Trial of Injected Liposomal Bupivacaine vs Bupivacaine Infusion After Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures

September 2, 2021 updated by: Denver Health and Hospital Authority

A Randomized Clinical Trial of Single Dose Liposomal Bupivacaine Delivered Via VATS Intercostal Nerve Block vs. Continuous Bupivacaine Infusion Delivered Via Indwelling Subscapular Catheter After Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures

Rib fractures represent a common injury pattern this is highly associated with patient morbidity and mortality, as pain control remains a challenge. Even after surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF), unsuccessful pain control can lead to morbid outcomes such as pneumonia and opioid dependence. Multi-modal anesthesia, with the use of thoracic epidurals and para-vertebral injections/catheters, has shown to lessen these occurrences but are subject to a wide array of limitations. A more directed therapy with liposomal bupivacaine has shown to provide sustained analgesia for up to 72 hours in patients who have undergone other types of thoracic surgery, but not SSRF. The hypothesis of the current clinical trial is that, among patients undergoing SSRF, liposomal bupivacaine delivered via video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) is an intercostal nerve block that provides comparable analgesia to the pain catheter, as measured by pulmonary function, numeric pain scoring, and postoperative narcotic use.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Rib fractures represent a common injury pattern with high associated morbidity and mortality. Effective pain control in both the acute and long term periods remains a challenge. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is now a recommended treatment for patients with severe chest wall injuries. In addition to stabilization of the chest wall, SSRF offers a unique opportunity to deliver directed, loco-regional anesthesia. Loco-regional anesthesia is a recognized, essential component of multi-modal anesthesia for patients with rib fractures in order to both decrease pain and minimize the use of opioids and their associated side effects.

Delivery options for loco-regional anesthesia to patients with rib fractures share in common the intention of anesthetizing the intercostal nerves. Moving from the spinal cord laterally, modalities include thoracic epidural catheters, paravertebral blocks or catheters, and rib/intercostal blocks. Although rib blocks may be accomplished via a variety of techniques, the two most common intra-operative techniques are video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) intercostal nerve blocks and indwelling, subscapular catheters In general, neuraxial modalities such as thoracic epidural and para-vertebral injections/catheters are subject to a wide array of limitations, including patient coagulopathy (International Normalized Ratio > 1.5), co-existing spine fractures, peri-insertion, peri-removal withholding of venous thromboembolism pharmacoprophylaxis, and provider availability. For these reasons, our current practice is to insert a subscapular "pain catheter" at the conclusion of the SSRF operation; this catheter is able to deliver a continuous infusion of 0.25% bupivacaine and may be left in place for several days.

Although favorable results using the pain catheter have been published in patients with rib fractures who have not undergone SSRF, we have noticed several limitations to this treatment modality. First, position is highly variable; and, because the catheter is not truly in the space of the intercostal nerves, drug delivery is likely irregular. This variability may be particularly relevant in obese patients; and the median body mass index of patient who underwent SSRF at Denver Health is 29 kg/m^2. Beyond catheter placement, we have also experienced issues with leakage of drug from the skin entry site of the catheter. Moreover, catheters frequently become dislodged or inadvertently removed during patient transport. Further, the indwelling foreign body likely introduces some risk of infection. Finally, the presence of the catheter is distressing to many patients.

Liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel, Pacira Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Parsippany, NJ, www.pacira.com) has been shown to provide sustained analgesia for up to 72 hours following a single injection of the drug delivery system. The safety and efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine has been evaluated in over 1,300 subjects and 21 clinical trials. Although many of these trials have included thoracic surgery patients, no trial has evaluated the efficacy and safety of liposomal bupivacaine administered to patients with rib fractures undergoing SSRF. Potential benefits as compared to current practice include directed injection immediately adjacent to the intercostal nerve using a VATS approach, as well as obviation of the need for an indwelling catheter. The hypothesis of the current clinical trial is that, among patients undergoing SSRF, liposomal bupivacaine delivered via video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) is an intercostal nerve block that provides comparable analgesia to the pain catheter, as measured by pulmonary function, numeric pain scoring, and postoperative narcotic use.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
36

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Colorado
      • Denver, Colorado, United States, 80204
        • Denver Health

