow velocity in the descending aorta will be measured using
ultrasound machines in ordinary clinical use (GE Venue R 2.5; GE Healthcare). The Doppler
recordings will be analyzed using commercially available software (EchoPAC; General Electric)
after blinding.
Data analyzes:
- Considerations regarding sample size for agreement analyzes: The investigators will
focus on within-subject variability, and the main outcome will be the corresponding
within-subject limits of agreement. If both methods have a precision of 2.9%, limits of
agreement will be 8.3%. Given 18 measurements per subject (one measurement every 5 min
over 1.5 hrs), 25 subjects will give an 80% power for an upper confidence interval of
the limits of agreement of 18%. By including 30 patients, the investigators allow for
some unsuccessful measurements due to e.g. poor echogenicity.
- Considerations regarding sample size for variability analyzes: Given that the SD of
oesophageal Doppler is 2.9%, the precision is 2.9%×1.96=5.7%. The probability of each
evaluation of showing a false reduction is 0.8%. If surgery lasts 1.5 hrs with one
evaluation every 5 min, the probability of at least one false reduction is 12%. If the
precision is reduced with a doubled SD, the probability of at least one false reduction
is 88%. Assuming a true SD of 2.9%; studying 25 subjects gives a power of 0.8 to detect
a SD <3.0%.