Nerve BlockPhase 2NCT03138668
Cutaneous Anesthesia of the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve
A Phase 2 study testing Ropivacaine Injection in people with Nerve Block and Anesthesia, Local, run by Zealand University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to investigate and describe the anatomical differences in distribution of the blocked area following a perineural LFCN (Lateral Femoris Cutaneous Nerve) block with either 8 ml or 16 ml of Ropivacaine, in relation to incision lines used in THA (Total Hip Arthroplasty). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Nerve Block, Anesthesia, Local, Pain, Postoperative
- What is being tested?
- Ropivacaine Injection
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteDenmark
- Study dates
- 19 May 2017to 9 Jun 2017
- Phase
- Phase 2
- 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 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Participant who have given their written consent after understanding the content and limitations of the study.
- ASA 1-2
- BMI ≥ 18 or ≤ 30
Who cannot join
- Participants who can not cooperate in the study.
- Participants who can not speak or understand danish.
- Allergies to the drugs used in the study.
- Alcohol abuse, by the investigators judgement.
- Drug abuse, by the investigators judgement.
- Daily use of prescription required analgesic drugs within the last four weeks.
Show all 12Show fewer
- Consumption of over the counter analgesic drugs within the last 48 hours.
- Neuromuscular defects, former surgery or trauma to the lower extremities. (Hip to knee)
- Broken skin or wounds on the lower extremities, that could be hindering in the evaluation of the anatomical distribution of the LFCN block.
- Diabetes Mellitus.
- Pregnant women (women in the fertile age must be using safe contraception and produce a negative urine-HCG test to be able to participate in the study).
- Large tattoos in the examination area.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Influence of Different Doses of Local Anesthetic on the Distribution of Anesthesia of the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve - a Randomized, Blinded, Paired Study of Healthy Individuals
The purpose of this study is to investigate and describe the anatomical differences in distribution of the blocked area following a perineural LFCN (Lateral Femoris Cutaneous Nerve) block with either 8 ml or 16 ml of Ropivacaine, in relation to incision lines used in THA (Total Hip Arthroplasty). Furthermore, we examine any loss of motor function in Musculus Quadriceps due to posible involvement of the Femoral Nerve. This trial will be conducted in healthy volunteers, as a blinded, randomized, paired trial.
Read the detailed description
Background:
Total hip arthroplasties may be associated with moderate to intense postoperative pain. It is essential that pain treatment, besides being analgesic, has a minimum of side effects, especially those opioid-related, in order to achieve low morbidity, high patient satisfaction and to encourage the functional rehabilitation.
Currently, there is no "gold standard" for pain treatment after THA, and there exists a large variety of treatment options. Some patients who have undergone THA, can be difficult to sufficiently treat with conventional analgesics without reaching additional morphine doses where side effects are unacceptable. It is therefore important to explore other treatment options, including nerve blockade.
Nerve blocks have previously been used after THA operations, but have been hampered by the fact, that the nerve blocks have an effect on the motorial nerve, inhibiting early mobilization and possibly increasing tendencies to fall when mobilized. The Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve (LFCN) is purely sensorial and can therefore relieve the patient of pain without influencing the early mobilization.
In two previous trials, the investigators have studied the effect of LFCN blocks in pain treatment after THA. In the recent study, the LFCN block was applied in patients after THA, who still had visual analogue scale (VAS) mobilization pain > 40 mm when lifting their leg stretched. The LFCN block alleviated significantly the average pain at group level. Meanwhile 42% of patients in the study had no or limited effect of the block. The reason for this may be due to the fact, that LFCN block does not cover all types of pain after THA, but also the fact, that the nerve innervation area has individual differences in the anatomical distribution. We are currently investigating this matter in another study.