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients undergoing SSRF at Denver Health Medical Center

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Allergy or hypersensitivity to bupivacaine
  • Pregnancy
  • Incarceration
  • Age < 18 years
  • Indwelling continuous thoracic epidural analgesia

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: TREATMENT
  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Bupivacaine indwelling catheter
Bupivacaine indwelling OnQ pain pump catheter will be placed in the subscapular space at the time of surgery, at infusion of 12 ml/hr of 0.25% bupivacaine, and left in place for a maximum of 120 hours
Drug: Bupivacaine indwelling catheter
Bupivacaine indwelling OnQ pain pump catheter is placed in the subscapular space at the time of SSRF for continuous bupivacaine infusion post op
Other Names:
  • OnQ pain pump, Continuous infusion of bupivacaine
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Liposomal bupivacaine injection
A single injection of liposomal bupivacaine: mixture of 20 mL liposomal bupivacaine, 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine, and 10 mL sterile saline (50 mL total), will be delivered in the intercostal space during VATS (with a 178 mm, 22 gauge needle, at ribs 3-8).
Drug: Liposomal bupivacaine injection
A single injection of liposomal bupivacaine is administered at the time of SSRF, directly to the fracture site via VATS
Other Names:
  • Exparel

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Daily Sequential Clinical Assessment of Respiratory Function (SCARF) Score
Time Frame: Median SCARF scores were recorded for the first 5 postoperative days.
The SCARF score is a validated, dynamic tool that ranges from 0-4, with 0 being the best score and 4 being the worst. One point is given for each of the following four parameters: (1) respiratory rate ≥ 20 breaths per minute; (2) numeric pain score ≥ 5; (3) incentive spirometry < 50% of predicted based upon a nomogram including sex, height, and age; (4) cough deemed inadequate to clear respiratory secretions by respiratory therapists. The parameters used to calculate the SCARF score are summed to create the total 0-4 score and these results were recorded by clinical personnel not involved in the trial. SCARF scores were taken at 10 am daily for all postoperative inpatient hospital days, however due to variance in length of stay, only scores from the first 5 postoperative days were recorded for the purpose of this results analysis. Scores were then aggregated across the patients and timeframe to result in one median score per group.
Median SCARF scores were recorded for the first 5 postoperative days.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Daily Narcotic Requirements Using Equi-analgesic Doses
Time Frame: Mean narcotic requirement scores were recorded for the first 5 postoperative hospital inpatient days.
Narcotic pain medication requirements were recorded daily over the duration of inpatient hospital stay, however due to variance in length of stay, only the first 5 postoperative days were recorded for this analysis. Scores were averaged across patients providing one daily postoperative mean score per treatment group. The narcotics provided to patients varied based on standard of care, so an Equi-Analgesic Scale was used to standardize dosages across narcotic type. A 1:1 ratio for narcotic dosages is calculated with the following measured as equivalent: 1.5 milligrams (mg) of intravenous (IV) Hydromorphone; 7.5 mg of per oral (PO) Hydromorphone; 100 micrograms (mcg) of IV Fentanyl; 10 mg of IV Morphine; 30 mg of PO Morphine; 20 mg of PO Oxycodone (Percocet); and 30 mg of PO Hydrocodone (Vicodin). In the context of this scale, lower scores are best, indicating fewer narcotics required and higher scores are worse indicating the need for more narcotics based on subjective patient pain.
Mean narcotic requirement scores were recorded for the first 5 postoperative hospital inpatient days.
Percentage of Participants Experiencing Failure of Primary Loco-Regional Analgesia (LRA)
Time Frame: 72 hours
The failure of LRA for this study was defined as the percentage number of instances a patient required a secondary LRA modality within 72 hours of placement of the primary modality for either treatment arm. Requirement of this secondary LRA was determined by the patients' medical team with criteria based on subjective patient experience of pain.
72 hours

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Denver Health and Hospital Authority

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
October 5, 2017

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
July 20, 2020

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
January 31, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
October 4, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
October 6, 2017

First Posted (ACTUAL)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
October 10, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
September 29, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
September 2, 2021

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
September 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 17-0685

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

Yes

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

Yes

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Pneumonia

Clinical Trials on Bupivacaine indwelling catheter

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings