AnesthesiaPhase 3NCT02658721
Effects of Systemic or Adjunct Tramadol Addition to Lidocaine Used for IVRA in Patients Undergoing Hand Surgery
A Phase 3 study testing Lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol and lidocaine+systemic tramadol in people with Anesthesia, run by Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital.
Trial summary
Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) is used in outpatient hand surgery as an easily applicable and cost-effective technique with clinical advantages. Nevertheless, IVRA has some disadvantages including anesthetic toxicity, slow-onset, poor muscle relaxation, tourniquet pain, and minimal postoperative pain relief. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Anesthesia
- What is being tested?
- Lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol and lidocaine+systemic tramadol
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jan 2013to Aug 2013
- Phase
- Phase 3
- 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
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients who were planned to undergo hand surgery.
Who cannot join
- Patients with Raynaud's disease, those with sickle-cell anemia, and those receiving any drug for history of allergy
About this study
Official title: Effects of Addition of Systemic Tramadol or Adjunct Tramadol to Lidocaine Used for Intravenous Regional Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Hand Surgery
Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) is used in outpatient hand surgery as an easily applicable and cost-effective technique with clinical advantages. Nevertheless, IVRA has some disadvantages including anesthetic toxicity, slow-onset, poor muscle relaxation, tourniquet pain, and minimal postoperative pain relief. Providing an ideal anesthesia by overcoming these disadvantages is possible with the addition of some adjunct agents into local anesthetic substances. One of these adjunct agents used for IVRA is tramadol, a synthetic analgesic having opioid and nonopioid characteristics. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of addition of systemic tramadol or adjunct tramadol to lidocaine for IVRA in patients undergoing hand surgery..
Read the detailed description
The present study included American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients (n=60) who were planned to undergo hand surgery. Patients with Raynaud's disease, those with sickle-cell anemia, and those receiving any drug for history of allergy were excluded. Approval of the ethics committee and informed consents of the patients were obtained for the study.
According to a computer-generated randomization list, the patients were divided into three groups, containing 20 subjects in each. In the first group, Lidocaine (LDC)+Adjunct Tramadol (TRA), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine (10% Lidocaine) plus 50 mg tramadol, which were administered after diluting with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. In the second group, lidocaine (LDC)+systemic tramadol (SysTRA), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 50 mg tramadol diluted with saline to 30 mL was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. In the third group (LDC group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. All solutions were prepared by resident anesthesiologists, who were blinded to the study, using identical injectors.
The patients received premedication 45 min before the surgery with intramuscular 0.07 mg/kg midazolam and 0.01 mg/kg atropine. Two intravenous cannulas, one into the vein in the dorsal aspect of the hand that would undergo surgery and the other into the vein in the dorsal aspect of the opposite hand, were inserted for crystalloid infusion. The arm that would undergo surgery was elevated for 2 min and Esmarch's bandage was used to control blood flow. A double pneumatic tourniquet was placed around the upper arm and the proximal cuff was inflated to 250 mmHg. The absence of radial artery pulse in the arm isolated from the circulation was confirmed by the disappearance of pulse oximeter waves in the index finger of the same hand. The solutions, which were pre-prepared according to the groups defined above, were injected to the patients for over 90 s by an anesthesiologist blinded to the contents of drugs.
After the injection, the sensorial block was assessed every 30 s until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test using 22 gauge needle on the radial, ulnar and median nerve stimulation areas of the hand and of the anterior surface of the arm. Motor function was checked by asking the patient to bring the wrist and finger to extension and flexion and the time of complete motor block was recorded when spontaneous movement was impossible. The time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until the sensorial block was provided in all stimulation areas was recorded as the onset time of sensorial block. Likewise, the time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until achieving the complete motor block was recorded as the onset time of motor block. After achieving complete motor block and sensorial block, the distal tourniquet was inflated to 250 mmHg, the proximal tourniquet was deflated, and the surgical procedure was initiated. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and heart rate (HR) were monitored during the surgery, before and after tourniquet application, and until disappearance of anesthesia after deflating the tourniquet.
