Pregnant WomenNCT07524296
QTc Interval in Cesarean Section Patients
A study testing QT and QTc interval in people with Pregnant Women and Cesarean Birth, run by Haseki Training and Research Hospital at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
The aim of this clinical study is to determine which type of anesthesia has the least effect on the electrical activity of the heart in pregnant women undergoing cesarean section. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Pregnant Women, Cesarean Birth
- What is being tested?
- QT and QTc interval
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 4 Oct 2023to 15 Feb 2024
- 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 18 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- pregnant women who scheduled for an elective cesarean section delivery
Who cannot join
- baseline QTc >440 ms, use of medications that affect the QTc interval, family history of long QT syndrome, electrocardiographic evidence of arrhythmia and/or conduction abnormalities, or the presence of a permanent pacemaker, contraindications to spinal anesthesia (high intracranial pressure, injection site infection, coagulation disorders, severe hypovolemia, aortic and/or mitral stenosis), history of spinal surgery, congenital spinal deformity or neuromuscular disease, anemia, electrolyte imbalance, significant cardiopulmonary/hepatic/renal disesase, obesity (Body Mass Index > 30 kg/m2), an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification ≥III or refusal to participate.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Haseki Traininng and Research Hospital
Istanbul
About this study
Official title: Comparison of the Effects of Spinal and General Anesthesia on the QTc Interval in Cesarean Section Patients
The aim of this clinical study is to determine which type of anesthesia has the least effect on the electrical activity of the heart in pregnant women undergoing cesarean section. We expect to answer the following questions at the end of this study:
- In pregnant women undergoing cesarean section, does spinal anesthesia have less effect on the electrical activity of the heart, as assessed by electrocardiography (duration of QTc interval), compared to general anesthesia? Researchers will compare spinal anesthesia to general anesthesia to see if spinal anesthesia has less effect on electrocardiography.
Read more
Participants will:
- Receive spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia for cesarean section delivery
- Be monitored during the procedure by anesthesia monitor including electrocardiography
Read the detailed description
Study design and setting:
Researchers designed a prospective randomized study to compare the effects of spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia on the QT interval in patients undergoing elective cesarean section delivery. The study has been approved by the local Institutional Review Board (Ethics Committee of Health Science University Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye; approval date: 04 October 2023; approval number: 169-2023). The research was performed acoording to the Declaration of Helsinki, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants The study was carried out at a university affiliated hospital with 700-bed in Istanbul, Türkiye between October 4 2023 and December 4 2023.
Patient selection and group allocation The patients enrolled in the study were selected from 64 consecutive pregnant women who scheduled for an elective cesarean section delivery (Figure 1). Exclusion criteria were baseline QTc >440 ms, use of medications that affect the QTc interval, family history of long QT syndrome, electrocardiographic evidence of arrhythmia and/or conduction abnormalities, or the presence of a permanent pacemaker, contraindications to spinal anesthesia (high intracranial pressure, injection site infection, coagulation disorders, severe hypovolemia, aortic and/or mitral stenosis), history of spinal surgery, congenital spinal deformity or neuromuscular disease, anemia, electrolyte imbalance, significant cardiopulmonary/hepatic/renal disesase, obesity (Body Mass Index > 30 kg/m2), an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification ≥III or refusal to participate.
In the preoperative ward an intravenous (iv) line was obtained and all the patients received 10 ml/kg isotonic saline) within 20 minutes. The patients were randomly allocated to either the spinal anesthesia group (Group S) or the general anesthesia group (Group G) using sealed envelope method by an independent investigator and then were transferred to the operating room.
Anesthesia procedure In the operating room the patients received isotonic saline at a rate of 8 mL/kg/h for intravenous hydration and prexoxgenation was obtained via face mask for 3 minutes (8 L/min).
