Pain, PostoperativePhase 4NCT03067740
Intraperitoneal Dexmedetomidine for Post-laparoscopic Appendicectomy Pain Management in Children
A Phase 4 study testing Bupivacaine and Dexmedetomidine in people with Pain, Postoperative, run by Zagazig University at 1 site in Saudi Arabia.
Trial summary
Fifty two children of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, aged 8-14 years old, of both gender, with suspected acute appendicitis scheduled for laparoscopic appendicectomy, were included in this study. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 8 to 14 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain, Postoperative
- What is being tested?
- Bupivacaine and Dexmedetomidine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 56 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSaudi Arabia
- Study dates
- Jun 2016to Apr 2017
- 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 8 to 14 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Patients are of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, aged 8-14 years old, of both gender, with suspected acute appendicitis scheduled for laparoscopic appendicectomy.
Who cannot join
- The diagnosis of developmental delay, attention deficit disorder, chronic pain, psychiatric illness, previous open abdominal surgery, the presence of a gastrostomy, ventricular-peritoneal shunt or other abdominal prosthesis, immunosuppression, and those allergic to any of the medications.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Saudi Arabia1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Ali Elnabtity
Jeddah, 21461
Amr Keera, 00966593258958, amrkeera@yahoo.com
About this study
Official title: Intraperitoneal Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Bupivacaine for Management of Pain in Children Undergoing Laparoscopic Appendicectomy: A Prospective Randomized Trial
Fifty two children of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, aged 8-14 years old, of both gender, with suspected acute appendicitis scheduled for laparoscopic appendicectomy, were included in this study. Patients were randomized into group (B) and group (BD) with a 1:1 allocation ratio.At the end of surgery, and after peritoneal lavage, those patients who were allocated to B group (bupivacaine group; n = 26) received bupivacaine 0.25% intraperitoneally at a dose of 2 mg/kg followed by 5 ml normal saline. However, in group BD (bupivacaine, Dexmedetomidine group; n = 26), bupivacaine 0.25% at a dose of 2mg/kg was instilled intraperitoneally followed by dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg diluted in 5 ml normal saline. In the postoperative period, assessments were made for pain and sedation on awakening in PACU (0 time) and at 2, 4, 6, 12,and 24 h. Abdominal and/or shoulder pain was assessed on the 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Sedation was assessed using the Ramsay sedation score. Also the occurrence of nausea or vomiting was recorded . The time from extubation to the first administration of pethidine was registered. The consumption of postoperative analgesia was recorded. Side effects of the study drugs were assessed and recorded by the ward nurses for 24h postoperatively. Possible complications such as respiratory depression, allergic reactions, local anaesthetic toxicity,dizziness, , headache, were recorded and managed accordingly. Duration of surgery and length of stay in PACU were noted. Before discharge to home, length of stay in the hospital was recorded and parent's satisfaction was assessed using the 7-point Likert scale
Read the detailed description
A written informed consent for participation in the trial was obtained by parents or the legal guardians . Fifty two children participate in the study.
Randomization and blindness: Patients were randomized into group (B) and group (BD) with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The allocated intervention was written on a slip of paper, placed in a sealed serially numbered, opaque envelopes. The envelopes were serially opened, and the allocated intervention was implemented. Patients were equally distributed in both groups. All investigators, parents, and patients were blind to which method was being used.
Study description:
On arrival to the operating room, routine preoperative evaluation was performed, and the procedure was explained to all parents. Before premedication, patients and parents were instructed in the use of the 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS),with score raging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). Baseline measurements of heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), and room air oxygen saturation (SaO2) were obtained using an electrocardiogram, a "Dinamap" automated blood pressure monitor, and a pulse oximeter, respectively.
All children received premedication with midazolam 0.05 mg/kg intravenously afterward, Ringer's lactate infusion (20 ml/kg/h) was started. Standardized prophylactic antiemetic was iv ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg. General anesthesia was inducted with propofol 2 mg/kg, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg, and fentanyl 2 mcg/kg intravenously (i.v.). Endotracheal intubation was performed, tube size was calculated according to the formula: age/4+4. Anesthesia was maintained with a sevoflurane and oxygen mixture, with total fresh gas flow 3 L/min controlled by mechanical ventilation, tidal volume 5-10 ml/kg. The respiratory rate adjusted according to the end tidal CO2 (maintaining CO2 in the normal range of 35-45 mmHg). Standardized prophylactic antiemetic was ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg.