LFCN arise from the lumbar plexus, L1-L3. It progresses profound to m. psoas major and over m. iliacus towards the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS). LFCN perforates the inguinal ligament in varying distance from the ASIS. Afterwards it makes a roughly 90 degrees lateral turn, divides into 3-5 branches and innervates skin lying on the lateral, proximal part of the leg. LFCN is found to have multiple anatomical variations therefore it is described to innervate both the lateral, as well as the anterior, parts of the thigh.
A single study has described LFCN as being placed in it's own canal created by a splitting of the Iliac Fascia creating a lumen in which the nerve lies. Therefore, it is hypothesized that a larger injection volume of local anaesthetic could migrate both proximal and distal within the above-described canal, spreading to additional local cutaneous nerves arising from LFCN, or even other nerves (iliohypogastric, ilioinguinal or subcostal), thereby giving rise to a greater blocked distribution area. An unwanted result of a larger injection volume is the possibility of involvement of the femoral nerve, which would result in motoric blockage of the Quadriceps muscle. It has previously been described that Iliac fascia block (injection profound to the iliaca fascia) has a great diversity in area distribution as well as blockage of the femoral nerve. By injecting the local anaesthetic directly into LFCN own canal we seek to minimize the risk of femoral nerve involvement.
Methods:
Prior to applying the nerve block, the measurement methods are tested and baseline values are registered for each leg of each participant.
The effect of a nerve block in healthy individuals can be studied by a number of validated measurement techniques. These techniques consist of mapping the affected anatomical area with temperature discrimination test (cold sensation) by using alcohol soaked gauze and pin-prick test by using a Von Frey filament, and of pain during tonic heat-stimulation of the skin (VAS tonic heat stimulation). The distribution of the sensory block is thus evaluated by high precision.
It is furthermore important to investigate whether the nerve blockade affects the femoral nerve's motorial innervation by testing m.Quadriceps' motoric function.
Course of study:
- Baseline values are measured.
- An orthopedic surgeon draws two hypothetical incisional lines corresponding to the posterior and to the anterior-lateral access to the hip joint on each leg of each participant. The incisional lines will be drawn with UV paint only visible under UV light. No other than the person drawing the lines and the participant will see where the lines are drawn.
- An ultrasound guided LFCN block is then applied by a doctor with extensive experience in applying ultrasound guided blocks. Each trial participant will get two injection of Ropivacaine 0.75%. 8 ml in one leg and 16 ml in the other leg. Neither trial participants, doctors,investigator or outcome assessors will know which volume the participant receives in which leg, that is the trial is blinded.
- After the LFCN block is applied a line called "Line A" is drawn on each leg. Line A goes from trochanter major to the femoral lateral epicondyle and is extended cranial. A line 0A is drawn perpendicular on line A at the trochanter major point. 5 cm above line 0A, is line -1A drawn up to -3A, and 5 cm below line 0A is line 1A drawn, and so forth to line 15A is reached.
- One hour after the nerve block is applied to the right leg, the motorial and sensorial tests will be carried out on each leg, and the outcome will be registered and documented with photography. The test will be carried out on the right leg and then on the left leg in following order:
- Maximum isometric voluntary contraction
- Temperature discrimination test (alcohol soaked gauze)
- Pin-prick (Von Frey filament)
- Photo documentation
- Drawing of the incisional lines under UV-light
- Photo documentation
- Measurement of the incisional lines
- Pain stimulation test. The subjects will be monitored with blood pressure, pulse oximetry and ECG during the trial. The study extends for each participant from the introductory conversation to all testing is complete.
- Conditions
- Nerve Block, Anesthesia, Local, Pain, Postoperative, Anatomical Distribution, Nervus Cutaneous Femoris Lateralis, Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve
- Being tested
- Ropivacaine Injection
- Medical subject headings
- Pain, Postoperative
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Ropivacaine InjectionDrug
Also called 8 ml Ropivacaine 0.75%
All 20 study participants will receive both treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" in form of a nerve block injection around the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" will be randomized to be given in either right or left lower extremity. If the participant is randomized to receive treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" in the right lower extremity, treatment "High dose Ropivacaine" will be given in the left lower extremity, and vice versa. Each participant will thus constitute as their own control.