In the group G anesthesia was induced with using 1 µg/kg fentanyl and 2-2.5 mg/kg propofol. Muscle relaxation was achieved with 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium and endotracheal intubation was performed with an experienced anesthesiologist at the first attempt. Following intubation, mechanical ventilation was provided in volume-controlled mode using an anesthesia machine (Dräger Primus, Dräger Medical Systems, Inc., Danvers, MA, USA), with a tidal volume set at 6-8 mL/kg based on ideal body weight and a positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH₂O. The respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) levels between 32 and 36 mmHg. Anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane at 0.8-1.0 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) in an oxygen-air mixture (Fraction of inspired oxygen [FiO₂]= 0.4) until the delivery of neonate. Subsequently 1.2 MAC of sevoflurane, additional doses of rocuronium (0.15 mg/kg) and fentanyl (1 µg/kg) were used for the maintenance of anesthesia. At the end of the procedure, residual neuromuscular blockade was antagonized with intravenous sugammadex at a dose of 4 mg/kg. Tracheal extubation was carried out once the patient was fully awake, breathing spontaneously with adequate tidal volumes.
In the group S, the patiets were placed into a sitting position and spinal anesthesia was achieved at either the L4 or L5 interspace using a 25-gauge Whitacre pencil-point spinal needle under strict sterile conditions after intradermal injection of 1 mL 2% lidocaine hydrochloride. Once free flow of cerebrospinal fluid was observed, 12.5 mg (2.5 mL) of hyperbaric bupivacaine (Marcaine Spinal 0.5% Heavy; AstraZeneca, Türkiye) was injected into the subarachnoid compartment for 30 seconds. Following the patients were immediately placed in a supine position and tilted 15 degrees to the left until the delivery of neonate. Oxygen was delivered to patients via a face mask at a rate of 5 L/min. Pinprick test was used to evaluate the level of sensory blockade and T6 dermatome level was considered as acceptable for surgery.
Monitoring Non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), heart rate (HR), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and continuous electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring were performed throughout the procedure using a standard anesthesia monitor (BeneView T8 Patient Monitor, Shenzhen Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China). QT interval measurements were automatically obtained from lead II, and corrected QT (QTc) values were derived by applying Bazett's formula (QTc = QT/√RR [s]) via the ECG monitoring system.
Duration of QTc intervals were measured and recorded at predefined time points: prior to anesthesia induction in the general anesthesia group (QTc-pre) or before intrathecal injection in the spinal anesthesia group (QTc-pre); at 1, 5, 10 and 15 minutes following endotracheal intubation or intrathecal injection, and following surgical slosure (QTc-post). The difference between the longest and shortest QTc values (ΔQTc) obtained from QTc measurements taken at five-minute intervals was also recorded.
Data collection Demographic and clinical variables, including age, sex, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status were documented. In Group S, the maximum sensory block level was assessed. Cardiopulmonary adverse events such as hypotension (mean arterial pressure ≤ 70 mmHg), hypertension (systolic ≥ 160 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 90 mmHg), bradycardia (heart rate ≤ 50 beats/min), tachycardia (heart rate ≥ 100 beats/min), hypoxemia (SpO₂ < 90%) and arrhythmia were also recorded.