In both study groups, laparoscopic surgery was performed according to the standard surgical protocol. Local infiltration of port sites was performed by 4 ml xylocaine 1% at a maximum dose of 3 mg/kg. Standardized surgery involved 3 ports, a 5 or10-mm umbilical Hasson cannula and 3 or 5- mm left iliac fossa and suprapubic ports. Pneumoperitoneum was achieved using nonhumidified and nonheated CO2, with the intra-abdominal pressure maintained around 10-12 mmHg.
At the end of surgery, and after peritoneal lavage, those patients who were allocated to B group (bupivacaine group; n = 26) received bupivacaine 0.25% intraperitoneally at a dose of 2 mg/kg followed by 5 ml normal saline. However, in group BD (bupivacaine, Dexmedetomidine group; n = 26), bupivacaine 0.25% at a dose of 2mg/kg was instilled intraperitoneally followed by dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg diluted in 5 ml normal saline. Surgeons instilled the study solution through a suction-irrigation device under visual control onto the parietal and visceral peritoneum of the right iliac fossa and pelvis to cover the appendix stump, lower pole of the cecum, and the terminal ileum. At the end of the operation, CO2 was cleared completely from the peritoneal cavity by manual compression of the abdomen with open trocar. Patients in both groups received intravenous paracetamol 15 mg/kg (Perfalgan, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Ltd, New York City, NY, USA).
Reversal of the muscle relaxant was carried out using prostigmine at a dose of 0.05-0.07 mg/kg and atropine at a dose of 0.02 mg/kg. The patients were then transferred to the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) where monitoring of heart rate (HR), mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), and pain scoring was carried out. After operation, paracetamol 15mg/kg iv drip was administered on a regular base every 8h, and iv pethidine 1mg/kg as rescue analgesia ( whenVAS≥ 4) for the 1st 24. the occurrence of nausea or vomiting was recorded and patients were immediately given ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg if they experienced nausea and/or vomiting.
The ward nurses were instructed to omit the 6-h dose of pethidine if they considered that the patient was over sedated or pain free.
The time from extubation to the first administration of pethidine was registered. Side effects of the study drugs were assessed and recorded by the ward nurses for 24h postoperatively. Oxygen desaturation was considered when SpO2 dropped below 93% for more than 10 s. Bradycardia was defined as a HR 20% decrease from the baseline, whereas a HR more than 20% of the baseline was labeled as tachycardia. A drop in MAP by 20% or more of the baseline was regarded as hypotension while a MAP value higher than the baseline by 20% was regarded as hypertension. Other possible complications such as respiratory depression, allergic reactions, local anaesthetic toxicity,dizziness, , headache, were recorded and managed accordingly.
The primary outcome of the study:
In the postoperative period, assessments were made for pain on awakening in PACU (0 time) and at 2, 4, 6, 12,and 24 h. Abdominal and/or shoulder pain was assessed on the 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
The secondary outcomes of the study:
- Sedation scores at PACU time and at 2h, 4h, 6h, 12h, and 24h after surgery.
- Time of first request of analgesia.
- Amount of rescue pethidine in 24h after surgery.
- Duration of surgery.
- Length of stay in PACU.
- Frequency of nausea and vomiting and other complications after surgery.
- Length of stay in hospital after surgery.
- Parents satisfaction before discharge to home.
Sample size calculation:
To calculate the sample size, the postoperative opioid consumption at day 1 in a similar clinical setting was taken into account. With a 2-tailed α = 0.05 and a power of 80%, we needed 23 patients in each group. Considering the anticipated drop out as 10%, 52 patients were asked to participate in the study. Data will be presented as a mean ± standard deviation, median, numbers, and frequencies, as appropriate. Statistical significance accepted at a P < 0.05 Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS program version 19 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) and EP16 program. Student's t-test, Chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Fisher's exact test will be used for statistical analysis, as appropriate.