Pain level of the patients was assessed by 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS; 0=no pain; 10=very severe pain). VAS scores were recorded before and after tourniquet application as well as at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 30th, 40th, and 50th min during the surgery. If the patient had a VAS score of >4 and if required, 1 μg/kg fentanyl was administered for analgesia and the dosage and time were recorded.
The tourniquet was not deflated earlier than 30 min and it was not inflated more than 2 h. Tourniquet deflation after the surgery was performed by periodic deflation technique. The time of sensorial recovery was recorded (the time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the highest pain felt by the patient via pinprick test performed every 30 s in all stimulation areas). The time of motor block recovery (time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the spontaneous movement of the fingers) was also recorded.
The patients were monitored in the postoperative care unit for the first 2 h and then in the observation room for 24 h by anesthesiologists who were blinded to the study. MAP, HR, SpO2 monitoring and VAS measurement were performed at the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 12th, and 24th h. The patients with a VAS score of >4 were administered with 75 mg diclofenac sodium via intramuscular route. Analgesia requirement was recorded as duration and dosage.
The patients were monitored for intraoperative and postoperative complications. In the event of hypotension (systolic arterial pressure <90 mmHg or a decrease of more than 50 mmHg from the normal value) during the surgery, 5 mg intravenous ephedrine was administered. In case of bradycardia (HR <50/min), 0.5 mg intravenous atropine was administered. Intravenous 4 mg ondansetron was administered for nausea and vomiting and oxygen was supplied via a facial mask when SpO2 decreased by more than 91%.
An anesthesiologist and a surgeon, who were blinded to the content of study drug, assessed the quality of anesthesia at the end of surgery as follows: 4: excellent, patient does not complain; 3: good, patient complains a little, no need for supplemental analgesic; 2: moderate, patient complains, need for supplemental analgesic; 1: failed, need for general anesthesia.
The Predictive Analytics Software (PASW) version 18.0 for Windows program (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics were expressed as number and percentage for categorical variables and as mean, standard deviation, median, the 25th percentile (Q1: the first quartile), and the 75th percentile (Q3: the third quartile) for numerical variables. For numerical variables, independent multiple group comparisons were performed by Kruskal-Wallis test for non-normally distributed data and by t-test for normally distributed data. Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction was used for subgroup analysis of non-normally distributed numerical variables. For multiple group comparisons of categorical variables, Chi-square test statistics was used in case the assumption of chi-square test was met, whereas Fisher's Exact test was used in case the assumption of chi-square test was not met. A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
With the assumption that the difference in the VAS score at the 5th min between the two surgical techniques being 1 and the expected standard deviation for two groups being 0.9, it was estimated to include 20 patients in the groups for which the least difference was expected. The statistical significance level was calculated as 0.015 owing to the presence of 3 groups and with the prediction that repeated measurement analysis would be performed assuming that the Bonferroni correction would be used. The power of the present study was 80% with these calculations.
- Conditions
- Anesthesia
- Keywords
- Systemic Tramadol, Adjunct Tramadol, Lidocain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
LidocaineDrug
lidocaine+adjunct tramadolDrug
Also called tramadol
IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine (10% Lidocaine) plus 50 mg tramadol, which were administered after diluting with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation
lidocaine+systemic tramadolDrug
Also called tramadol
IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 50 mg tramadol diluted with saline to 30 mL was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation
FentanylDrug
If the patient had a VAS score of >4 and if required, 1 μg/kg fentanyl was administered for analgesia and the dosage and time were recorded.
AtropineDrug
The patients received premedication 45 min before the surgery with intramuscular 0.01 mg/kg atropine.
In case of bradycardia (HR <50/min), 0.5 mg intravenous atropine was administered.
MidazolamDrug
The patients received premedication 45 min before the surgery with intramuscular 0.07 mg/kg midazolam
Diclofenac sodiumDrug
The patients with a VAS score of >4 were administered with 75 mg diclofenac sodium via intramuscular route.
