Upper Gastrointestinal EndoscopyNCT06566326
Oropharyngeoesophageal Topical Anesthesia Versus Propofol - Ketamine Sedation for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
A study testing Propofol and ketamine and Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool in people with Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Topical Anesthesia, run by Zagazig University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an essential and widely used diagnostic and therapeutic procedure in gastroenterology. EGD can be performed in association with topical anesthesia of the pharynx, intravenous anesthesia, or with their combination. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 to 64 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Topical Anesthesia, Intravenous Sedation
- What is being tested?
- Propofol and ketamine and Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2023to 30 Jul 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 to 64 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Both sexes. Patients aged between 21-64 years old undergoing elective upper GI endoscopy after taking informed consent. ASA class II /III BMI < 30kg/m2
Who cannot join
- Hypersensitivity to drugs included in the study. Difficult airway or known airway problems. Active bleeding from esophageal varices. Emergency procedure Low base line oxygen saturation < 92% at room air. Cases expected to need general anesthesia for the procedure as judged by endoscopist.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Oropharyngeoesophageal Topical Anesthesia Prototype Device Versus Intravenous (Propofol - Ketamine Sedation) for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an essential and widely used diagnostic and therapeutic procedure in gastroenterology. EGD can be performed in association with topical anesthesia of the pharynx, intravenous anesthesia, or with their combination. Sedation is required to alleviate anxiety, provide analgesia, amnesia and to improve endoscopic performance specifically in therapeutic procedures. However, sedation-related gastrointestinal endoscopy complications when occur, may lead to significant morbidity and occasional mortality especially with moderate and deep sedation. Cardiopulmonary complications resulting from aspiration, oversedation, hypoventilation, vasovagal reflex, and airway obstruction account for more than 50% of all complications associated with upper endoscopy. Topical pharyngeal anesthesia currently is a requirement for upper endoscopy to provide patients with the best comfort in unsedated EGD. In Hong Kong, 10% Xylocaine pump spray (AstraZeneca, Sodertalje, Sweden) is the pharyngeal anesthesia generally used as a premedication in unsedated EGD. The aim of this study was to provide more effective, safer, tolerable and offers quicker recovery technique using either the modified Oropharyngeoesophageal Topical Anesthesia (OPETA) technique or conventional intravenous sedation by prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine (ketofol 4:1) .
Read the detailed description
This Randomized prospective clinical study was conducted at Zagazig University Hospitals in anesthesia, intensive care and pain management department at the outpatient endoscopy unit service at general medicine department on 60 patients scheduled to undergo elective upper GI endoscopy. All upper GI endoscopy procedures was preformed by OLYMPUS EVIS EXERA III CV- 190 .Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
According to a computer-generated randomization table, patients were allocated to two equal groups (30 patients in each group). Group (PK): Included 30 patients received intravenous sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine (in the ratio 4:1).
Group (OPETA):
Included 30 patients underwent modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool (Nofal 2010).
All participants were subjected to:
Obtaining of history and physical examination including vital signs, cardiac and chest condition as well as excluding criteria. Routine laboratory investigations included Complete blood count (CBC), Random blood sugar, coagulation profile (PT, PTT, INR) liver function tests , renal function tests . General and airway examination was done All patients were kept fasting for 4 hours from clear fluids and 6 hours from other foods Midazolam 2-2.5 mg IV was given to all patients at holding area.
Study design:
After routine pre-operative evaluation, standard monitors were connected to the patients: pulse oximetry, noninvasive blood pressure and electrocardiogram and baseline parameter were recorded (peripheral oxygen saturation, mean arterial pressure and heart rate). Intravenous (IV) line will be inserted and atropine IV 1 mg administered for all patients. Patients will be allocated into two equal groups by a computer-generated randomization table:
Group (PK) (n=30):
Patients received intravenous sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine in ratio (4:1). It is prepared by mixing 0.8 mg/kg propofol with 0.2 mg/kg ketamine (4:1) in an IV bolus, followed by half of the initial dose every 3 minutes as needed for sedation. The desired level of sedation was achieved (more than score 4) using Modified Ramsay sedation score) before allowing endoscopiest to start the procedure, then the score was assessed every 3 minutes before giving of top up doses of ketofol 4:1 (half of the initial dose) if needed, then the range and median of modified Ramsay sedation score was calculated.