- Conditions
- Pain, Postoperative
- Being tested
- Bupivacaine, Dexmedetomidine
- Keywords
- appendicectomy, children, local anesthetics, laparoscopy, peritoneum
- Medical subject headings
- Pain, Postoperative
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
BupivacaineDrug
Also called Marcaine
intraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) after excision of the appendix.
DexmedetomidineDrug
Also called Precidex
intraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) plus dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg after excision of the appendix.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Bupivacaine group | Active comparator | intraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) after excision of the appendix. Receives: Drug: Bupivacaine |
| Bupivacaine-Dexmedetomidine group | Experimental | intraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) plus dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg after excision of the appendix. Receives: Drug: Dexmedetomidine |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Postoperative abdominal and/or shoulder VAS pain score
assessment of changes in pain scores along different time intervals in the postoperative 24 hours
Measured: at the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU)(0 time), and 2 Hours, 4 Hours, 6 Hours, 12 Hours, and 24 Hours postoperative
Secondary outcomes (4)
Time of first request of analgesia.
when VAS becomes more than 3, analgesia is given and the time is recorded
Measured: from the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU time) and up to 8 hours
amount of rescue pethidine consumed
in milligrams
Measured: in 24 Hours postoperative
Length of hospital stay
postoperative stay in hospital (days)
Measured: from end of surgery till discharge to home, up to one week
Sedation score
Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS)
Measured: at the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU)(0 time), and 2 Hours, 4 Hours, 6 Hours, 12 Hours, and 24 Hours postoperative
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Mar 2017
- Study startJun 2016
- Primary completionMar 2017 (estimated)
- Study completionApr 2017 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pain, PostoperativeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Zagazig 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
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Zagazig University
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ali Elnabtity, Zagazig University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03067740
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- approved on 11 june 2016
- Status last verified
- Feb 2017
- First submitted
- 16 Feb 2017
- Last updated
- 1 Mar 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Witt WP, Weiss AJ, Elixhauser A. Overview of Hospital Stays for Children in the United States, 2012. 2014 Dec. In: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2006 Feb-. Statistical Brief #187. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK274247/
PubMed 25695124Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 Oct 18;(4):CD001546. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001546.pub2.
PubMed 15495014Tomecka MJ, Bortsov AV, Miller NR, Solano N, Narron J, McNaull PP, Ricketts KJ, Lupa CM, McLean SA. Substantial postoperative pain is common among children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Feb;22(2):130-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2011.03711.x. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
PubMed 21958060Alexander JI. Pain after laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth. 1997 Sep;79(3):369-78. doi: 10.1093/bja/79.3.369. No abstract available.
PubMed 9389858El-Labban GM, Hokkam EN, El-Labban MA, Morsy K, Saadl S, Heissam KS. Intraincisional vs intraperitoneal infiltration of local anaesthetic for controlling early post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy pain. J Minim Access Surg. 2011 Jul;7(3):173-7. doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.83508.
PubMed 22022099Golubovic S, Golubovic V, Cindric-Stancin M, Tokmadzic VS. Intraperitoneal analgesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: bupivacaine versus bupivacaine with tramadol. Coll Antropol. 2009 Mar;33(1):299-302.
PubMed 19408641Albanese AM, Albanese EF, Mino JH, Gomez E, Gomez M, Zandomeni M, Merlo AB. Peritoneal surface area: measurements of 40 structures covered by peritoneum: correlation between total peritoneal surface area and the surface calculated by formulas. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009 Jun;31(5):369-77. doi: 10.1007/s00276-008-0456-9. Epub 2009 Jan 14.
PubMed 19142561Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Soop M, Hill AG. Intraperitoneal use of local anesthetic in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2010 Sep;17(5):637-56. doi: 10.1007/s00534-010-0271-7.