EphedrineDrug
In the event of hypotension (systolic arterial pressure <90 mmHg or a decrease of more than 50 mmHg from the normal value) during the surgery, 5 mg intravenous ephedrine was administered.
OndansetronDrug
Intravenous 4 mg ondansetron was administered for nausea and vomiting.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| lidocaine+adjunct tramadol | Experimental | In the first group (LDC+TRA group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine (10% Lidocaine) plus 50 mg tramadol, which were administered after diluting with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. Receives: Drug: lidocaine+adjunct tramadol; Drug: Fentanyl; Drug: Atropine; Drug: Midazolam; Drug: Diclofenac sodium; Drug: Ephedrine; Drug: Ondansetron |
| lidocaine+systemic tramadol | Experimental | In the second group (LDC+SysTRA group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 50 mg tramadol diluted with saline to 30 mL was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. Receives: Drug: lidocaine+systemic tramadol; Drug: Fentanyl; Drug: Atropine; Drug: Midazolam; Drug: Diclofenac sodium; Drug: Ephedrine; Drug: Ondansetron |
| lidocaine | Active comparator | In the third group (LDC group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. Receives: Drug: Lidocaine; Drug: Fentanyl; Drug: Atropine; Drug: Midazolam; Drug: Diclofenac sodium; Drug: Ephedrine; Drug: Ondansetron |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Onset time of sensory block
After the injection, the sensorial block was assessed until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test using 22 gauge needle on the radial, ulnar and median nerve stimulation areas of the hand and of the anterior surface of the arm. The time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until the sensorial block was provided in all stimulation areas was recorded as the onset time of sensorial block.
Measured: The sensorial block was assessed from the injection of the study drug until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test (approximately 175 seconds)
Recovery time of sensory block
The time of sensorial recovery was recorded (the time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the highest pain felt by the patient via pinprick test in all stimulation areas).
Measured: The time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the highest pain felt by the patient via pinprick test (approximately 135 seconds)
Onset time of motor block
Measured: The time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until achieving the complete motor block was recorded as the onset time of motor block (approximately 220 seconds)
Recovery time of motor block
Measured: Time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the spontaneous movement of the fingers (approximately 165 seconds)
Secondary outcomes (3)
Degree of intraoperative pain
Pain level of the patients was assessed by 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS; 0=no pain; 10=very severe pain) for once throughout the study.There is no follow up visit in the study. VAS scores were recorded before (one minute ago) and after tourniquet (five minutes later) application as well as at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 30th, 40th, and 50th min during the surgery for once throughout the study.
Measured: VAS scores were recorded before (one minute ago) and after tourniquet (five minutes later) application as well as at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 30th, 40th, and 50th min during the surgery
Degree of postoperative pain with VAS measurement
The patients were monitored in the postoperative care unit for the first 2 h and then in the observation room for 24 h by anesthesiologists who were blinded to the study. VAS measurement was performed at the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 12th and 24th h for once throughout the study.There is no follow up visit in the study.
Measured: VAS measurement was performed at the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 12th and 24th hour.
Quality of anesthesia
Quality of anesthesia is assessed as follows. 4: excellent, patient does not complain; 3: good, patient complains a little, no need for supplemental analgesic; 2: moderate, patient complains, need for supplemental analgesic; 1: failed, need for general anesthesia
Measured: From the initiation of surgery (30 minutes) up to 24 hours after surgery, an average of 24,5 hours
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Jan 2016 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2013
- Primary completionJun 2013
- Study completionAug 2013
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (27)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for AnesthesiaStudies 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 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Abdulkadir Yektas, Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02658721
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IVRA
- Status last verified
- Jan 2016
- First submitted
- 10 Dec 2015
- Last updated
- 20 Jan 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Chan VW, Peng PW, Kaszas Z, Middleton WJ, Muni R, Anastakis DG, Graham BA. A comparative study of general anesthesia, intravenous regional anesthesia, and axillary block for outpatient hand surgery: clinical outcome and cost analysis. Anesth Analg. 2001 Nov;93(5):1181-4. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200111000-00025.
