PainNCT01838928
Minimum Effective Concentration of Bupivacaine in Ultrasound-guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block
A study testing Bupivacaine in people with Pain, run by Federal University of São Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
Trial summary
Background: The use of ultrasound in regional anesthesia enables a reduction in the local anesthetic volume. The present study aimed to determine the minimum effective concentration (EC50 and EC95) of bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain
- What is being tested?
- Bupivacaine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 46 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBrazil
- Study dates
- Aug 2010to Jun 2012
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- patients with a physical condition of I or II according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists,
- between 18 and 65 years of age
- unilateral hand surgery
- BMI< 35 kg;m@
Who cannot join
- contraindication to regional anesthesia
- bleeding diathesis
- inability to visualize one or more nerves in the axilla
- psychiatric history
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Background: The use of ultrasound in regional anesthesia enables a reduction in the local anesthetic volume. The present study aimed to determine the minimum effective concentration (EC50 and EC95) of bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB). Methods: Following approval by the Research Ethics Committee, patients with a physical condition of I or II according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists, between 21 and 65 years of age were recruited and subjected to elective surgery of the hand and ABPB. The concentration of the anesthetic was determined using a step-up/step-down method and was based on the outcome of the preceding block.
Read the detailed description
The demographic data of all included patients were recorded. Routine monitoring of the surgical procedure, including electrocardiography, non-invasive blood pressure and pulse oximetry, was performed. Peripheral venous access was established in the nonoperative upper limb and standard intravenous premedication (0.03 mgkg of midazolan) was administered to all patients.
Brachial plexus blocks were performed through the axilla on patients in a supine position using a ultrasound device with a 13-6 MHz linear transducer (SonoSite, Bothell, WA, USA) and a Stimuplex® DIG RC peripheral nerve stimulator (B. Braun, Melsung, Germany).
The end of the local anesthetic injection was considered time 0 for evaluating the effectiveness of the block. A blinded observer, who was not present during the injection and was unaware of the concentration of local anesthetic used, assessed motor, thermal and sensory blocks. These assessments were performed every 5 minutes after the procedure for 30 minutes or until the block was deemed effective.
Motor function was assessed using a modified Bromage scale. The following muscles were assessed: finger flexors (median nerve), finger extensors (radial nerve), finger adductors (ulnar nerve) and elbow flexion (musculocutaneos nerve).The assessment of thermal sensation in the upper limb was performed using gauze and alcohol. Pain sensation was assessed by a pinprick test using a 23 G needle. The thermal and pain sensitivities of the ulnar, median, radial and musculocutaneos were examined.
Surgical anesthesia was defined as a motor scale of 2 or lower, with absent of appreciation of cold and pinprick sensation. Patients who exhibited block failure received an ultrasound-guided complement to the nerve block distal to axilla or conversion to general anestehesia.
All patients received a subcutaneous injection of 3 mL of a 2% lidocaine solution with epinephrine as a supplementary intercostobrachial block due to the use of a pneumatic tourniquet on the middle third of the arm. During surgery, an infusion of 25-50 mcg.kg-1.min-1 of propofol was used to achieve proper sedation.
Postoperative analgesia was assessed in the recovery room using a numeric pain rating scale (0 indicating no pain, 10 indicating the worst pain ever experienced) and the amount of analgesic used at four hours after the ABPB.
After the surgical procedure, the patients were admitted to the recovery room, where they were monitored until they met the conditions for discharge into an outpatient regimen.
Statistical Analysis
In this study, the primary objective was to estimate the minimum effective concentration of a 5-mL bupivacaine solution without epinephrine for ultrasound-guided ABPB. Volume assignment was carried out using a biased coin design up-and-down sequential method.The initial concentration of local anesthetic was 0.35%. This dose was chosen based on our clinical experience and statistical simulation at various doses. Each subsequent dose was based on the response of the preceding subject, as per a biased-coin design up-down sequential method.6 The dosing changes were in increments of 0,05%. The anesthesia provider was blinded to the concentration of bupivacaine, as was the subject. If a failure was observed in the previous subject, the dose was stepped up in the next subject. If a success was observed, the next subject was randomized with probability of 0.1 to the next lower dose and with probability of 0.9 to the same dose.
The ED95 with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and estimated probabilities were calculated using logistic regression with SAS software. A sample size of at least 40 patients was selected after testing a variety of scenarios, each with simulations of both the responses and the corresponding doses selected by the sequential allocation method described above, and beginning with various starting doses.
The means and standard deviations were used to analyse parametric data, whereas medians and quartiles were used to analyse non-parametric data.
- Conditions
- Pain
- Being tested
- Bupivacaine
- Keywords
- Axillary brachial plexus block, Ultrasound, Minimum effective concentration, Bupivacaine, ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block
- Medical subject headings
- Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
BupivacaineDrug
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Bupivacaine | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: Bupivacaine |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Minimum effective concentration of bupivacaine in ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block
Measured: 2 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Apr 2013 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2010
- Primary completionDec 2010
- Study completionJun 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 46 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of São Paulo
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Leonardo Henrique Cunha Ferraro, Federal University of São Paulo
- Investigators
- Leonardo HC Ferraro, M.D., Principal investigator, Federal University of São Paulo
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01838928
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- FU 002
- Status last verified
- Apr 2013
- First submitted
- 22 Apr 2013
- Last updated
- 24 Apr 2013
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Takeda A, Ferraro LH, Rezende AH, Sadatsune EJ, Falcao LF, Tardelli MA. Minimum effective concentration of bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block guided by ultrasound. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015 May-Jun;65(3):163-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2013.11.007. Epub 2015 Feb 16.
