Prostate CancerPhase 4NCT01547416
The Effect of Combined General/Epidural Anesthesia Versus General Anesthesia on Diaphragmatic Function
A Phase 4 study testing epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus dose and no epidural drug administered in people with Prostate Cancer, run by Yonsei University at 1 site in South Korea.
Trial summary
The aim of this study was to investigate whether robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy give rise to the impairment of diaphragmatic function postoperatively, and whether combined general/epidural anesthesia could provide better postoperative diaphragmatic function. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 19 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Prostate Cancer
- What is being tested?
- epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus dose and no epidural drug administered
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSouth Korea
- Study dates
- Nov 2011to May 2012
- Phase
- Phase 4
- 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 19 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients of over 18 years of age undergoing elective Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
Who cannot join
- Patients with previous history of smoking, cardiopulmonary or neuromuscular disease or obesity (body mass index > 30 kg.m-2)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
South Korea1 site
Severence Hospital, Yonsei University Health System
Seoul, 120-752
About this study
Official title: The Effect of Combined General/Epidural Anesthesia Versus General Anesthesia on Diaphragmatic Function After Robot-assisted Prostatectomy
The aim of this study was to investigate whether robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy give rise to the impairment of diaphragmatic function postoperatively, and whether combined general/epidural anesthesia could provide better postoperative diaphragmatic function.
Read the detailed description
Diaphragmatic dysfunction after abdominal surgery can result in extended hospital stay and increased medical costs, because it is related with atelectasis, lung collapse or pneumonia. The mechanism of diaphragm dysfunction is thought to be from not only direct injury to abdominal wall and viscera but inhibitory reflexes of phrenic activity. Thoracic or upper abdominal surgery is suggested as a risk factor of postoperative diaphragm dysfunction, and perioperative analgesic modality is also known to affect diaphragm movements. But there has been no trial to investigate the effect of laparoscopic pelvic surgery such as prostatectomy on diaphragm movement. Moreover, it is not clear if minimally invasive Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) has any influence on respiratory and diaphragm functions.
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer
- Being tested
- epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus dose, no epidural drug administered
- Keywords
- Diaphragmatic dysfunction, General anesthesia, Epidural Anesthesia
- Medical subject headings
- Prostatic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus doseDrug
Before the induction of anesthesia, epidural catheter was inserted in group GE at T8/9, T9/10, or T10/11 interspinous space with a 17-gauge Tuohy needle in lateral decubitus position and advanced 5 cm cephalad. .
Epidural analgesia was maintained using the patient-controlled analgesia technique containing 250 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL fentanyl with setting of 5 mL/hr for continuous infusion and 0.5 mL of bolus dose. Lockout time was set to 15 min.
General anesthesia was induced with 2 mg/kg of propofol and 50 mg of rocuronium. After tracheal intubation, anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane. All the patients were ventilated with controlled mode of 8 mL/kg of ideal body weight and respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide between 35-40 mmHg.
no epidural drug administeredDrug
Patients allocated to general anesthesia group and DID NOT receive epidural anesthesia.
General anesthesia was induced with 2 mg/kg of propofol and 50 mg of rocuronium. After tracheal intubation, anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane. All the patients were ventilated with controlled mode of 8 mL/kg of ideal body weight and respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide between 35-40 mmHg.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| combined general/epidural anesthesia | Experimental | epidural catheter was inserted in group GE at T8/9, T9/10, or T10/11 interspinous space with a 17-gauge Tuohy needle in lateral decubitus position and advanced 5 cm cephalad. Epidural analgesia was maintained using the patient-controlled analgesia technique. Receives: Drug: epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus dose |
| General anesthesia | Active comparator | Patients allocated to general anesthesia group did not receive epidural anesthesia. Receives: Drug: no epidural drug administered |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change of diaphragm movement using sonography (diaphragm inspiratory amplitude, diaphragm inspiratory and expiratory velocity)on postoperative day 1 and 2 from baseline (day before surgery)
The measurements of diaphragmatic motion were attained at the posterior surface of the diaphragm. From the tracings on M-mode, the distance between echogenic lines (DIA) in cm and diaphragm inspiratory/expiratory velocity in cm.s-1 during quiet, deep, and sniff breathing were measured on the frozen images. Three consecutive sonographic examinations were performed, and the highest value of three measurements was recorded
Measured: on the day before surgery until postoperative day 2
Secondary outcomes (1)
Change in pulmonary function test on postoperative day 1 and 2 from baseline (day before surgery)
Spirometric measurements included vital capacity (VCIN), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), FEV1/FVC, peak expiratory flow rate (PEF), maximal midexpiratory flow rate (MMEF), tidal volume (VT), and expiratory residual volume (ERV)
Measured: on the day before surgery until postoperative day 2
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Mar 2012 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2011
- Primary completionMar 2012
- Study completionMay 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Prostate CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Yonsei UniversityThe 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
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Yonsei University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Young Jun Oh, M.D. Ph.D., Principal investigator, Severance Hospital, Yonsi University Health System
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01547416
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 4-2007-0344
- Status last verified
- Jul 2013
- First submitted
- 27 Feb 2012
- Last updated
- 11 Jul 2013
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Jul 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effect of Combined General/Epidural Anesthesia Versus General Anesthesia on Diaphragmatic Function After Robot-assisted Prostatectomy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01547416
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 4-2007-0344
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer
- Keywords
- Diaphragmatic dysfunction, General anesthesia, Epidural Anesthesia
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Yonsei UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2011
- Primary completion
- Mar 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- May 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 7 Mar 2012 (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 aim of this study was to investigate whether robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy give rise to the impairment of diaphragmatic function postoperatively, and whether combined general/epidural anesthesia could provide better postoperative diaphragmatic function.