PubMed 11682392dos Reis A Jr. Intravenous regional anesthesia--first century (1908-2008). Beggining, development, and current status. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2008 May-Jun;58(3):299-321. doi: 10.1590/s0034-70942008000300013. English, Portuguese.
PubMed 19378526Choyce A, Peng P. A systematic review of adjuncts for intravenous regional anesthesia for surgical procedures. Can J Anaesth. 2002 Jan;49(1):32-45. doi: 10.1007/BF03020416.
PubMed 11782326Vazzana M, Andreani T, Fangueiro J, Faggio C, Silva C, Santini A, Garcia ML, Silva AM, Souto EB. Tramadol hydrochloride: pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, adverse side effects, co-administration of drugs and new drug delivery systems. Biomed Pharmacother. 2015 Mar;70:234-8. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2015.01.022. Epub 2015 Feb 7.
PubMed 25776506Pang WW, Mok MS, Chang DP, Huang MH. Local anesthetic effect of tramadol, metoclopramide, and lidocaine following intradermal injection. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1998 Nov-Dec;23(6):580-3. doi: 10.1016/s1098-7339(98)90085-2.
PubMed 9840854Pang WW, Huang PY, Chang DP, Huang MH. The peripheral analgesic effect of tramadol in reducing propofol injection pain: a comparison with lidocaine. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999 May-Jun;24(3):246-9. doi: 10.1016/s1098-7339(99)90136-0.
PubMed 10338176Sousa AM, Ashmawi HA, Costa LS, Posso IP, Slullitel A. Percutaneous sciatic nerve block with tramadol induces analgesia and motor blockade in two animal pain models. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2012 Feb;45(2):147-52. doi: 10.1590/s0100-879x2011007500164. Epub 2011 Dec 23.
PubMed 22183244Kapral S, Gollmann G, Waltl B, Likar R, Sladen RN, Weinstabl C, Lehofer F. Tramadol added to mepivacaine prolongs the duration of an axillary brachial plexus blockade. Anesth Analg. 1999 Apr;88(4):853-6. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199904000-00032.
PubMed 10195537Nagpal V, Rana S, Singh J, Chaudhary SK. Comparative study of systemically and perineurally administered tramadol as an adjunct for supraclavicular brachial plexus block. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Apr-Jun;31(2):191-5. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.155147.
PubMed 25948899Bigat Z, Boztug N, Hadimioglu N, Cete N, Coskunfirat N, Ertok E. Does dexamethasone improve the quality of intravenous regional anesthesia and analgesia? A randomized, controlled clinical study. Anesth Analg. 2006 Feb;102(2):605-9. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000194944.54073.dd.
PubMed 16428570Kashefi P, Montazeri K, Honarmand A, Safavi M, Hosseini HM. The analgesic effect of midazolam when added to lidocaine for intravenous regional anaesthesia. J Res Med Sci. 2011 Sep;16(9):1139-48.
PubMed 22973382Khanna P, Mohan VK, Sunder RA. Efficacy of diltiazem as an adjunct to lignocaine in intravenous regional anesthesia. Saudi J Anaesth. 2013 Jul;7(3):305-9. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.115359.
PubMed 24015135Memis D, Turan A, Karamanlioglu B, Pamukcu Z, Kurt I. Adding dexmedetomidine to lidocaine for intravenous regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2004 Mar;98(3):835-40, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000100680.77978.66.
PubMed 14980948Sen H, Kulahci Y, Bicerer E, Ozkan S, Dagli G, Turan A. The analgesic effect of paracetamol when added to lidocaine for intravenous regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2009 Oct;109(4):1327-30. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181b0fedb.
