PainCVINCT00689130
ADVANCE: Assessment for Defining Variability in Anesthesia Through Novel Clinical EEG
An observational study of Pain, run by Medtronic - MITG at 4 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
The present study is designed to compare prospectively whether sBIS, sEMG, or CVI variability (brain monitoring) can be used to predict unwanted intraoperative responses (high blood pressure, fast heart rate, tearing, etc.) to stimulation (pain) and to determine whether these intraoperative findings are related to… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain
- How many people
- 120 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- May 2008to Oct 2008
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients, aged 18-80, under general anesthesia for a moderately painful elective surgical procedure.
Who may be able to join
- Age range 18-80 years old
- ASA I through III
- Scheduled for elective, non-cardiac surgery under General Anesthesia
- Ability to understand and perform all recovery assessments and procedures
Who cannot join
- Subjects with known neurological disorders, including current use of anticonvulsant medications.
- Subjects with uncontrolled hypertension or other serious medical conditions which would interfere with cardiovascular responses analysis. Subjects on anti-arrhythmics, beta-blockers, or other agents which may reduce the cardiovascular responsiveness to pain and surgical stress.
- Patients with any contraindications to the selected anesthetic agents specified for each site.
- Alcohol or illicit drug use which prevents normal functioning in society or has lead to organ toxicity. Chronic use of opioids, narcotics or analgesics which may limit a subject's responsiveness to analgesic dosages.
- Significant hypotension (systolic BP < 100) or bradycardia (HR < 55) during baseline assessment.
- Anticipated or planned regional block or extensive local anesthetic for post-operative pain control.
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 2 countries.
4 sites in 2 countries
United States3 sites
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, Georgia, 30322
University of Louisville
Louisville, Kentucky, 40202
Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Center
New York, New York, 10011
About this study
Official title: "Advance": Assessment for Defining Variability in Anesthesia
The present study is designed to compare prospectively whether sBIS, sEMG, or CVI variability (brain monitoring) can be used to predict unwanted intraoperative responses (high blood pressure, fast heart rate, tearing, etc.) to stimulation (pain) and to determine whether these intraoperative findings are related to patient-assessed postoperative pain scores.
The hypothesis is that increases in these variability measures are associated with increased probability of unwanted responses. If confirmed, these variability measures may help anesthesia providers by highlighting periods of inadequate analgesia (pain relief).
Read the detailed description
Anesthesia providers have been using processed EEG parameters (brain monitors) to assess the depth of anesthesia for many years. The Bispectral Index (BIS®; Aspect Medical Systems, Inc.), one such brain monitor, provides a direct measure of the hypnotic state of the patient [1, 2]. These clinicians use the BIS value, a number ranging from 0 (very deep anesthesia) to 100 (awake state), to help optimize anesthetic dosing. Using BIS technology, anesthesia providers may adjust anesthesia doses to provide adequate sedation while avoiding over sedation, resulting in faster recovery [3] and a reduced incidence of awareness with recall [4].
While BIS technology helps anesthesia providers achieve desired levels of hypnosis, they currently rely primarily on monitoring hemodynamic (blood pressure and heart rate), autonomic (tearing, sweating), and somatic (moving) responses to noxious (painful) stimulation as a means to detect potential patient arousals. Additional analgesics (narcotics, NSAIDS) are often administered in order to suppress further response to noxious (painful) stimulation. Several studies have shown that noxious stimulation can also affect EEG signals, resulting in increased variability in the BIS index, suggesting that information in EEG signals could potentially help clinicians anticipate and detect patient response to noxious stimulation.
Ropcke et al. [5] showed that BIS values were higher with surgical stimulation than without any stimulation. Other reports have shown that focal noxious stimuli in volunteers and patients induce transient increases in BIS [6-9]. Many of these studies show that adding analgesics suppresses the BIS response to noxious stimulation, and the level of suppression achieved was related to the dose of the added drugs [6, 8, 9].
Based on these findings, it is expected that insufficient analgesia would likely result in transient increases in BIS due to ongoing surgical stimulation, increasing the overall variability of BIS. Recently reported findings confirm that overall variability of BIS increased prior to and following intraoperative somatic events [10]. These reports also identified similar increases in variability of the EMG, with the largest changes realized from a Composite Variability Index (CVI) which combined the BIS variability (sBIS) and EMG variability (sEMG) into a single value. Other studies have also shown an association between these variability measures and postoperative pain scores [11, 12]. These studies showed that sBIS, sEMG, and CVI computed over the entire surgical procedure were all higher in both adults and children with worse postoperative pain scores. However, the reliability and optimum method of displaying these variability scores has yet to be been determined.
The present study is designed to compare whether sBIS, sEMG, or CVI can be used to predict unwanted intraoperative somatic responses to stimulation, and to determine whether these values are related to patient-assessed postoperative pain scores. Our hypothesis is that increases in these variability measures are associated with increased probability of somatic responses. If our hypothesis is confirmed, these variability measures may help clinicians by highlighting periods of inadequate analgesia.
- Conditions
- Pain
- Keywords
- Analgesia, Bispectral Index, BIS Variability, Electroencephalography, Electromyography, Monitoring, Intraoperative, Movement, Pain, Postoperative, Somatic Events, Patients under general anesthesia undergoing a moderately painful procedure.