Ropivacaine InjectionDrug
Also called 16 ml Ropivacaine 0.75%
All 20 study participants will receive both treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" in form of a nerve block injection around the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" will be randomized to be given in either right or left lower extremity. If the participant is randomized to receive treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" in the right lower extremity, treatment "High dose Ropivacaine" will be given in the left lower extremity, and vice versa. Each participant will thus constitute as their own control.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Low dose Ropivacaine | Experimental | Perineural injection of 8 ml of Ropivacaine 0.75% at the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve Receives: Drug: Ropivacaine Injection |
| High dose Ropivacaine | Experimental | Perineural injection of 16 ml of Ropivacaine 0.75% at the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Receives: Drug: Ropivacaine Injection |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) between the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml, assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
Secondary outcomes (9)
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (anterolateral approach) assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (anterolateral approach) between the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml, assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) assessed by pinprick (von frey).
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) between the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml, assessed by pinprick (von frey).
Measured: 1 hour post-block
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (anterolateral approach) assessed by pinprick (von frey).
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (anterolateral approach) between the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml, assessed by pinprick (von frey).
Measured: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most superior part of the incision (posterior approach)
The percentage of patients with no sensory function (VAS = 0) assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most superior part of the incision (posterior approach) on the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most inferior part of the incision (posterior approach)
The percentage of patients with no sensory function (VAS = 0) assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most inferior part of the incision (posterior approach) on the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most superior part of the incision (anterolateral approach)
The percentage of patients with no sensory function (VAS = 0) assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most superior part of the incision (anterolateral approach) on the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most inferior part of the incision (anterolateral approach)
The percentage of patients with no sensory function (VAS = 0) assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most inferior part of the incision (anterolateral approach) on the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
Estimation of the areal of the sensory loss
Estimation of the areal of the sensory loss (including photodocumentation) on the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml. Marked with the incisions
Measured: 1 hour post-block
The difference in MVIC of the knee joint
The difference in MVIC (maximal voluntary isometric contraction) of the knee joint between the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml compared to pre-block values.
Measured: 1 hour post-block
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 May 2017
- Study start19 May 2017
- Primary completion9 Jun 2017
- Study completion9 Jun 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (17)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Nerve BlockStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Zealand University HospitalThe 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 2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Zealand University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Naestved Hospital
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Daniel Hägi-Pedersen, MD, PhD, Study chair, Naestved HospitalKasper H Thybo, MD, Principal investigator, Naestved Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03138668
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SM2-KHT-2016
- Other IDs
- 2016-004936-39, 2016
- Status last verified
- Mar 2017
- First submitted
- 1 May 2017
- Last updated
- 14 Jun 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: If data is requested by an editor, it will be allowed.
Publications
Gerbershagen HJ, Aduckathil S, van Wijck AJ, Peelen LM, Kalkman CJ, Meissner W. Pain intensity on the first day after surgery: a prospective cohort study comparing 179 surgical procedures. Anesthesiology. 2013 Apr;118(4):934-44. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31828866b3.
PubMed 23392233Kehlet H, Dahl JB. Anaesthesia, surgery, and challenges in postoperative recovery. Lancet. 2003 Dec 6;362(9399):1921-8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14966-5.
PubMed 14667752Hojer Karlsen AP, Geisler A, Petersen PL, Mathiesen O, Dahl JB. Postoperative pain treatment after total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. Pain. 2015 Jan;156(1):8-30. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.0000000000000003.
PubMed 25599296Fischer HB, Simanski CJ. A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for analgesia after total hip replacement. Anaesthesia. 2005 Dec;60(12):1189-202. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2005.04382.x.