PubMed 19762765Sen S, Ugur B, Aydin ON, Ogurlu M, Gezer E, Savk O. The analgesic effect of lornoxicam when added to lidocaine for intravenous regional anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2006 Sep;97(3):408-13. doi: 10.1093/bja/ael170. Epub 2006 Jul 15.
PubMed 16845131
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Jan 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of Addition of Systemic Tramadol or Adjunct Tramadol to Lidocaine Used for Intravenous Regional Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Hand Surgery
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02658721
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IVRA
- Conditions
- Anesthesia
- Keywords
- Systemic Tramadol, Adjunct Tramadol, Lidocain
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Bagcilar Training and Research HospitalOther government
- Study start
- Jan 2013
- Primary completion
- Jun 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2013 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Jan 2016 (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.
Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) is used in outpatient hand surgery as an easily applicable and cost-effective technique with clinical advantages. Nevertheless, IVRA has some disadvantages including anesthetic toxicity, slow-onset, poor muscle relaxation, tourniquet pain, and minimal postoperative pain relief. Providing an ideal anesthesia by overcoming these disadvantages is possible with the addition of some adjunct agents into local anesthetic substances. One of these adjunct agents used for IVRA is tramadol, a synthetic analgesic having opioid and nonopioid characteristics. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of addition of systemic tramadol or adjunct tramadol to lidocaine for IVRA in patients undergoing hand surgery..
Detailed description
The present study included American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients (n=60) who were planned to undergo hand surgery. Patients with Raynaud's disease, those with sickle-cell anemia, and those receiving any drug for history of allergy were excluded. Approval of the ethics committee and informed consents of the patients were obtained for the study.
According to a computer-generated randomization list, the patients were divided into three groups, containing 20 subjects in each. In the first group, Lidocaine (LDC)+Adjunct Tramadol (TRA), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine (10% Lidocaine) plus 50 mg tramadol, which were administered after diluting with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. In the second group, lidocaine (LDC)+systemic tramadol (SysTRA), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 50 mg tramadol diluted with saline to 30 mL was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. In the third group (LDC group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. All solutions were prepared by resident anesthesiologists, who were blinded to the study, using identical injectors.
The patients received premedication 45 min before the surgery with intramuscular 0.07 mg/kg midazolam and 0.01 mg/kg atropine. Two intravenous cannulas, one into the vein in the dorsal aspect of the hand that would undergo surgery and the other into the vein in the dorsal aspect of the opposite hand, were inserted for crystalloid infusion. The arm that would undergo surgery was elevated for 2 min and Esmarch's bandage was used to control blood flow. A double pneumatic tourniquet was placed around the upper arm and the proximal cuff was inflated to 250 mmHg. The absence of radial artery pulse in the arm isolated from the circulation was confirmed by the disappearance of pulse oximeter waves in the index finger of the same hand. The solutions, which were pre-prepared according to the groups defined above, were injected to the patients for over 90 s by an anesthesiologist blinded to the contents of drugs.
After the injection, the sensorial block was assessed every 30 s until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test using 22 gauge needle on the radial, ulnar and median nerve stimulation areas of the hand and of the anterior surface of the arm. Motor function was checked by asking the patient to bring the wrist and finger to extension and flexion and the time of complete motor block was recorded when spontaneous movement was impossible. The time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until the sensorial block was provided in all stimulation areas was recorded as the onset time of sensorial block. Likewise, the time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until achieving the complete motor block was recorded as the onset time of motor block. After achieving complete motor block and sensorial block, the distal tourniquet was inflated to 250 mmHg, the proximal tourniquet was deflated, and the surgical procedure was initiated. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and heart rate (HR) were monitored during the surgery, before and after tourniquet application, and until disappearance of anesthesia after deflating the tourniquet.
Pain level of the patients was assessed by 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS; 0=no pain; 10=very severe pain). VAS scores were recorded before and after tourniquet application as well as at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 30th, 40th, and 50th min during the surgery. If the patient had a VAS score of >4 and if required, 1 μg/kg fentanyl was administered for analgesia and the dosage and time were recorded.