Detailed description
Diaphragmatic dysfunction after abdominal surgery can result in extended hospital stay and increased medical costs, because it is related with atelectasis, lung collapse or pneumonia. The mechanism of diaphragm dysfunction is thought to be from not only direct injury to abdominal wall and viscera but inhibitory reflexes of phrenic activity. Thoracic or upper abdominal surgery is suggested as a risk factor of postoperative diaphragm dysfunction, and perioperative analgesic modality is also known to affect diaphragm movements. But there has been no trial to investigate the effect of laparoscopic pelvic surgery such as prostatectomy on diaphragm movement. Moreover, it is not clear if minimally invasive Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) has any influence on respiratory and diaphragm functions.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| combined general/epidural anesthesia | Experimental | Drug: epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus doseepidural catheter was inserted in group GE at T8/9, T9/10, or T10/11 interspinous space with a 17-gauge Tuohy needle in lateral decubitus position and advanced 5 cm cephalad. Epidural analgesia was maintained using the patient-controlled analgesia technique. |
| General anesthesia | Active comparator | Drug: no epidural drug administeredPatients allocated to general anesthesia group did not receive epidural anesthesia. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 19 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients of over 18 years of age undergoing elective Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with previous history of smoking, cardiopulmonary or neuromuscular disease or obesity (body mass index > 30 kg.m-2)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus doseBefore the induction of anesthesia, epidural catheter was inserted in group GE at T8/9, T9/10, or T10/11 interspinous space with a 17-gauge Tuohy needle in lateral decubitus position and advanced 5 cm cephalad. . Epidural analgesia was maintained using the patient-controlled analgesia technique containing 250 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL fentanyl with setting of 5 mL/hr for continuous infusion and 0.5 mL of bolus dose. Lockout time was set to 15 min. General anesthesia was induced with 2 mg/kg of propofol and 50 mg of rocuronium. After tracheal intubation, anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane. All the patients were ventilated with controlled mode of 8 mL/kg of ideal body weight and respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide between 35-40 mmHg. | Drug | combined general/epidural anesthesia |
| no epidural drug administeredPatients allocated to general anesthesia group and DID NOT receive epidural anesthesia. General anesthesia was induced with 2 mg/kg of propofol and 50 mg of rocuronium. After tracheal intubation, anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane. All the patients were ventilated with controlled mode of 8 mL/kg of ideal body weight and respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide between 35-40 mmHg. | Drug | General anesthesia |
Primary outcome
Change of diaphragm movement using sonography (diaphragm inspiratory amplitude, diaphragm inspiratory and expiratory velocity)on postoperative day 1 and 2 from baseline (day before surgery)
Time frame: on the day before surgery until postoperative day 2
The measurements of diaphragmatic motion were attained at the posterior surface of the diaphragm. From the tracings on M-mode, the distance between echogenic lines (DIA) in cm and diaphragm inspiratory/expiratory velocity in cm.s-1 during quiet, deep, and sniff breathing were measured on the frozen images. Three consecutive sonographic examinations were performed, and the highest value of three measurements was recorded
1 secondary outcome
Change in pulmonary function test on postoperative day 1 and 2 from baseline (day before surgery)
Time frame: on the day before surgery until postoperative day 2
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 11 Jul 2013.
Related trials for Prostate Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
Active, not recruitingObservational study
MRI Fusion Biopsy vs. Micro-Ultrasound Guided Biopsy
Prostate Cancer
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
STAR0602 With Nivolumab in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer and in Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer, and STAR0602 Alone in Thymic Carcinoma
NSCLC, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Recruiting
Rehabilitation and Sex Therapy to Optimize Recovery After Prostate Cancer Treatment
Prostate Cancer, Urinary Incontinence
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.
Young Jun Oh, M.D. Ph.D. principal investigator
Severance Hospital, Yonsi University Health System
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing epidural 250mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL of fentanyl, 5 mL/hr continuous infusion and 0.5 mL bolus dose and no epidural drug administered in people with Prostate Cancer, run by Yonsei University at 1 site in South Korea.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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 11 Jul 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in South Korea. 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.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
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.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change of diaphragm movement using sonography (diaphragm inspiratory amplitude, diaphragm inspiratory and expiratory velocity)on postoperative day 1 and 2 from baseline (day before surgery) (time frame: on the day before surgery until postoperative day 2). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
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 11 Jul 2013.