Statistical analysis Statistical Package for Social Sciences software for Windows (SPSS, version 27.0; IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyse of study data. Quantitative variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD), while categorical variables were represented as patient numbers and percentages. Normality of quantitative variables was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov/Shapiro-Wilk test. Normally distrubeted data were compared between the groups using independent Student's t-test, while the Mann-Whitney U test was applied for non-normally distributed variables. Categorical variables were compared using chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. Duration of QTc within each group were evaluated using repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction. Based on a previous study, the duration of QTc was 428 ± 26 ms after C/S performed with spinal anesthesia. Power analysis with α = 0.05 and β = 0.2 revealed that a minimum 25 patients per goup was required to detect at least a 20 ms difference in QTc duration in pregnant patients undergoing general anesthesia. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
- Conditions
- Pregnant Women, Cesarean Birth
- Being tested
- QT and QTc interval
- Keywords
- QT interval, qt interval prolongation, qt intervals changes, spinal anesthesia, propofol, general anesthesia, sevoflurane
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
QT and QTc intervalDiagnostic test
Measurement of QT and QTc duration on ECG
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Spinal anesthesia | Experimental | Patients scheduled for elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia Receives: Diagnostic Test: QT and QTc interval |
| General anesthesia | Active comparator | Patients scheduled for elective cesarean section under general anesthesia Receives: Diagnostic Test: QT and QTc interval |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Duration of QTc interval
QT interval measurements were automatically obtained from lead II, and corrected QT (QTc) values were derived by applying Bazett's formula (QTc = QT/√RR [s]) via the ECG monitoring system.
Measured: Before the induction of general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia; 1, 5 and 10 minutes after endotrakeal intubation or spinal anesthesia; after extubation or surgery.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Hemodynamic changes
To compare incidence of hypotension between groups
Measured: Before anesthesia induction to postoperative period
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Apr 2026
- Study start4 Oct 2023
- Primary completion4 Dec 2023
- Study completion15 Feb 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pregnant WomenStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Haseki Training and Research Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Sinan Uzman, Haseki Training and Research Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07524296
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 169-2023
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 6 Mar 2026
- Last updated
- 13 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: All collected IPD
Publications
Deniz Y, Okyay D, Hanci V, Yurtlu S, Ayoglu H, Ozkocak Turan I. The effect of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine on QT, corrected QT (Qtc), and P wave dispersions in cesarean section. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2013 Mar-Apr;63(2):202-8. doi: 10.1016/S0034-7094(13)70216-2.
PubMed 23601262
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of the Effects of Spinal and General Anesthesia on the QTc Interval in Cesarean Section Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07524296
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 169-2023
- Conditions
- Pregnant Women, Cesarean Birth
- Keywords
- QT interval, qt interval prolongation, qt intervals changes, spinal anesthesia, propofol, general anesthesia, sevoflurane
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Haseki Training and Research HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 4 Oct 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 4 Dec 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Feb 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Apr 2026 (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 aim of this clinical study is to determine which type of anesthesia has the least effect on the electrical activity of the heart in pregnant women undergoing cesarean section. We expect to answer the following questions at the end of this study:
- In pregnant women undergoing cesarean section, does spinal anesthesia have less effect on the electrical activity of the heart, as assessed by electrocardiography (duration of QTc interval), compared to general anesthesia? Researchers will compare spinal anesthesia to general anesthesia to see if spinal anesthesia has less effect on electrocardiography.
Participants will:
- Receive spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia for cesarean section delivery
- Be monitored during the procedure by anesthesia monitor including electrocardiography
Detailed description
Study design and setting:
Researchers designed a prospective randomized study to compare the effects of spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia on the QT interval in patients undergoing elective cesarean section delivery. The study has been approved by the local Institutional Review Board (Ethics Committee of Health Science University Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye; approval date: 04 October 2023; approval number: 169-2023). The research was performed acoording to the Declaration of Helsinki, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants The study was carried out at a university affiliated hospital with 700-bed in Istanbul, Türkiye between October 4 2023 and December 4 2023.
Patient selection and group allocation The patients enrolled in the study were selected from 64 consecutive pregnant women who scheduled for an elective cesarean section delivery (Figure 1). Exclusion criteria were baseline QTc >440 ms, use of medications that affect the QTc interval, family history of long QT syndrome, electrocardiographic evidence of arrhythmia and/or conduction abnormalities, or the presence of a permanent pacemaker, contraindications to spinal anesthesia (high intracranial pressure, injection site infection, coagulation disorders, severe hypovolemia, aortic and/or mitral stenosis), history of spinal surgery, congenital spinal deformity or neuromuscular disease, anemia, electrolyte imbalance, significant cardiopulmonary/hepatic/renal disesase, obesity (Body Mass Index > 30 kg/m2), an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification ≥III or refusal to participate.