The tourniquet was not deflated earlier than 30 min and it was not inflated more than 2 h. Tourniquet deflation after the surgery was performed by periodic deflation technique. The time of sensorial recovery was recorded (the time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the highest pain felt by the patient via pinprick test performed every 30 s in all stimulation areas). The time of motor block recovery (time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the spontaneous movement of the fingers) was also recorded.
The patients were monitored in the postoperative care unit for the first 2 h and then in the observation room for 24 h by anesthesiologists who were blinded to the study. MAP, HR, SpO2 monitoring and VAS measurement were performed at the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 12th, and 24th h. The patients with a VAS score of >4 were administered with 75 mg diclofenac sodium via intramuscular route. Analgesia requirement was recorded as duration and dosage.
The patients were monitored for intraoperative and postoperative complications. In the event of hypotension (systolic arterial pressure <90 mmHg or a decrease of more than 50 mmHg from the normal value) during the surgery, 5 mg intravenous ephedrine was administered. In case of bradycardia (HR <50/min), 0.5 mg intravenous atropine was administered. Intravenous 4 mg ondansetron was administered for nausea and vomiting and oxygen was supplied via a facial mask when SpO2 decreased by more than 91%.
An anesthesiologist and a surgeon, who were blinded to the content of study drug, assessed the quality of anesthesia at the end of surgery as follows: 4: excellent, patient does not complain; 3: good, patient complains a little, no need for supplemental analgesic; 2: moderate, patient complains, need for supplemental analgesic; 1: failed, need for general anesthesia.
The Predictive Analytics Software (PASW) version 18.0 for Windows program (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics were expressed as number and percentage for categorical variables and as mean, standard deviation, median, the 25th percentile (Q1: the first quartile), and the 75th percentile (Q3: the third quartile) for numerical variables. For numerical variables, independent multiple group comparisons were performed by Kruskal-Wallis test for non-normally distributed data and by t-test for normally distributed data. Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction was used for subgroup analysis of non-normally distributed numerical variables. For multiple group comparisons of categorical variables, Chi-square test statistics was used in case the assumption of chi-square test was met, whereas Fisher's Exact test was used in case the assumption of chi-square test was not met. A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
With the assumption that the difference in the VAS score at the 5th min between the two surgical techniques being 1 and the expected standard deviation for two groups being 0.9, it was estimated to include 20 patients in the groups for which the least difference was expected. The statistical significance level was calculated as 0.015 owing to the presence of 3 groups and with the prediction that repeated measurement analysis would be performed assuming that the Bonferroni correction would be used. The power of the present study was 80% with these calculations.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| lidocaine+adjunct tramadol | Experimental | Drug: lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, Drug: Fentanyl, Drug: Atropine, Drug: Midazolam, Drug: Diclofenac sodium, Drug: Ephedrine, Drug: OndansetronIn the first group (LDC+TRA group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine (10% Lidocaine) plus 50 mg tramadol, which were administered after diluting with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. |
| lidocaine+systemic tramadol | Experimental | Drug: lidocaine+systemic tramadol, Drug: Fentanyl, Drug: Atropine, Drug: Midazolam, Drug: Diclofenac sodium, Drug: Ephedrine, Drug: OndansetronIn the second group (LDC+SysTRA group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 50 mg tramadol diluted with saline to 30 mL was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation. |
| lidocaine | Active comparator | Drug: Lidocaine, Drug: Fentanyl, Drug: Atropine, Drug: Midazolam, Drug: Diclofenac sodium, Drug: Ephedrine, Drug: OndansetronIn the third group (LDC group), IVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients who were planned to undergo hand surgery.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with Raynaud's disease, those with sickle-cell anemia, and those receiving any drug for history of allergy
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Lidocaine | Drug | lidocaine |
| lidocaine+adjunct tramadolAlso: tramadolIVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine (10% Lidocaine) plus 50 mg tramadol, which were administered after diluting with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 30 mL saline was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation | Drug | lidocaine+adjunct tramadol |