PubMed 16288617Thybo KH, Schmidt H, Hagi-Pedersen D. Effect of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve-block on pain after total hip arthroplasty: a randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2016 Mar 23;16:21. doi: 10.1186/s12871-016-0183-4.
PubMed 27006014Thybo KH, Mathiesen O, Dahl JB, Schmidt H, Hagi-Pedersen D. Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block after total hip arthroplasty: a randomised trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016 Oct;60(9):1297-305. doi: 10.1111/aas.12764. Epub 2016 Jul 18.
PubMed 27426231Doklamyai P, Agthong S, Chentanez V, Huanmanop T, Amarase C, Surunchupakorn P, Yotnuengnit P. Anatomy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve related to inguinal ligament, adjacent bony landmarks, and femoral artery. Clin Anat. 2008 Nov;21(8):769-74. doi: 10.1002/ca.20716.
PubMed 18942079Surucu HS, Tanyeli E, Sargon MF, Karahan ST. An anatomic study of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Surg Radiol Anat. 1997;19(5):307-10. doi: 10.1007/BF01637599.
PubMed 9413078Grothaus MC, Holt M, Mekhail AO, Ebraheim NA, Yeasting RA. Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve: an anatomic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Aug;(437):164-8. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000164526.08610.97.
PubMed 16056045Dimitropoulos G, Schaepkens van Riempst J, Schertenleib P. Anatomical variation of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve: a case report and review of the literature. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011 Jul;64(7):961-2. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2010.11.020. Epub 2011 Jan 3.
PubMed 21208836Davies A, Crossley A, Harper M, O'Loughlin E. Lateral cutaneous femoral nerve blockade-limited skin incision coverage in hip arthroplasty. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2014 Sep;42(5):625-30. doi: 10.1177/0310057X1404200513.
PubMed 25233177Corujo A, Franco CD, Williams JM. The sensory territory of the lateral cutaneous nerve of the thigh as determined by anatomic dissections and ultrasound-guided blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;37(5):561-4. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e318261c8b6.
PubMed 22878522Tomaszewski KA, Popieluszko P, Henry BM, Roy J, Sanna B, Kijek MR, Walocha JA. The surgical anatomy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve in the inguinal region: a meta-analysis. Hernia. 2016 Oct;20(5):649-57. doi: 10.1007/s10029-016-1493-7. Epub 2016 Apr 26.
PubMed 27115766Rudin D, Manestar M, Ullrich O, Erhardt J, Grob K. The Anatomical Course of the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve with Special Attention to the Anterior Approach to the Hip Joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Apr 6;98(7):561-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.01022.
PubMed 27053584Hanna A. The lateral femoral cutaneous nerve canal. J Neurosurg. 2017 Mar;126(3):972-978. doi: 10.3171/2016.1.JNS152262. Epub 2016 Apr 22.
PubMed 27104839
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Jun 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Influence of Different Doses of Local Anesthetic on the Distribution of Anesthesia of the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve - a Randomized, Blinded, Paired Study of Healthy Individuals
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03138668
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SM2-KHT-2016
- Conditions
- Nerve Block, Anesthesia, Local, Pain, Postoperative, Anatomical Distribution, Nervus Cutaneous Femoris Lateralis, Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Zealand University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Naestved Hospital
- Study start
- 19 May 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Jun 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 9 Jun 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 May 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.
The purpose of this study is to investigate and describe the anatomical differences in distribution of the blocked area following a perineural LFCN (Lateral Femoris Cutaneous Nerve) block with either 8 ml or 16 ml of Ropivacaine, in relation to incision lines used in THA (Total Hip Arthroplasty). Furthermore, we examine any loss of motor function in Musculus Quadriceps due to posible involvement of the Femoral Nerve. This trial will be conducted in healthy volunteers, as a blinded, randomized, paired trial.