Group (OPETA) (n=30):
Every patient by him or herself or by help of anesthetist topicalized the anterior tonsillar pillar on both sides and the posterior one third of the tongue as well as the posterior pharyngeal wall using xylocain gel 5 % on the tip of his index or middle finger then after 5-7 minutes the patient inserted his middle finger deeply into his mouth as a test for tolerability before the insertion of OPETA tool (the patient was instructed not to swallow the used local anesthetic but gurgle it as long as possible). While the head tilted forward ("chin on chest"), Lubricated Oropharyngeoseogageal pack (OPETA device), soaked with 10 ml lidocaine 2 % mixed with adrenaline 1/200000 was gradually placed by the patient himself or herself with assistance from the anesthetist and patients swallowing into the esophagus. To ensure effective topical anesthesia and patient tolerance, the pack was left in place for three to five minutes before being moved up, down, clockwise and anti-clockwise.. If necessary, increments of 5 ml of 2% lidocaine/adrenaline mixture was injected through the device until the patient is comfortable. For all patients, the maximum local anesthetic dose (5 mg/kg of lidocaine without adrenaline and 7 mg/kg of a lidocaine with adrenaline 1:200000) was meticulously considered. However, we tryied to keep the maximum dosage at 5 mg/kg as we dealing with topical anesthesia at the mucous membrane.
The Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesa (OPETA) device:
It is a handmade device of a patented concept (patency no 23733, academy of scientific research and technology, ARST. Egypt, it is originally used as supraglottic topical anesthesia device. The prototype OPETA device consists of orogastric tube surrounded by a cotton gauze of 5 cm. width. The tube and device size are age dependent and usually of 16-gauge tube size. The tip of the orogastric tube is burnt e.g., by a flame of lighter and simultaneously clamped by a needle holder. Air under pressure is then pushed through the tube port using a 10 ml syringe to verify integrity of the closed tip. Starting from the burnt closed tip, the orogastric tube was punctured with a 21-gauge needle in two perpendicular planes with 1 cm in between each puncture within the same plane for 45 to 50 cm in adult cases representing the length of a line passing from the mouth to earlobe then to xyphoid process. 5 cm wide cotton gauze was wrapped over the punctured part of the tube and secured with 2- 0 Mersilk. After inserting the device into the oropharyngeal cavity and esophagus, local anesthetic (LA) /adrenaline mixture was injected into the punctured tube when required. The injected LA was sprayed through the puncture sites to the surrounding cotton gauze that is in contact with the oropharyngeal and esophageal mucosa, anesthetizing it. During the device insertion, if it is required to make the device less malleable for easier insertion, part of an ureteric guide wire or ureteric catheter cover could be inserted within the tube of the device to strengthen it. After getting the patient sedated or topically anesthetized, endoscopist started the procedure. The modified Aldrete's scoring system was used for the discharge of all patients from recovery. Achievement of at least 9 out of 10 scores was the criteria for discharge in this study. Twenty four hour after the procedure all patients were asked through telephone connection about their experiences regarding the intraprocedural events, they were asked to score their satisfaction level during the procedure in terms of recalling any painful or other undesirable intraprocedural events.
Monitoring:
Standard monitors for all cases include patient's heart rate, oxygen saturation, and MAP pre-procedural (basal) for both topical and sedation groups then every 5 minutes throughout the procedure until the patient is fully alert. Side effects such as hypotension and bradycardia were recorded, if hypotension occurs (decrease in MAP more than 20% from baseline) it was treated with normal saline and if blood pressure was not corrected, ephedrine 5 mg was administered incrementally, and if bradycardia occurs (HR < 60 beats/min) it was treated with atropine 0.01 mg/kg).
Post procedural assessment:
- Patient assessment:
- Two separate questionnaires were asked to the patients in order to rate the procedure 24 hours after discharge when they become completely alert (through telephone connection). The patients answered the following questions:
- The difficulty in insertion of OPETA device.
- Discomfort they felt during procedure. Answers was given on a 0 -10-mm numeric rating scale. The left end of the scale (0 mm) will be defined as ''not at all'' and the right end (10 mm) as ''extremely.
