AzTrials
AzTrials

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.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

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.

Brazil1 site
  • Federal University of Sao Paulo

    São Paulo, São Paulo, 04024-002

Other trials in Brazil

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.

Study groups in NCT01838928
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
BupivacaineExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: Bupivacaine

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. 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.

  1. First posted24 Apr 2013 (estimated)
  2. Study startAug 2010
  3. Primary completionDec 2010
  4. Study completionJun 2012

Resources

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)
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

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.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in