Detailed description
Background:
Total hip arthroplasties may be associated with moderate to intense postoperative pain. It is essential that pain treatment, besides being analgesic, has a minimum of side effects, especially those opioid-related, in order to achieve low morbidity, high patient satisfaction and to encourage the functional rehabilitation.
Currently, there is no "gold standard" for pain treatment after THA, and there exists a large variety of treatment options. Some patients who have undergone THA, can be difficult to sufficiently treat with conventional analgesics without reaching additional morphine doses where side effects are unacceptable. It is therefore important to explore other treatment options, including nerve blockade.
Nerve blocks have previously been used after THA operations, but have been hampered by the fact, that the nerve blocks have an effect on the motorial nerve, inhibiting early mobilization and possibly increasing tendencies to fall when mobilized. The Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve (LFCN) is purely sensorial and can therefore relieve the patient of pain without influencing the early mobilization.
In two previous trials, the investigators have studied the effect of LFCN blocks in pain treatment after THA. In the recent study, the LFCN block was applied in patients after THA, who still had visual analogue scale (VAS) mobilization pain > 40 mm when lifting their leg stretched. The LFCN block alleviated significantly the average pain at group level. Meanwhile 42% of patients in the study had no or limited effect of the block. The reason for this may be due to the fact, that LFCN block does not cover all types of pain after THA, but also the fact, that the nerve innervation area has individual differences in the anatomical distribution. We are currently investigating this matter in another study.
LFCN arise from the lumbar plexus, L1-L3. It progresses profound to m. psoas major and over m. iliacus towards the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS). LFCN perforates the inguinal ligament in varying distance from the ASIS. Afterwards it makes a roughly 90 degrees lateral turn, divides into 3-5 branches and innervates skin lying on the lateral, proximal part of the leg. LFCN is found to have multiple anatomical variations therefore it is described to innervate both the lateral, as well as the anterior, parts of the thigh.
A single study has described LFCN as being placed in it's own canal created by a splitting of the Iliac Fascia creating a lumen in which the nerve lies. Therefore, it is hypothesized that a larger injection volume of local anaesthetic could migrate both proximal and distal within the above-described canal, spreading to additional local cutaneous nerves arising from LFCN, or even other nerves (iliohypogastric, ilioinguinal or subcostal), thereby giving rise to a greater blocked distribution area. An unwanted result of a larger injection volume is the possibility of involvement of the femoral nerve, which would result in motoric blockage of the Quadriceps muscle. It has previously been described that Iliac fascia block (injection profound to the iliaca fascia) has a great diversity in area distribution as well as blockage of the femoral nerve. By injecting the local anaesthetic directly into LFCN own canal we seek to minimize the risk of femoral nerve involvement.
Methods:
Prior to applying the nerve block, the measurement methods are tested and baseline values are registered for each leg of each participant.
The effect of a nerve block in healthy individuals can be studied by a number of validated measurement techniques. These techniques consist of mapping the affected anatomical area with temperature discrimination test (cold sensation) by using alcohol soaked gauze and pin-prick test by using a Von Frey filament, and of pain during tonic heat-stimulation of the skin (VAS tonic heat stimulation). The distribution of the sensory block is thus evaluated by high precision.
It is furthermore important to investigate whether the nerve blockade affects the femoral nerve's motorial innervation by testing m.Quadriceps' motoric function.
Course of study:
- Baseline values are measured.
- An orthopedic surgeon draws two hypothetical incisional lines corresponding to the posterior and to the anterior-lateral access to the hip joint on each leg of each participant. The incisional lines will be drawn with UV paint only visible under UV light. No other than the person drawing the lines and the participant will see where the lines are drawn.
- An ultrasound guided LFCN block is then applied by a doctor with extensive experience in applying ultrasound guided blocks. Each trial participant will get two injection of Ropivacaine 0.75%. 8 ml in one leg and 16 ml in the other leg. Neither trial participants, doctors,investigator or outcome assessors will know which volume the participant receives in which leg, that is the trial is blinded.