- Endoscopist assessment:
The endoscopist assessed the following:
- Difficulty in introducing the endoscope.
- The overall technical difficulty of the examination.
- Gagging whether occurred or not. For endoscopist's assessment the 0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
Data collection:
Patient characteristics (Age, Sex, ASA physical status class, BMI). Indications of endoscopic procedure. Baseline heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), and oxygen saturation were recorded every five minutes throughout endoscopic procedure and every 10 minutes when the patients at PACU. Patient Assessment: numeric rating scale (0 …………..…….10)
- Discomfort felt during the procedure.
- Willing to Re-do in OPETA group. Endoscopist Assessment: numeric rating scale (0 …………….. 10) 1. Difficulty in introducing the endoscope. 2. Gagging with esophageal intubation. 3. The endoscopist satisfaction. Number of doses in PK group.
Time:
- OPETA time: Time from administration of self or helped oral topical anesthesia till getting the OPETA device manipulation tolerated by the patient (moving the OPETA tool up and down clockwise and anti-clockwise without distressing the patient).
- Sedation time: Time from starting intravenous sedation until ability to insert endoscope freely.
- Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope.
- Recovery time: Time since the endoscopist finish the endoscopy until the patient is completely alert and oriented to space and time.
- Discharge time: Time from admission to the recovery area to get the patient ready for discharge from the recovery area using modified aldert score.
- Total time: summation of previous times. Any complications e.g., systemic toxicity, respiratory depression, desaturation, nausea and vomiting in both studied groups were recorded and managed.
- Being tested
- Propofol and ketamine, Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool
- Keywords
- Topical Anesthesia, Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Propofol - ketamine sedation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Propofol and ketamineDrug
Also called Intravenous sedation
Patients received IV sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine in ratio (4:1). It is prepared by mixing 0.8 mg/kg propofol with 0.2 mg/kg ketamine (4:1) in an IV bolus, followed by half of the initial dose every 3 minutes as needed for sedation. The desired level of sedation was achieved (more than score 4) using Modified Ramsay sedation score) before allowing endoscopiest to start the procedure, then the score was assessed every 3 minutes before giving of top up doses of ketofol 4:1 (half of the initial dose) if needed, then the range and median of modified Ramsay sedation score was calculated.
Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype toolDevice
Topicalization was done for anterior tonsillar pillar on both sides and posterior 1/3 of tongue and posterior pharyngeal wall using xylocain gel 5 % on tip of his index or middle finger then after 5-7 min. patient inserted his middle finger deeply into his mouth as a test for tolerability before insertion of OPETA tool. While head tilted forward, Lubricated OPETA device, soaked with 10 ml lidocaine 2 % mixed with adrenaline 1/200000 was gradually placed by patient with assistance from anesthetist \& patients swallowing into esophagus. To ensure effective topical anesthesia and patient tolerance, pack was left in place for 3-5 min. before being moved up, down, clockwise \& anti-clockwise.. If necessary, increments of 5 ml of 2% lidocaine/adrenaline mixture was injected through device until patient is comfortable. Maximum LA dose was kept at 5 mg/kg.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group (PK) | Active comparator | Patients received intravenous sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine (in the ratio 4:1) Receives: Drug: Propofol and ketamine |
| Group (OPETA) | Active comparator | Patients underwent modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool Receives: Device: Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patient discomfort felt during endoscopy
0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
Measured: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope
Secondary outcomes (3)
Difficulty in insertion of OPETA device
0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
Measured: OPETA time: Time from administration of self or helped oral topical anesthesia till getting the OPETA device manipulation tolerated by the patient (moving the OPETA tool up and down clockwise and anti-clockwise without distressing the patient).
Difficulty in introducing the endoscope
0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
Measured: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope
Overall technical difficulty of the examination
0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
Measured: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Aug 2024
- Study start1 Jan 2023
- Primary completion1 Jul 2023
- Study completion30 Jul 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Upper Gastrointestinal EndoscopyStudies 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Zagazig University
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ashraf Torki, Zagazig University
- Investigators
- Osama A Nofal, MD, Study director, Zagazig UniversityRania A Kamel, MD, Study chair, Zagazig UniversityBadiea B Elhag, Msc, Principal investigator, Zagazig University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06566326
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- ZU-IRB #10002
- Status last verified
- Jul 2023
- First submitted
- 20 Aug 2024
- Last updated
- 30 Aug 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Amornyotin, S. (2015). Anesthesia innovations for endoscopy of gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy-innovative uses and emerging technologies. Croatia: InTech, 39-61.
de la Morena F, Santander C, Esteban C, de Cuenca B, Garcia JA, Sanchez J, Moreno R. Usefulness of applying lidocaine in esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed under sedation with propofol. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May 16;5(5):231-9. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v5.i5.231.