PubMed 20393755
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Mar 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Intraperitoneal Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Bupivacaine for Management of Pain in Children Undergoing Laparoscopic Appendicectomy: A Prospective Randomized Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03067740
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- approved on 11 june 2016
- Conditions
- Pain, Postoperative
- Keywords
- appendicectomy, children, local anesthetics, laparoscopy, peritoneum
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Zagazig UniversityOther government
- Study start
- Jun 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Mar 2017 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Apr 2017 (estimated)
- First posted
- 1 Mar 2017 (actual)
- 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.
Fifty two children of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, aged 8-14 years old, of both gender, with suspected acute appendicitis scheduled for laparoscopic appendicectomy, were included in this study. Patients were randomized into group (B) and group (BD) with a 1:1 allocation ratio.At the end of surgery, and after peritoneal lavage, those patients who were allocated to B group (bupivacaine group; n = 26) received bupivacaine 0.25% intraperitoneally at a dose of 2 mg/kg followed by 5 ml normal saline. However, in group BD (bupivacaine, Dexmedetomidine group; n = 26), bupivacaine 0.25% at a dose of 2mg/kg was instilled intraperitoneally followed by dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg diluted in 5 ml normal saline. In the postoperative period, assessments were made for pain and sedation on awakening in PACU (0 time) and at 2, 4, 6, 12,and 24 h. Abdominal and/or shoulder pain was assessed on the 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Sedation was assessed using the Ramsay sedation score. Also the occurrence of nausea or vomiting was recorded . The time from extubation to the first administration of pethidine was registered. The consumption of postoperative analgesia was recorded. Side effects of the study drugs were assessed and recorded by the ward nurses for 24h postoperatively. Possible complications such as respiratory depression, allergic reactions, local anaesthetic toxicity,dizziness, , headache, were recorded and managed accordingly. Duration of surgery and length of stay in PACU were noted. Before discharge to home, length of stay in the hospital was recorded and parent's satisfaction was assessed using the 7-point Likert scale
Detailed description
A written informed consent for participation in the trial was obtained by parents or the legal guardians . Fifty two children participate in the study.
Randomization and blindness: Patients were randomized into group (B) and group (BD) with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The allocated intervention was written on a slip of paper, placed in a sealed serially numbered, opaque envelopes. The envelopes were serially opened, and the allocated intervention was implemented. Patients were equally distributed in both groups. All investigators, parents, and patients were blind to which method was being used.
Study description:
On arrival to the operating room, routine preoperative evaluation was performed, and the procedure was explained to all parents. Before premedication, patients and parents were instructed in the use of the 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS),with score raging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). Baseline measurements of heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), and room air oxygen saturation (SaO2) were obtained using an electrocardiogram, a "Dinamap" automated blood pressure monitor, and a pulse oximeter, respectively.
All children received premedication with midazolam 0.05 mg/kg intravenously afterward, Ringer's lactate infusion (20 ml/kg/h) was started. Standardized prophylactic antiemetic was iv ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg. General anesthesia was inducted with propofol 2 mg/kg, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg, and fentanyl 2 mcg/kg intravenously (i.v.). Endotracheal intubation was performed, tube size was calculated according to the formula: age/4+4. Anesthesia was maintained with a sevoflurane and oxygen mixture, with total fresh gas flow 3 L/min controlled by mechanical ventilation, tidal volume 5-10 ml/kg. The respiratory rate adjusted according to the end tidal CO2 (maintaining CO2 in the normal range of 35-45 mmHg). Standardized prophylactic antiemetic was ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg.
In both study groups, laparoscopic surgery was performed according to the standard surgical protocol. Local infiltration of port sites was performed by 4 ml xylocaine 1% at a maximum dose of 3 mg/kg. Standardized surgery involved 3 ports, a 5 or10-mm umbilical Hasson cannula and 3 or 5- mm left iliac fossa and suprapubic ports. Pneumoperitoneum was achieved using nonhumidified and nonheated CO2, with the intra-abdominal pressure maintained around 10-12 mmHg.