- After the LFCN block is applied a line called "Line A" is drawn on each leg. Line A goes from trochanter major to the femoral lateral epicondyle and is extended cranial. A line 0A is drawn perpendicular on line A at the trochanter major point. 5 cm above line 0A, is line -1A drawn up to -3A, and 5 cm below line 0A is line 1A drawn, and so forth to line 15A is reached.
- One hour after the nerve block is applied to the right leg, the motorial and sensorial tests will be carried out on each leg, and the outcome will be registered and documented with photography. The test will be carried out on the right leg and then on the left leg in following order:
- Maximum isometric voluntary contraction
- Temperature discrimination test (alcohol soaked gauze)
- Pin-prick (Von Frey filament)
- Photo documentation
- Drawing of the incisional lines under UV-light
- Photo documentation
- Measurement of the incisional lines
- Pain stimulation test. The subjects will be monitored with blood pressure, pulse oximetry and ECG during the trial. The study extends for each participant from the introductory conversation to all testing is complete.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Low dose Ropivacaine | Experimental | Drug: Ropivacaine InjectionPerineural injection of 8 ml of Ropivacaine 0.75% at the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve |
| High dose Ropivacaine | Experimental | Drug: Ropivacaine InjectionPerineural injection of 16 ml of Ropivacaine 0.75% at the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Participant who have given their written consent after understanding the content and limitations of the study.
- ASA 1-2
- BMI ≥ 18 or ≤ 30
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- Participants who can not cooperate in the study.
- Participants who can not speak or understand danish.
- Allergies to the drugs used in the study.
- Alcohol abuse, by the investigators judgement.
- Drug abuse, by the investigators judgement.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Ropivacaine InjectionAlso: 8 ml Ropivacaine 0.75%All 20 study participants will receive both treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" in form of a nerve block injection around the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" will be randomized to be given in either right or left lower extremity. If the participant is randomized to receive treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" in the right lower extremity, treatment "High dose Ropivacaine" will be given in the left lower extremity, and vice versa. Each participant will thus constitute as their own control. | Drug | Low dose Ropivacaine |
| Ropivacaine InjectionAlso: 16 ml Ropivacaine 0.75%All 20 study participants will receive both treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" in form of a nerve block injection around the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" and "High dose Ropivacaine" will be randomized to be given in either right or left lower extremity. If the participant is randomized to receive treatment "Low dose Ropivacaine" in the right lower extremity, treatment "High dose Ropivacaine" will be given in the left lower extremity, and vice versa. Each participant will thus constitute as their own control. | Drug | High dose Ropivacaine |
Primary outcome
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) between the side given ropivacaine, 16 ml, versus the side given ropivacaine, 8 ml, assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
9 secondary outcomes
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (anterolateral approach) assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab.
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) assessed by pinprick (von frey).
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (anterolateral approach) assessed by pinprick (von frey).
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most superior part of the incision (posterior approach)
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most inferior part of the incision (posterior approach)
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most superior part of the incision (anterolateral approach)
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
The percentage of patients with no sensory function assessed by Maximum pain during tonic heat stimulation test on the most inferior part of the incision (anterolateral approach)
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
Estimation of the areal of the sensory loss
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
The difference in MVIC of the knee joint
Time frame: 1 hour post-block
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 14 Jun 2017.
- Background: PubMed 23392233Gerbershagen HJ, Aduckathil S, van Wijck AJ, Peelen LM, Kalkman CJ, Meissner W. Pain intensity on the first day after surgery: a prospective cohort study comparing 179 surgical procedures. Anesthesiology. 2013 Apr;118(4):934-44. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31828866b3.
- Background: PubMed 14667752Kehlet H, Dahl JB. Anaesthesia, surgery, and challenges in postoperative recovery. Lancet. 2003 Dec 6;362(9399):1921-8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14966-5.