PubMed 23678376hfeda, M. A. M., Ganaw, A., Ahmed, S. M. G., Chanda, A., Mahood, Z., Jabira, S., et al . (2021). Anaesthetic Considerations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopies. In Esophagitis and Gastritis-Recent Updates. (Edited by Vincenzo Neri and Monjur Ahmed) Ch 9, P. 141- 158. BoD- Book on Demand .
Feng AY, Kaye AD, Kaye RJ, Belani K, Urman RD. Novel propofol derivatives and implications for anesthesia practice. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Jan-Mar;33(1):9-15. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.202205.
PubMed 28413268Heuss LT, Hanhart A, Dell-Kuster S, Zdrnja K, Ortmann M, Beglinger C, Bucher HC, Degen L. Propofol sedation alone or in combination with pharyngeal lidocaine anesthesia for routine upper GI endoscopy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Dec;74(6):1207-14. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.072. Epub 2011 Oct 13.
PubMed 22000794Kamalipour, H., Joghataei, P., & Kamali, K. (2009). Comparing the Combination Effect of Propofol-Ketamine and Propofol-Alfentanil on Hemodynamic Stability during Induction of General Anesthesia in the Elderly.
Nofal O. Awake light-aided blind nasal intubation: prototype device. Br J Anaesth. 2010 Feb;104(2):254-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aep367. Epub 2009 Dec 26.
PubMed 20037149
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Aug 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Oropharyngeoesophageal Topical Anesthesia Prototype Device Versus Intravenous (Propofol - Ketamine Sedation) for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06566326
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ZU-IRB #10002
- Keywords
- Topical Anesthesia, Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Propofol - ketamine sedation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Zagazig UniversityOther government
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jul 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jul 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Aug 2024 (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.
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an essential and widely used diagnostic and therapeutic procedure in gastroenterology. EGD can be performed in association with topical anesthesia of the pharynx, intravenous anesthesia, or with their combination. Sedation is required to alleviate anxiety, provide analgesia, amnesia and to improve endoscopic performance specifically in therapeutic procedures. However, sedation-related gastrointestinal endoscopy complications when occur, may lead to significant morbidity and occasional mortality especially with moderate and deep sedation. Cardiopulmonary complications resulting from aspiration, oversedation, hypoventilation, vasovagal reflex, and airway obstruction account for more than 50% of all complications associated with upper endoscopy. Topical pharyngeal anesthesia currently is a requirement for upper endoscopy to provide patients with the best comfort in unsedated EGD. In Hong Kong, 10% Xylocaine pump spray (AstraZeneca, Sodertalje, Sweden) is the pharyngeal anesthesia generally used as a premedication in unsedated EGD. The aim of this study was to provide more effective, safer, tolerable and offers quicker recovery technique using either the modified Oropharyngeoesophageal Topical Anesthesia (OPETA) technique or conventional intravenous sedation by prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine (ketofol 4:1) .
Detailed description
This Randomized prospective clinical study was conducted at Zagazig University Hospitals in anesthesia, intensive care and pain management department at the outpatient endoscopy unit service at general medicine department on 60 patients scheduled to undergo elective upper GI endoscopy. All upper GI endoscopy procedures was preformed by OLYMPUS EVIS EXERA III CV- 190 .Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
According to a computer-generated randomization table, patients were allocated to two equal groups (30 patients in each group). Group (PK): Included 30 patients received intravenous sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine (in the ratio 4:1).
Group (OPETA):
Included 30 patients underwent modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool (Nofal 2010).