In the preoperative ward an intravenous (iv) line was obtained and all the patients received 10 ml/kg isotonic saline) within 20 minutes. The patients were randomly allocated to either the spinal anesthesia group (Group S) or the general anesthesia group (Group G) using sealed envelope method by an independent investigator and then were transferred to the operating room.
Anesthesia procedure In the operating room the patients received isotonic saline at a rate of 8 mL/kg/h for intravenous hydration and prexoxgenation was obtained via face mask for 3 minutes (8 L/min).
In the group G anesthesia was induced with using 1 µg/kg fentanyl and 2-2.5 mg/kg propofol. Muscle relaxation was achieved with 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium and endotracheal intubation was performed with an experienced anesthesiologist at the first attempt. Following intubation, mechanical ventilation was provided in volume-controlled mode using an anesthesia machine (Dräger Primus, Dräger Medical Systems, Inc., Danvers, MA, USA), with a tidal volume set at 6-8 mL/kg based on ideal body weight and a positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH₂O. The respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) levels between 32 and 36 mmHg. Anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane at 0.8-1.0 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) in an oxygen-air mixture (Fraction of inspired oxygen [FiO₂]= 0.4) until the delivery of neonate. Subsequently 1.2 MAC of sevoflurane, additional doses of rocuronium (0.15 mg/kg) and fentanyl (1 µg/kg) were used for the maintenance of anesthesia. At the end of the procedure, residual neuromuscular blockade was antagonized with intravenous sugammadex at a dose of 4 mg/kg. Tracheal extubation was carried out once the patient was fully awake, breathing spontaneously with adequate tidal volumes.
In the group S, the patiets were placed into a sitting position and spinal anesthesia was achieved at either the L4 or L5 interspace using a 25-gauge Whitacre pencil-point spinal needle under strict sterile conditions after intradermal injection of 1 mL 2% lidocaine hydrochloride. Once free flow of cerebrospinal fluid was observed, 12.5 mg (2.5 mL) of hyperbaric bupivacaine (Marcaine Spinal 0.5% Heavy; AstraZeneca, Türkiye) was injected into the subarachnoid compartment for 30 seconds. Following the patients were immediately placed in a supine position and tilted 15 degrees to the left until the delivery of neonate. Oxygen was delivered to patients via a face mask at a rate of 5 L/min. Pinprick test was used to evaluate the level of sensory blockade and T6 dermatome level was considered as acceptable for surgery.
Monitoring Non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), heart rate (HR), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and continuous electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring were performed throughout the procedure using a standard anesthesia monitor (BeneView T8 Patient Monitor, Shenzhen Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China). QT interval measurements were automatically obtained from lead II, and corrected QT (QTc) values were derived by applying Bazett's formula (QTc = QT/√RR [s]) via the ECG monitoring system.
Duration of QTc intervals were measured and recorded at predefined time points: prior to anesthesia induction in the general anesthesia group (QTc-pre) or before intrathecal injection in the spinal anesthesia group (QTc-pre); at 1, 5, 10 and 15 minutes following endotracheal intubation or intrathecal injection, and following surgical slosure (QTc-post). The difference between the longest and shortest QTc values (ΔQTc) obtained from QTc measurements taken at five-minute intervals was also recorded.
Data collection Demographic and clinical variables, including age, sex, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status were documented. In Group S, the maximum sensory block level was assessed. Cardiopulmonary adverse events such as hypotension (mean arterial pressure ≤ 70 mmHg), hypertension (systolic ≥ 160 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 90 mmHg), bradycardia (heart rate ≤ 50 beats/min), tachycardia (heart rate ≥ 100 beats/min), hypoxemia (SpO₂ < 90%) and arrhythmia were also recorded.