- Background: PubMed 25599296Hojer Karlsen AP, Geisler A, Petersen PL, Mathiesen O, Dahl JB. Postoperative pain treatment after total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. Pain. 2015 Jan;156(1):8-30. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.0000000000000003.
- Background: PubMed 16288617Fischer HB, Simanski CJ. A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for analgesia after total hip replacement. Anaesthesia. 2005 Dec;60(12):1189-202. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2005.04382.x.
- Background: PubMed 27006014Thybo KH, Schmidt H, Hagi-Pedersen D. Effect of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve-block on pain after total hip arthroplasty: a randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2016 Mar 23;16:21. doi: 10.1186/s12871-016-0183-4.
- Background: PubMed 27426231Thybo KH, Mathiesen O, Dahl JB, Schmidt H, Hagi-Pedersen D. Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block after total hip arthroplasty: a randomised trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016 Oct;60(9):1297-305. doi: 10.1111/aas.12764. Epub 2016 Jul 18.
- Background: PubMed 18942079Doklamyai P, Agthong S, Chentanez V, Huanmanop T, Amarase C, Surunchupakorn P, Yotnuengnit P. Anatomy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve related to inguinal ligament, adjacent bony landmarks, and femoral artery. Clin Anat. 2008 Nov;21(8):769-74. doi: 10.1002/ca.20716.
- Background: PubMed 9413078Surucu HS, Tanyeli E, Sargon MF, Karahan ST. An anatomic study of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Surg Radiol Anat. 1997;19(5):307-10. doi: 10.1007/BF01637599.
- Background: PubMed 16056045Grothaus MC, Holt M, Mekhail AO, Ebraheim NA, Yeasting RA. Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve: an anatomic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Aug;(437):164-8. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000164526.08610.97.
- Background: PubMed 21208836Dimitropoulos G, Schaepkens van Riempst J, Schertenleib P. Anatomical variation of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve: a case report and review of the literature. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011 Jul;64(7):961-2. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2010.11.020. Epub 2011 Jan 3.
- Background: PubMed 25233177Davies A, Crossley A, Harper M, O'Loughlin E. Lateral cutaneous femoral nerve blockade-limited skin incision coverage in hip arthroplasty. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2014 Sep;42(5):625-30. doi: 10.1177/0310057X1404200513.
- Background: PubMed 22878522Corujo A, Franco CD, Williams JM. The sensory territory of the lateral cutaneous nerve of the thigh as determined by anatomic dissections and ultrasound-guided blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;37(5):561-4. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e318261c8b6.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. If data is requested by an editor, it will be allowed.
Related trials for Nerve Block
RecruitingPhase 1
IL-17 Blockade to Decrease irAEs (REPLAY)
Metastatic Melanoma
Recruiting
Minimum Effective Local Anesthetic Volume for Ultrasound Guided Superior Trunk Block
Musculoskeletal Diseases or Conditions
Active, not recruiting
Efficacy of Laparoscopic-Assisted TAP Block in Laparoscopic Appendectomy
Appendectomy, Laparoscopic, Blockades Neuromuscular
Recruiting
SIRI Levels Following PENG Block in Pediatric Hip Surgery
Hip Dysplasia
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Pectoral Nerve Block (PECS) Using Magnesium Sulfate Added to Dexamethasone on Quality of Recovery and Chronic Post-Mastectomy Pain
Breast Cancer, Postoperative Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Daniel Hägi-Pedersen, MD, PhD study chair
Naestved Hospital
Kasper H Thybo, MD principal investigator
Naestved Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing Ropivacaine Injection in people with Nerve Block and Anesthesia, Local, run by Zealand University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
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 3 inclusion and 12 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 14 Jun 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 Denmark. 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 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
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?
Difference in the percentage coverage of the incision (posterior approach) assessed by cold sensation with an alcohol swab. (time frame: 1 hour post-block). 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 NCT03138668, which also lists 17 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 14 Jun 2017.