All participants were subjected to:
Obtaining of history and physical examination including vital signs, cardiac and chest condition as well as excluding criteria. Routine laboratory investigations included Complete blood count (CBC), Random blood sugar, coagulation profile (PT, PTT, INR) liver function tests , renal function tests . General and airway examination was done All patients were kept fasting for 4 hours from clear fluids and 6 hours from other foods Midazolam 2-2.5 mg IV was given to all patients at holding area.
Study design:
After routine pre-operative evaluation, standard monitors were connected to the patients: pulse oximetry, noninvasive blood pressure and electrocardiogram and baseline parameter were recorded (peripheral oxygen saturation, mean arterial pressure and heart rate). Intravenous (IV) line will be inserted and atropine IV 1 mg administered for all patients. Patients will be allocated into two equal groups by a computer-generated randomization table:
Group (PK) (n=30):
Patients received intravenous sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine in ratio (4:1). It is prepared by mixing 0.8 mg/kg propofol with 0.2 mg/kg ketamine (4:1) in an IV bolus, followed by half of the initial dose every 3 minutes as needed for sedation. The desired level of sedation was achieved (more than score 4) using Modified Ramsay sedation score) before allowing endoscopiest to start the procedure, then the score was assessed every 3 minutes before giving of top up doses of ketofol 4:1 (half of the initial dose) if needed, then the range and median of modified Ramsay sedation score was calculated.
Group (OPETA) (n=30):
Every patient by him or herself or by help of anesthetist topicalized the anterior tonsillar pillar on both sides and the posterior one third of the tongue as well as the posterior pharyngeal wall using xylocain gel 5 % on the tip of his index or middle finger then after 5-7 minutes the patient inserted his middle finger deeply into his mouth as a test for tolerability before the insertion of OPETA tool (the patient was instructed not to swallow the used local anesthetic but gurgle it as long as possible). While the head tilted forward ("chin on chest"), Lubricated Oropharyngeoseogageal pack (OPETA device), soaked with 10 ml lidocaine 2 % mixed with adrenaline 1/200000 was gradually placed by the patient himself or herself with assistance from the anesthetist and patients swallowing into the esophagus. To ensure effective topical anesthesia and patient tolerance, the pack was left in place for three to five minutes before being moved up, down, clockwise and anti-clockwise.. If necessary, increments of 5 ml of 2% lidocaine/adrenaline mixture was injected through the device until the patient is comfortable. For all patients, the maximum local anesthetic dose (5 mg/kg of lidocaine without adrenaline and 7 mg/kg of a lidocaine with adrenaline 1:200000) was meticulously considered. However, we tryied to keep the maximum dosage at 5 mg/kg as we dealing with topical anesthesia at the mucous membrane.
The Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesa (OPETA) device:
It is a handmade device of a patented concept (patency no 23733, academy of scientific research and technology, ARST. Egypt, it is originally used as supraglottic topical anesthesia device. The prototype OPETA device consists of orogastric tube surrounded by a cotton gauze of 5 cm. width. The tube and device size are age dependent and usually of 16-gauge tube size. The tip of the orogastric tube is burnt e.g., by a flame of lighter and simultaneously clamped by a needle holder. Air under pressure is then pushed through the tube port using a 10 ml syringe to verify integrity of the closed tip. Starting from the burnt closed tip, the orogastric tube was punctured with a 21-gauge needle in two perpendicular planes with 1 cm in between each puncture within the same plane for 45 to 50 cm in adult cases representing the length of a line passing from the mouth to earlobe then to xyphoid process. 5 cm wide cotton gauze was wrapped over the punctured part of the tube and secured with 2- 0 Mersilk. After inserting the device into the oropharyngeal cavity and esophagus, local anesthetic (LA) /adrenaline mixture was injected into the punctured tube when required. The injected LA was sprayed through the puncture sites to the surrounding cotton gauze that is in contact with the oropharyngeal and esophageal mucosa, anesthetizing it. During the device insertion, if it is required to make the device less malleable for easier insertion, part of an ureteric guide wire or ureteric catheter cover could be inserted within the tube of the device to strengthen it. After getting the patient sedated or topically anesthetized, endoscopist started the procedure. The modified Aldrete's scoring system was used for the discharge of all patients from recovery. Achievement of at least 9 out of 10 scores was the criteria for discharge in this study. Twenty four hour after the procedure all patients were asked through telephone connection about their experiences regarding the intraprocedural events, they were asked to score their satisfaction level during the procedure in terms of recalling any painful or other undesirable intraprocedural events.