| lidocaine+systemic tramadolAlso: tramadolIVRA was performed with 3 mg/kg lidocaine, which was diluted with saline to 40 mL. While performing IVRA, 50 mg tramadol diluted with saline to 30 mL was simultaneously administered to the systemic circulation | Drug | lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
| FentanylIf the patient had a VAS score of >4 and if required, 1 μg/kg fentanyl was administered for analgesia and the dosage and time were recorded. | Drug | lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
| AtropineThe patients received premedication 45 min before the surgery with intramuscular 0.01 mg/kg atropine. In case of bradycardia (HR <50/min), 0.5 mg intravenous atropine was administered. | Drug | lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
| MidazolamThe patients received premedication 45 min before the surgery with intramuscular 0.07 mg/kg midazolam | Drug | lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
| Diclofenac sodiumThe patients with a VAS score of >4 were administered with 75 mg diclofenac sodium via intramuscular route. | Drug | lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
| EphedrineIn the event of hypotension (systolic arterial pressure <90 mmHg or a decrease of more than 50 mmHg from the normal value) during the surgery, 5 mg intravenous ephedrine was administered. | Drug | lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
| OndansetronIntravenous 4 mg ondansetron was administered for nausea and vomiting. | Drug | lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol, lidocaine+systemic tramadol |
Primary outcome
Onset time of sensory block
Time frame: The sensorial block was assessed from the injection of the study drug until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test (approximately 175 seconds)
After the injection, the sensorial block was assessed until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test using 22 gauge needle on the radial, ulnar and median nerve stimulation areas of the hand and of the anterior surface of the arm. The time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until the sensorial block was provided in all stimulation areas was recorded as the onset time of sensorial block.
Recovery time of sensory block
Time frame: The time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the highest pain felt by the patient via pinprick test (approximately 135 seconds)
The time of sensorial recovery was recorded (the time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the highest pain felt by the patient via pinprick test in all stimulation areas).
Onset time of motor block
Time frame: The time elapsed from the injection of the study drug until achieving the complete motor block was recorded as the onset time of motor block (approximately 220 seconds)
Recovery time of motor block
Time frame: Time elapsed from the deflation of tourniquet to the spontaneous movement of the fingers (approximately 165 seconds)
3 secondary outcomes
Degree of intraoperative pain
Time frame: VAS scores were recorded before (one minute ago) and after tourniquet (five minutes later) application as well as at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 30th, 40th, and 50th min during the surgery
Degree of postoperative pain with VAS measurement
Time frame: VAS measurement was performed at the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 12th and 24th hour.
Quality of anesthesia
Time frame: From the initiation of surgery (30 minutes) up to 24 hours after surgery, an average of 24,5 hours
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 20 Jan 2016.
- Background: PubMed 11682392Chan VW, Peng PW, Kaszas Z, Middleton WJ, Muni R, Anastakis DG, Graham BA. A comparative study of general anesthesia, intravenous regional anesthesia, and axillary block for outpatient hand surgery: clinical outcome and cost analysis. Anesth Analg. 2001 Nov;93(5):1181-4. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200111000-00025.
- Background: PubMed 19378526dos Reis A Jr. Intravenous regional anesthesia--first century (1908-2008). Beggining, development, and current status. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2008 May-Jun;58(3):299-321. doi: 10.1590/s0034-70942008000300013. English, Portuguese.
- Background: PubMed 11782326Choyce A, Peng P. A systematic review of adjuncts for intravenous regional anesthesia for surgical procedures. Can J Anaesth. 2002 Jan;49(1):32-45. doi: 10.1007/BF03020416.
- Background: PubMed 25776506Vazzana M, Andreani T, Fangueiro J, Faggio C, Silva C, Santini A, Garcia ML, Silva AM, Souto EB. Tramadol hydrochloride: pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, adverse side effects, co-administration of drugs and new drug delivery systems. Biomed Pharmacother. 2015 Mar;70:234-8. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2015.01.022. Epub 2015 Feb 7.