At the end of surgery, and after peritoneal lavage, those patients who were allocated to B group (bupivacaine group; n = 26) received bupivacaine 0.25% intraperitoneally at a dose of 2 mg/kg followed by 5 ml normal saline. However, in group BD (bupivacaine, Dexmedetomidine group; n = 26), bupivacaine 0.25% at a dose of 2mg/kg was instilled intraperitoneally followed by dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg diluted in 5 ml normal saline. Surgeons instilled the study solution through a suction-irrigation device under visual control onto the parietal and visceral peritoneum of the right iliac fossa and pelvis to cover the appendix stump, lower pole of the cecum, and the terminal ileum. At the end of the operation, CO2 was cleared completely from the peritoneal cavity by manual compression of the abdomen with open trocar. Patients in both groups received intravenous paracetamol 15 mg/kg (Perfalgan, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Ltd, New York City, NY, USA).
Reversal of the muscle relaxant was carried out using prostigmine at a dose of 0.05-0.07 mg/kg and atropine at a dose of 0.02 mg/kg. The patients were then transferred to the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) where monitoring of heart rate (HR), mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), and pain scoring was carried out. After operation, paracetamol 15mg/kg iv drip was administered on a regular base every 8h, and iv pethidine 1mg/kg as rescue analgesia ( whenVAS≥ 4) for the 1st 24. the occurrence of nausea or vomiting was recorded and patients were immediately given ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg if they experienced nausea and/or vomiting.
The ward nurses were instructed to omit the 6-h dose of pethidine if they considered that the patient was over sedated or pain free.
The time from extubation to the first administration of pethidine was registered. Side effects of the study drugs were assessed and recorded by the ward nurses for 24h postoperatively. Oxygen desaturation was considered when SpO2 dropped below 93% for more than 10 s. Bradycardia was defined as a HR 20% decrease from the baseline, whereas a HR more than 20% of the baseline was labeled as tachycardia. A drop in MAP by 20% or more of the baseline was regarded as hypotension while a MAP value higher than the baseline by 20% was regarded as hypertension. Other possible complications such as respiratory depression, allergic reactions, local anaesthetic toxicity,dizziness, , headache, were recorded and managed accordingly.
The primary outcome of the study:
In the postoperative period, assessments were made for pain on awakening in PACU (0 time) and at 2, 4, 6, 12,and 24 h. Abdominal and/or shoulder pain was assessed on the 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
The secondary outcomes of the study:
- Sedation scores at PACU time and at 2h, 4h, 6h, 12h, and 24h after surgery.
- Time of first request of analgesia.
- Amount of rescue pethidine in 24h after surgery.
- Duration of surgery.
- Length of stay in PACU.
- Frequency of nausea and vomiting and other complications after surgery.
- Length of stay in hospital after surgery.
- Parents satisfaction before discharge to home.
Sample size calculation:
To calculate the sample size, the postoperative opioid consumption at day 1 in a similar clinical setting was taken into account. With a 2-tailed α = 0.05 and a power of 80%, we needed 23 patients in each group. Considering the anticipated drop out as 10%, 52 patients were asked to participate in the study. Data will be presented as a mean ± standard deviation, median, numbers, and frequencies, as appropriate. Statistical significance accepted at a P < 0.05 Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS program version 19 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) and EP16 program. Student's t-test, Chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Fisher's exact test will be used for statistical analysis, as appropriate.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Bupivacaine group | Active comparator | Drug: Bupivacaineintraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) after excision of the appendix. |
| Bupivacaine-Dexmedetomidine group | Experimental | Drug: Dexmedetomidineintraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) plus dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg after excision of the appendix. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 8 to 14 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients are of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, aged 8-14 years old, of both gender, with suspected acute appendicitis scheduled for laparoscopic appendicectomy.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- The diagnosis of developmental delay, attention deficit disorder, chronic pain, psychiatric illness, previous open abdominal surgery, the presence of a gastrostomy, ventricular-peritoneal shunt or other abdominal prosthesis, immunosuppression, and those allergic to any of the medications.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| BupivacaineAlso: Marcaineintraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) after excision of the appendix. | Drug | Bupivacaine group |
| DexmedetomidineAlso: Precidexintraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine 0.25% ( 2mg/kg) plus dexmedetomidine 1mcg/kg after excision of the appendix. | Drug | Bupivacaine-Dexmedetomidine group |
Primary outcome
Postoperative abdominal and/or shoulder VAS pain score
Time frame: at the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU)(0 time), and 2 Hours, 4 Hours, 6 Hours, 12 Hours, and 24 Hours postoperative
assessment of changes in pain scores along different time intervals in the postoperative 24 hours
4 secondary outcomes
Time of first request of analgesia.