PubMed 25925026
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Apr 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Minimum Effective Concentration of Bupivacaine in Ultrasound-guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01838928
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FU 002
- Conditions
- Pain
- Keywords
- Axillary brachial plexus block, Ultrasound, Minimum effective concentration, Bupivacaine, ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 46 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of São PauloUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Aug 2010
- Primary completion
- Dec 2010 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jun 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Apr 2013 (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.
Background: The use of ultrasound in regional anesthesia enables a reduction in the local anesthetic volume. The present study aimed to determine the minimum effective concentration (EC50 and EC95) of bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB). Methods: Following approval by the Research Ethics Committee, patients with a physical condition of I or II according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists, between 21 and 65 years of age were recruited and subjected to elective surgery of the hand and ABPB. The concentration of the anesthetic was determined using a step-up/step-down method and was based on the outcome of the preceding block.
Detailed description
The demographic data of all included patients were recorded. Routine monitoring of the surgical procedure, including electrocardiography, non-invasive blood pressure and pulse oximetry, was performed. Peripheral venous access was established in the nonoperative upper limb and standard intravenous premedication (0.03 mgkg of midazolan) was administered to all patients.
Brachial plexus blocks were performed through the axilla on patients in a supine position using a ultrasound device with a 13-6 MHz linear transducer (SonoSite, Bothell, WA, USA) and a Stimuplex® DIG RC peripheral nerve stimulator (B. Braun, Melsung, Germany).
The end of the local anesthetic injection was considered time 0 for evaluating the effectiveness of the block. A blinded observer, who was not present during the injection and was unaware of the concentration of local anesthetic used, assessed motor, thermal and sensory blocks. These assessments were performed every 5 minutes after the procedure for 30 minutes or until the block was deemed effective.
Motor function was assessed using a modified Bromage scale. The following muscles were assessed: finger flexors (median nerve), finger extensors (radial nerve), finger adductors (ulnar nerve) and elbow flexion (musculocutaneos nerve).The assessment of thermal sensation in the upper limb was performed using gauze and alcohol. Pain sensation was assessed by a pinprick test using a 23 G needle. The thermal and pain sensitivities of the ulnar, median, radial and musculocutaneos were examined.
Surgical anesthesia was defined as a motor scale of 2 or lower, with absent of appreciation of cold and pinprick sensation. Patients who exhibited block failure received an ultrasound-guided complement to the nerve block distal to axilla or conversion to general anestehesia.
All patients received a subcutaneous injection of 3 mL of a 2% lidocaine solution with epinephrine as a supplementary intercostobrachial block due to the use of a pneumatic tourniquet on the middle third of the arm. During surgery, an infusion of 25-50 mcg.kg-1.min-1 of propofol was used to achieve proper sedation.
Postoperative analgesia was assessed in the recovery room using a numeric pain rating scale (0 indicating no pain, 10 indicating the worst pain ever experienced) and the amount of analgesic used at four hours after the ABPB.
After the surgical procedure, the patients were admitted to the recovery room, where they were monitored until they met the conditions for discharge into an outpatient regimen.
Statistical Analysis
In this study, the primary objective was to estimate the minimum effective concentration of a 5-mL bupivacaine solution without epinephrine for ultrasound-guided ABPB. Volume assignment was carried out using a biased coin design up-and-down sequential method.The initial concentration of local anesthetic was 0.35%. This dose was chosen based on our clinical experience and statistical simulation at various doses. Each subsequent dose was based on the response of the preceding subject, as per a biased-coin design up-down sequential method.6 The dosing changes were in increments of 0,05%. The anesthesia provider was blinded to the concentration of bupivacaine, as was the subject. If a failure was observed in the previous subject, the dose was stepped up in the next subject. If a success was observed, the next subject was randomized with probability of 0.1 to the next lower dose and with probability of 0.9 to the same dose.
The ED95 with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and estimated probabilities were calculated using logistic regression with SAS software. A sample size of at least 40 patients was selected after testing a variety of scenarios, each with simulations of both the responses and the corresponding doses selected by the sequential allocation method described above, and beginning with various starting doses.
The means and standard deviations were used to analyse parametric data, whereas medians and quartiles were used to analyse non-parametric data.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Bupivacaine | Experimental | Drug: Bupivacaine |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- patients with a physical condition of I or II according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists,
- between 18 and 65 years of age
- unilateral hand surgery
- BMI< 35 kg;m@
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- contraindication to regional anesthesia
- bleeding diathesis
- inability to visualize one or more nerves in the axilla
- psychiatric history
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Bupivacaine | Drug | Bupivacaine |
Primary outcome
Minimum effective concentration of bupivacaine in ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block
Time frame: 2 years
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 24 Apr 2013.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25925026Takeda A, Ferraro LH, Rezende AH, Sadatsune EJ, Falcao LF, Tardelli MA. Minimum effective concentration of bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block guided by ultrasound. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015 May-Jun;65(3):163-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2013.11.007. Epub 2015 Feb 16.
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.
Leonardo HC Ferraro, M.D. principal investigator
Federal University of São Paulo
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Bupivacaine in people with Pain, run by Federal University of São Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
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 4 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 24 Apr 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 Brazil. 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.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Minimum effective concentration of bupivacaine in ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block (time frame: 2 years). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01838928, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 24 Apr 2013; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.