Statistical analysis Statistical Package for Social Sciences software for Windows (SPSS, version 27.0; IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyse of study data. Quantitative variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD), while categorical variables were represented as patient numbers and percentages. Normality of quantitative variables was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov/Shapiro-Wilk test. Normally distrubeted data were compared between the groups using independent Student's t-test, while the Mann-Whitney U test was applied for non-normally distributed variables. Categorical variables were compared using chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. Duration of QTc within each group were evaluated using repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction. Based on a previous study, the duration of QTc was 428 ± 26 ms after C/S performed with spinal anesthesia. Power analysis with α = 0.05 and β = 0.2 revealed that a minimum 25 patients per goup was required to detect at least a 20 ms difference in QTc duration in pregnant patients undergoing general anesthesia. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Spinal anesthesia | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: QT and QTc intervalPatients scheduled for elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia |
| General anesthesia | Active comparator | Diagnostic Test: QT and QTc intervalPatients scheduled for elective cesarean section under general anesthesia |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- pregnant women who scheduled for an elective cesarean section delivery
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- baseline QTc >440 ms, use of medications that affect the QTc interval, family history of long QT syndrome, electrocardiographic evidence of arrhythmia and/or conduction abnormalities, or the presence of a permanent pacemaker, contraindications to spinal anesthesia (high intracranial pressure, injection site infection, coagulation disorders, severe hypovolemia, aortic and/or mitral stenosis), history of spinal surgery, congenital spinal deformity or neuromuscular disease, anemia, electrolyte imbalance, significant cardiopulmonary/hepatic/renal disesase, obesity (Body Mass Index > 30 kg/m2), an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification ≥III or refusal to participate.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| QT and QTc intervalMeasurement of QT and QTc duration on ECG | Diagnostic test | General anesthesia, Spinal anesthesia |
Primary outcome
Duration of QTc interval
Time frame: Before the induction of general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia; 1, 5 and 10 minutes after endotrakeal intubation or spinal anesthesia; after extubation or surgery.
QT interval measurements were automatically obtained from lead II, and corrected QT (QTc) values were derived by applying Bazett's formula (QTc = QT/√RR [s]) via the ECG monitoring system.
1 secondary outcome
Hemodynamic changes
Time frame: Before anesthesia induction to postoperative period
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 13 Apr 2026.
- Background: PubMed 23601262Deniz Y, Okyay D, Hanci V, Yurtlu S, Ayoglu H, Ozkocak Turan I. The effect of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine on QT, corrected QT (Qtc), and P wave dispersions in cesarean section. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2013 Mar-Apr;63(2):202-8. doi: 10.1016/S0034-7094(13)70216-2.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. All collected IPD
Related trials for Pregnant Women
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
A Beta-only IL-2 ImmunoTherapY Study
Advanced Solid Tumor, Unresectable Solid Tumor
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Treating Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer With A Non-surgical Method Consisting of Anti-PD-1 Therapy and Chemoradiation
Muscle-Invasive Bladder Carcinoma, Programmed Cell Death Protein 1 Inhibitor
Not yet recruiting
Ultrasound-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Focal Adenomyosis
Adenomyosis, Adenomyoma of Uterus
RecruitingPhase 2
Neurovascular Regulation During Exercise in Humans With Chronic Kidney Disease: Sympatholysis in CKD
Chronic Kidney Disease
Not yet recruiting
Combined Versus Multicomponent Training in People With Chronic Kidney Disease Stages 3a and 3b
Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 3A, Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 3B
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing QT and QTc interval in people with Pregnant Women and Cesarean Birth, run by Haseki Training and Research Hospital at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
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 13 Apr 2026. 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 Turkey (Türkiye). 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?
Duration of QTc interval (time frame: Before the induction of general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia; 1, 5 and 10 minutes after endotrakeal intubation or spinal anesthesia; after extubation or surgery.). 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 NCT07524296, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 13 Apr 2026.