Monitoring:
Standard monitors for all cases include patient's heart rate, oxygen saturation, and MAP pre-procedural (basal) for both topical and sedation groups then every 5 minutes throughout the procedure until the patient is fully alert. Side effects such as hypotension and bradycardia were recorded, if hypotension occurs (decrease in MAP more than 20% from baseline) it was treated with normal saline and if blood pressure was not corrected, ephedrine 5 mg was administered incrementally, and if bradycardia occurs (HR < 60 beats/min) it was treated with atropine 0.01 mg/kg).
Post procedural assessment:
- Patient assessment:
- Two separate questionnaires were asked to the patients in order to rate the procedure 24 hours after discharge when they become completely alert (through telephone connection). The patients answered the following questions:
- The difficulty in insertion of OPETA device.
- Discomfort they felt during procedure. Answers was given on a 0 -10-mm numeric rating scale. The left end of the scale (0 mm) will be defined as ''not at all'' and the right end (10 mm) as ''extremely.
- Endoscopist assessment:
The endoscopist assessed the following:
- Difficulty in introducing the endoscope.
- The overall technical difficulty of the examination.
- Gagging whether occurred or not. For endoscopist's assessment the 0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
Data collection:
Patient characteristics (Age, Sex, ASA physical status class, BMI). Indications of endoscopic procedure. Baseline heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), and oxygen saturation were recorded every five minutes throughout endoscopic procedure and every 10 minutes when the patients at PACU. Patient Assessment: numeric rating scale (0 …………..…….10)
- Discomfort felt during the procedure.
- Willing to Re-do in OPETA group. Endoscopist Assessment: numeric rating scale (0 …………….. 10) 1. Difficulty in introducing the endoscope. 2. Gagging with esophageal intubation. 3. The endoscopist satisfaction. Number of doses in PK group.
Time:
- OPETA time: Time from administration of self or helped oral topical anesthesia till getting the OPETA device manipulation tolerated by the patient (moving the OPETA tool up and down clockwise and anti-clockwise without distressing the patient).
- Sedation time: Time from starting intravenous sedation until ability to insert endoscope freely.
- Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope.
- Recovery time: Time since the endoscopist finish the endoscopy until the patient is completely alert and oriented to space and time.
- Discharge time: Time from admission to the recovery area to get the patient ready for discharge from the recovery area using modified aldert score.
- Total time: summation of previous times. Any complications e.g., systemic toxicity, respiratory depression, desaturation, nausea and vomiting in both studied groups were recorded and managed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group (PK) | Active comparator | Drug: Propofol and ketaminePatients received intravenous sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine (in the ratio 4:1) |
| Group (OPETA) | Active comparator | Device: Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype toolPatients underwent modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 to 64 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Both sexes. Patients aged between 21-64 years old undergoing elective upper GI endoscopy after taking informed consent. ASA class II /III BMI < 30kg/m2
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Hypersensitivity to drugs included in the study. Difficult airway or known airway problems. Active bleeding from esophageal varices. Emergency procedure Low base line oxygen saturation < 92% at room air. Cases expected to need general anesthesia for the procedure as judged by endoscopist.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Propofol and ketamineAlso: Intravenous sedationPatients received IV sedation using prepared mixture of propofol and ketamine in ratio (4:1). It is prepared by mixing 0.8 mg/kg propofol with 0.2 mg/kg ketamine (4:1) in an IV bolus, followed by half of the initial dose every 3 minutes as needed for sedation. The desired level of sedation was achieved (more than score 4) using Modified Ramsay sedation score) before allowing endoscopiest to start the procedure, then the score was assessed every 3 minutes before giving of top up doses of ketofol 4:1 (half of the initial dose) if needed, then the range and median of modified Ramsay sedation score was calculated. | Drug | Group (PK) |
| Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype toolTopicalization was done for anterior tonsillar pillar on both sides and posterior 1/3 of tongue and posterior pharyngeal wall using xylocain gel 5 % on tip of his index or middle finger then after 5-7 min. patient inserted his middle finger deeply into his mouth as a test for tolerability before insertion of OPETA tool. While head tilted forward, Lubricated OPETA device, soaked with 10 ml lidocaine 2 % mixed with adrenaline 1/200000 was gradually placed by patient with assistance from anesthetist \& patients swallowing into esophagus. To ensure effective topical anesthesia and patient tolerance, pack was left in place for 3-5 min. before being moved up, down, clockwise \& anti-clockwise.. If necessary, increments of 5 ml of 2% lidocaine/adrenaline mixture was injected through device until patient is comfortable. Maximum LA dose was kept at 5 mg/kg. | Device | Group (OPETA) |
Primary outcome
Patient discomfort felt during endoscopy
Time frame: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope
0-10 numeric rating scale was the measurement scale where 0 means the procedure was extremely comfortable and 10 means that it was extremely uncomfortable.