- Medical subject headings
- Pain, Agnosia, Pain, Postoperative
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Jun 2008 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2008
- Primary completionOct 2008
- Study completionOct 2008
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Medtronic - MITGThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 120 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medtronic - MITG
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Donald Matthews, MD, Principal investigator, Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Center, New York, New York
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00689130
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 251
- Acronym
- CVI
- Status last verified
- Nov 2008
- First submitted
- 30 May 2008
- Last updated
- 7 Mar 2012
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Mar 2012. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- "Advance": Assessment for Defining Variability in Anesthesia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00689130
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CVI / 251
- Conditions
- Pain
- Keywords
- Analgesia, Bispectral Index, BIS Variability, Electroencephalography, Electromyography, Monitoring, Intraoperative, Movement, Pain, Postoperative
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 120 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medtronic - MITGIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- May 2008
- Primary completion
- Oct 2008 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2008 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Jun 2008 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The present study is designed to compare prospectively whether sBIS, sEMG, or CVI variability (brain monitoring) can be used to predict unwanted intraoperative responses (high blood pressure, fast heart rate, tearing, etc.) to stimulation (pain) and to determine whether these intraoperative findings are related to patient-assessed postoperative pain scores.
The hypothesis is that increases in these variability measures are associated with increased probability of unwanted responses. If confirmed, these variability measures may help anesthesia providers by highlighting periods of inadequate analgesia (pain relief).
Detailed description
Anesthesia providers have been using processed EEG parameters (brain monitors) to assess the depth of anesthesia for many years. The Bispectral Index (BIS®; Aspect Medical Systems, Inc.), one such brain monitor, provides a direct measure of the hypnotic state of the patient [1, 2]. These clinicians use the BIS value, a number ranging from 0 (very deep anesthesia) to 100 (awake state), to help optimize anesthetic dosing. Using BIS technology, anesthesia providers may adjust anesthesia doses to provide adequate sedation while avoiding over sedation, resulting in faster recovery [3] and a reduced incidence of awareness with recall [4].
While BIS technology helps anesthesia providers achieve desired levels of hypnosis, they currently rely primarily on monitoring hemodynamic (blood pressure and heart rate), autonomic (tearing, sweating), and somatic (moving) responses to noxious (painful) stimulation as a means to detect potential patient arousals. Additional analgesics (narcotics, NSAIDS) are often administered in order to suppress further response to noxious (painful) stimulation. Several studies have shown that noxious stimulation can also affect EEG signals, resulting in increased variability in the BIS index, suggesting that information in EEG signals could potentially help clinicians anticipate and detect patient response to noxious stimulation.
Ropcke et al. [5] showed that BIS values were higher with surgical stimulation than without any stimulation. Other reports have shown that focal noxious stimuli in volunteers and patients induce transient increases in BIS [6-9]. Many of these studies show that adding analgesics suppresses the BIS response to noxious stimulation, and the level of suppression achieved was related to the dose of the added drugs [6, 8, 9].
Based on these findings, it is expected that insufficient analgesia would likely result in transient increases in BIS due to ongoing surgical stimulation, increasing the overall variability of BIS. Recently reported findings confirm that overall variability of BIS increased prior to and following intraoperative somatic events [10]. These reports also identified similar increases in variability of the EMG, with the largest changes realized from a Composite Variability Index (CVI) which combined the BIS variability (sBIS) and EMG variability (sEMG) into a single value. Other studies have also shown an association between these variability measures and postoperative pain scores [11, 12]. These studies showed that sBIS, sEMG, and CVI computed over the entire surgical procedure were all higher in both adults and children with worse postoperative pain scores. However, the reliability and optimum method of displaying these variability scores has yet to be been determined.
The present study is designed to compare whether sBIS, sEMG, or CVI can be used to predict unwanted intraoperative somatic responses to stimulation, and to determine whether these values are related to patient-assessed postoperative pain scores. Our hypothesis is that increases in these variability measures are associated with increased probability of somatic responses. If our hypothesis is confirmed, these variability measures may help clinicians by highlighting periods of inadequate analgesia.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients, aged 18-80, under general anesthesia for a moderately painful elective surgical procedure.
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age range 18-80 years old
- ASA I through III
- Scheduled for elective, non-cardiac surgery under General Anesthesia
- Ability to understand and perform all recovery assessments and procedures
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Subjects with known neurological disorders, including current use of anticonvulsant medications.
- Subjects with uncontrolled hypertension or other serious medical conditions which would interfere with cardiovascular responses analysis. Subjects on anti-arrhythmics, beta-blockers, or other agents which may reduce the cardiovascular responsiveness to pain and surgical stress.
- Patients with any contraindications to the selected anesthetic agents specified for each site.
- Alcohol or illicit drug use which prevents normal functioning in society or has lead to organ toxicity. Chronic use of opioids, narcotics or analgesics which may limit a subject's responsiveness to analgesic dosages.
- Significant hypotension (systolic BP < 100) or bradycardia (HR < 55) during baseline assessment.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 Mar 2012.
Related trials for Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use During Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal After Coronary Angiography
Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal, Stress Ball
Recruiting
Empowered Relief® for Cancer Survivors With Chronic Pain
Chronic Pain Due to Cancer, Pain Catastrophizing
RecruitingPhase 4
ESP Blocks for Posterior Spinal Fusion
Postoperative Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Pain Phenotypes in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis
Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Hip Hinge Exercises on Pain, Range of Motion and Functional Disability in Non-specific Low Back Pain.
Low Back Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Donald Matthews, MD principal investigator
Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Center, New York, New York
4 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Pain, run by Medtronic - MITG at 4 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Mar 2012. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in United States, Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Mar 2012.