AzTrials
AzTrials

AnesthesiaNCT02766894

Adequate Depth of Anesthesia: the Anesthesiologist's Assessment and the EEG Processed Monitoring

An observational study of Anesthesia, run by Kepler University Hospital.

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

Comparison of conventional assessment of anesthetic depth by anesthesiologists (moderate, deep or light anesthesia) with EEG monitoring (Narcotrend® state/index). In case of mismatch statistical analysis for underlying factors are done. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 1 year to 110 years
Conditions the study is for
Anesthesia
What is being tested?
EEG monitoring
Type of treatment
Medical device
How many people
600 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
May 2016to Mar 2017
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 1 year to 110 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Study population: Patients: Randomization of patients (m/w) after informed consent. For detailed inclusion criteria see corresponding section. Patients are randomly assigned to anesthesiologist. Anesthesiologists are blinded and must assume anesthesia level. Evaluation will be performed by study leader.

Who may be able to join

  • operation under general anesthesia
  • duration of surgery ≥ 10 minutes
  • informed consent
  • ASA physical status 1-4
  • age 1-110y
  • performance check of Narcotrend

Who cannot join

  • proximity of EEG electrodes to the operating field
  • frontal skin lesion
  • frontal cerebral pathology
  • hypoxic brain damage
  • hypothermia (≤33°C)
  • language barrier

About this study

Comparison of conventional assessment of anesthetic depth by anesthesiologists (moderate, deep or light anesthesia) with EEG monitoring (Narcotrend® state/index). In case of mismatch statistical analysis for underlying factors are done.

Read the detailed description

In this observational study estimation of anesthetic depth by anesthesiologists is compared with the EEG based monitoring Narcotrend®. 10-20 voluntary anesthesiologists of the Kepler University Hospital, unfamiliar with EEG-monitoring during anesthesia, assess depth of anesthesia (moderate, deep or light level) during a steady-state period by clinical signs and measured or calculated concentrations of anesthetics. Concurrently Narcotrend® provides data of anesthetic depth (index, stadium) blinded for the anesthesiologist. Each anesthesiologist is included 30 times during study period. The aim of this study is to define conformity between subjective and objective assessment of narcotic depth. In the cases of divergence data of the patient (age, body mass index, comorbidity…), data of the anesthesiologist (age, years of practice…), data of anesthesia (balanced anesthesia, target controlled infusion, endtidal concentration of volatile anesthetic…) and data of the operation (eye surgery, cardiac surgery…) will be analyzed by statistics with regard to underlying or concomitant factors. These findings could help to develop recommendations in the use of EEG-processed monitoring to improve subjective assessment and facilitate an adequate depth of anesthesia to be provided for every patient.

Conditions
Anesthesia
Being tested
EEG monitoring

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • EEG monitoringDevice

    EEG will be performed. Data obtained will be analyzed using software. Anesthesiologists will enter their assumption in a blinded fashion and data obtained will be compared with EEG data

What is being measured

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

  1. Comparison of subjective (anesthesiologist) vs. objective (Narcotrend) assessment of anesthesia depth.

    Depth of anesthesia will be assessed by the anesthesiologist in an subjective way. During a defined period of stable anesthesia state, the indicated subjective depth levels will be assessed by the anesthesiologist and will be compared to those obtained by narcotrend (Narcotrend-Index). Anesthesiologists will assess by deep, moderate and superficial depth of anesthesia. Narcotrend indices will also be assigned to three groups (superficial, moderate, deep levels). After the procedure, both systems will be compared. In the case of non-correlation, other factors like i.e. patient's age, comorbidities, years of practice of the anesthesiologist etc. will be analysed for any other type of correlation.

    Measured: up to 1 year

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted10 May 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study startMay 2016
  3. Primary completionMar 2017
  4. Study completionMar 2017

Resources

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
600 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02766894
Sponsor's protocol ID
C-109-16
Status last verified
Aug 2017
First submitted
1 May 2016
Last updated
22 Aug 2017
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
Individual data sharing
Yes: Data will be accessible on central server to observers after completion of the study

Publications

  • Kreuer S, Bruhn J, Stracke C, Aniset L, Silomon M, Larsen R, Wilhelm W. Narcotrend or bispectral index monitoring during desflurane-remifentanil anesthesia: a comparison with a standard practice protocol. Anesth Analg. 2005 Aug;101(2):427-434. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000157565.00359.E2.

    PubMed 16037157
  • Bauerle K, Greim CA, Schroth M, Geisselbrecht M, Kobler A, Roewer N. Prediction of depth of sedation and anaesthesia by the Narcotrend EEG monitor. Br J Anaesth. 2004 Jun;92(6):841-5. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeh142. Epub 2004 Apr 2.

    PubMed 15064250
  • Puchner WF, Dunser MW, Paulus P, Neuner MP, Mayer CL, Pomberger IM, Hackl R, Meier JM. A comparative study on adequate anesthesia depth: clinical judgement and the Narcotrend(R) measurement. Can J Anaesth. 2020 Jun;67(6):664-673. doi: 10.1007/s12630-020-01602-x. Epub 2020 Mar 3.

    PubMed 32128723

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Anesthesia, run by Kepler University 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 6 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 22 Aug 2017. 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.

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?

Comparison of subjective (anesthesiologist) vs. objective (Narcotrend) assessment of anesthesia depth. (time frame: up to 1 year). 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 NCT02766894, which also lists 3 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 22 Aug 2017.

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