3 secondary outcomes
Difficulty in insertion of OPETA device
Time frame: OPETA time: Time from administration of self or helped oral topical anesthesia till getting the OPETA device manipulation tolerated by the patient (moving the OPETA tool up and down clockwise and anti-clockwise without distressing the patient).
Difficulty in introducing the endoscope
Time frame: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope
Overall technical difficulty of the examination
Time frame: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope
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 30 Aug 2024.
- BackgroundAmornyotin, S. (2015). Anesthesia innovations for endoscopy of gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy-innovative uses and emerging technologies. Croatia: InTech, 39-61.
- Background: PubMed 23678376de la Morena F, Santander C, Esteban C, de Cuenca B, Garcia JA, Sanchez J, Moreno R. Usefulness of applying lidocaine in esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed under sedation with propofol. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May 16;5(5):231-9. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v5.i5.231.
- Backgroundhfeda, M. A. M., Ganaw, A., Ahmed, S. M. G., Chanda, A., Mahood, Z., Jabira, S., et al . (2021). Anaesthetic Considerations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopies. In Esophagitis and Gastritis-Recent Updates. (Edited by Vincenzo Neri and Monjur Ahmed) Ch 9, P. 141- 158. BoD- Book on Demand .
- Background: PubMed 28413268Feng AY, Kaye AD, Kaye RJ, Belani K, Urman RD. Novel propofol derivatives and implications for anesthesia practice. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Jan-Mar;33(1):9-15. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.202205.
- Background: PubMed 22000794Heuss LT, Hanhart A, Dell-Kuster S, Zdrnja K, Ortmann M, Beglinger C, Bucher HC, Degen L. Propofol sedation alone or in combination with pharyngeal lidocaine anesthesia for routine upper GI endoscopy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Dec;74(6):1207-14. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.072. Epub 2011 Oct 13.
- BackgroundKamalipour, H., Joghataei, P., & Kamali, K. (2009). Comparing the Combination Effect of Propofol-Ketamine and Propofol-Alfentanil on Hemodynamic Stability during Induction of General Anesthesia in the Elderly.
- Background: PubMed 20037149Nofal O. Awake light-aided blind nasal intubation: prototype device. Br J Anaesth. 2010 Feb;104(2):254-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aep367. Epub 2009 Dec 26.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Media Use, Anxiety, Sedation, and Recovery in Children Having Upper GI Endoscopy
Anesthesia, Anxiety
Not yet recruiting
HFNC vs Conventional Oxygen During Gastrocolonoscopy in Elderly Patients
Hypoxemia, Eldery People
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Efficacy and Safety of OsrhCT Before Upper Endoscopy on Improving Visualization of the Gastric Mucosa.
Gastric Mucosal Lesion
Recruiting
OTSC vs. Angiographic Embolization in Patients With Refractory Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Not yet recruiting
Study of Eso-SPONGE for Treating Leaks After Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery
Anastomotic Leaks
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.
Osama A Nofal, MD study director
Zagazig University
Rania A Kamel, MD study chair
Zagazig University
Badiea B Elhag, Msc principal investigator
Zagazig University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Propofol and ketamine and Modified Oropharyngeo-esophygeal Topical Anesthesia by OPETA Prototype tool in people with Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Topical Anesthesia, run by Zagazig University at 1 site in Egypt.
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 30 Aug 2024. 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 Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Patient discomfort felt during endoscopy (time frame: Endoscopy time: Time from starting of insertion till removal of the endoscope). 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 NCT06566326, which also lists 7 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 30 Aug 2024.