- Background: PubMed 9840854Pang WW, Mok MS, Chang DP, Huang MH. Local anesthetic effect of tramadol, metoclopramide, and lidocaine following intradermal injection. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1998 Nov-Dec;23(6):580-3. doi: 10.1016/s1098-7339(98)90085-2.
- Background: PubMed 10338176Pang WW, Huang PY, Chang DP, Huang MH. The peripheral analgesic effect of tramadol in reducing propofol injection pain: a comparison with lidocaine. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999 May-Jun;24(3):246-9. doi: 10.1016/s1098-7339(99)90136-0.
- Background: PubMed 22183244Sousa AM, Ashmawi HA, Costa LS, Posso IP, Slullitel A. Percutaneous sciatic nerve block with tramadol induces analgesia and motor blockade in two animal pain models. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2012 Feb;45(2):147-52. doi: 10.1590/s0100-879x2011007500164. Epub 2011 Dec 23.
- Background: PubMed 10195537Kapral S, Gollmann G, Waltl B, Likar R, Sladen RN, Weinstabl C, Lehofer F. Tramadol added to mepivacaine prolongs the duration of an axillary brachial plexus blockade. Anesth Analg. 1999 Apr;88(4):853-6. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199904000-00032.
- Background: PubMed 25948899Nagpal V, Rana S, Singh J, Chaudhary SK. Comparative study of systemically and perineurally administered tramadol as an adjunct for supraclavicular brachial plexus block. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Apr-Jun;31(2):191-5. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.155147.
- Background: PubMed 16428570Bigat Z, Boztug N, Hadimioglu N, Cete N, Coskunfirat N, Ertok E. Does dexamethasone improve the quality of intravenous regional anesthesia and analgesia? A randomized, controlled clinical study. Anesth Analg. 2006 Feb;102(2):605-9. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000194944.54073.dd.
- Background: PubMed 22973382Kashefi P, Montazeri K, Honarmand A, Safavi M, Hosseini HM. The analgesic effect of midazolam when added to lidocaine for intravenous regional anaesthesia. J Res Med Sci. 2011 Sep;16(9):1139-48.
- Background: PubMed 24015135Khanna P, Mohan VK, Sunder RA. Efficacy of diltiazem as an adjunct to lignocaine in intravenous regional anesthesia. Saudi J Anaesth. 2013 Jul;7(3):305-9. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.115359.
Related trials for Anesthesia
Not yet recruitingObservational study
"Comparison of Oxygen Reserve Index (ORI), End-Tidal Oxygen, and Time-Based Preoxygenation Targets With Arterial Blood Gas During Preoxygenation
Preoxygenation Adequacy Assessed by Oxygen Reserve Index, End-tidal Oxygen and Arterial Blood Gas
RecruitingObservational study
Comparison of Hemodynamic Responses During Anesthesia Induction Using Eleveld and Schnider
Spinal (Fusion) Surgery, Total Intravenous Anesthesia
Not yet recruiting
A Randomized Controlled SaCo-VLM Trial
General Anaesthesia Using Supraglotic Airway
Not yet recruiting
Bispectral Index-Guided Propofol Sedation During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Deep Sedation, Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
RecruitingPhase 4
Comparison of Hemodynamics and Respiratory Function Between Ciprofol and Propofol in Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-intubated General Anesthesia
Comparison of Hemodynamics and Respiratory Function Between Ciprofol and Propofol in Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-intubated General Anesthesia
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Lidocaine, lidocaine+adjunct tramadol and lidocaine+systemic tramadol in people with Anesthesia, run by Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital.
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 20 Jan 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
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?
Onset time of sensory block (time frame: The sensorial block was assessed from the injection of the study drug until the initiation of surgery by pinprick test (approximately 175 seconds)). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT02658721, which also lists 27 linked publications.
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 20 Jan 2016.