Time frame: from the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU time) and up to 8 hours
amount of rescue pethidine consumed
Time frame: in 24 Hours postoperative
Length of hospital stay
Time frame: from end of surgery till discharge to home, up to one week
Sedation score
Time frame: at the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU)(0 time), and 2 Hours, 4 Hours, 6 Hours, 12 Hours, and 24 Hours postoperative
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 Mar 2017.
- Background: PubMed 25695124Witt WP, Weiss AJ, Elixhauser A. Overview of Hospital Stays for Children in the United States, 2012. 2014 Dec. In: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2006 Feb-. Statistical Brief #187. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK274247/
- Results publication: PubMed 15495014Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 Oct 18;(4):CD001546. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001546.pub2.
- Results publication: PubMed 21958060Tomecka MJ, Bortsov AV, Miller NR, Solano N, Narron J, McNaull PP, Ricketts KJ, Lupa CM, McLean SA. Substantial postoperative pain is common among children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Feb;22(2):130-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2011.03711.x. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
- Results publication: PubMed 9389858Alexander JI. Pain after laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth. 1997 Sep;79(3):369-78. doi: 10.1093/bja/79.3.369. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 22022099El-Labban GM, Hokkam EN, El-Labban MA, Morsy K, Saadl S, Heissam KS. Intraincisional vs intraperitoneal infiltration of local anaesthetic for controlling early post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy pain. J Minim Access Surg. 2011 Jul;7(3):173-7. doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.83508.
- Results publication: PubMed 19408641Golubovic S, Golubovic V, Cindric-Stancin M, Tokmadzic VS. Intraperitoneal analgesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: bupivacaine versus bupivacaine with tramadol. Coll Antropol. 2009 Mar;33(1):299-302.
- Results publication: PubMed 19142561Albanese AM, Albanese EF, Mino JH, Gomez E, Gomez M, Zandomeni M, Merlo AB. Peritoneal surface area: measurements of 40 structures covered by peritoneum: correlation between total peritoneal surface area and the surface calculated by formulas. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009 Jun;31(5):369-77. doi: 10.1007/s00276-008-0456-9. Epub 2009 Jan 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 20393755Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Soop M, Hill AG. Intraperitoneal use of local anesthetic in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2010 Sep;17(5):637-56. doi: 10.1007/s00534-010-0271-7.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Pain, Postoperative
Not yet recruiting
PRP-Assisted Regenerative Endodontics Versus Conventional Root Canal Treatment in Mature Necrotic Teeth
Pulp Necrosis, Apical Periodontitis
Not yet recruiting
Magnesium Sulphate as an Adjuvant in Combined Costoclavicular Block and Suprascapular Block Versus Interscalene Block for Ambulatory Shoulder Arthroscopy
Postoperative Pain, Shoulder Arthroscopy
Not yet recruiting
Nerve Block of the Vastus Medialis and Anterior Obturator Branch in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With DIDT Graft
Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Reconstruction Surgery
Recruiting
Safety and Efficacy of NTP in Thyroid Surgery: Pilot Study on Morbidity Prevention and Adjuvant Oncological Control
Thyroid Diseases, Wound Healing
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Submucosal Cryotherapy and Anti-inflammatory Drugs for Postoperative Pain Following Root Canal Treatment in Maxillary Molars
Pulpitis
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.
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 Bupivacaine and Dexmedetomidine in people with Pain, Postoperative, run by Zagazig University at 1 site in Saudi Arabia.
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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 Mar 2017. 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 Saudi Arabia. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Each site lists its own contact: choose the nearest one under Trial locations. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Postoperative abdominal and/or shoulder VAS pain score (time frame: at the start of postanesthesia care unit (PACU)(0 time), and 2 Hours, 4 Hours, 6 Hours, 12 Hours, and 24 Hours postoperative). 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 NCT03067740, which also lists 8 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 1 Mar 2017.