A Trial Comparing Transversus Abdominis Plane Catheter Versus Epidural After Esophagectomy

January 19, 2023 updated by: Swedish Medical Center

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Transversus Abdominis Plane Catheter Versus Epidural After Esophagectomy

A randomized trial comparing perioperative outcomes between bilateral transversus abdominis plane TAP catheters with patient controlled analgesia (PCA) to epidural for esophagectomy patients with a VATS chest approach. Further objectives are to determine pain requirements between multiple modalities of pain control and compare the subsequent sequelae of narcotic use and blood pressure control and to compare complications such as anastomotic leak, atrial fibrillation and perioperative morbidity and mortality between the two groups.

Study Overview

Status

Status

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

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

Epidural analgesia is considered the 'gold standard' for post-operative analgesia following open esophagectomy. Epidurals have been shown to reduce post-operative pulmonary morbidity and mortality. However, epidurals are often associated with sympathetic blockade that creates hypotension and could therefore adversely affect the conduit. Pain management techniques that use peripheral nerve blockade are becoming more prevalent, reducing the need for an epidural. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) catheters have been used in colorectal and abdominal surgery showing equivocal pain scores to epidurals. With the minimally invasive chest approach, the analgesia coverage focuses on the abdominal incision where both epidurals and TAPs are considered standard of care.

The investigators have completed a retrospective study in preparation for a randomized control trial. The investigators previous retrospective study found that TAP blocks/catheters are a reasonable alternative to epidurals, providing adequate pain coverage for abdominal incisions. The study found no statistical difference in pain scores between the two groups. The TAP group had a lower prevalence of hypotension and lower crystalloid resuscitation needs. Pulmonary complications were similar between the two groups. This retrospective review showed that TAP blocks are a reasonable alternative to epidurals and may reduce episodes of hypotension. The investigators aim is to now expand this study to a randomized control trial.

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.
38

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.
  • Not Applicable

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
    • Washington
      • Seattle, Washington, United States, 98104
        • Swedish Cancer Institute

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:

  • All adult individuals who undergo an esophagectomy with a minimally invasive approach of the chest at Swedish Medical Center-First Hill. These approaches include:
  • 3 hole with R video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)
  • Ivor Lewis R VATS
  • Transhiatal

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age <18
  • Unable to consent
  • Additional surgical procedures planned
  • Patient with chronic pain on a daily regimen of narcotics
  • Patients who remain intubated greater than 24 hours post operatively
  • Non-English speaking

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: Sequential Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

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: Transversus abdominis plane catheter
Transversus abdominis plane catheter (TAP) for pain control in esophagectomy operations. TAP group will have bilateral subcostal TAP catheters and single shot bilateral rectus sheath blocks placed at the end of the surgery, prior to emergence. Bilateral subcostal TAP catheters will be bolused with 20ml of .2% ropivacaine on each side and then infused with .2% ropivacaine at 10ml/ hr for 75 hours each. Rectus sheath blocks will be bilateral bolus 20ml of .2% ropivacaine.
Procedure: Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy with minimally invasive approach of the chest including:

3 hole with R video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), Ivor Lewis R VATS, Transhiatal

Procedure: Transversus abdominis plane catheter
TAP group will have bilateral subcostal TAP catheters and single shot bilateral rectus sheath blocks placed at the end of the surgery, prior to emergence. Bilateral subcostal TAP catheters will be bolused with 20ml of .2% ropivacaine on each side and then infused with .2% ropivacaine at 10ml/ hr for 75 hours each. Rectus sheath blocks will be bilateral bolus 20ml of .2% ropivacaine
Other Names:
  • TAP catheter
Active Comparator: epidural
Epidural pain control for pain control in esophagectomy operation. Patients randomize the TEP group will have bilateral TEP placed at T8-9 +/- one level based on patient anatomy. TEP will be bolused with 5ml of 1.5% lidocaine with epinephrine and then started on infusion of .0625% bupivacaine plus 4 mcg/ml fentanyl plus 2 mcg/ ml epinephrine at 6ml/hr with a range of 6-12 ml/hr, titrating to optimize patient comfort. Epidurals are placed before surgery start time.
Procedure: Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy with minimally invasive approach of the chest including:

3 hole with R video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), Ivor Lewis R VATS, Transhiatal

Procedure: Epidural
Patients randomize the TEP group will have bilateral TEP placed at T8-9 +/- one level based on patient anatomy. TEP will be bolused with 5ml of 1.5% lidocaine with epinephrine and then started on infusion of .0625% bupivacaine plus 4 mcg/ml fentanyl plus 2 mcg/ ml epinephrine at 6ml/hr with a range of 6-12 ml/hr, titrating to optimize patient comfort. Epidurals are placed before surgery start time.
Other Names:
  • TEP

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
Pain scores
Time Frame: Up to post-operative day 4
Pain scores on a scale of 0-10 will be collected from patients twice a day
Up to post-operative day 4

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
Volume Resuscitation
Time Frame: Up to post-operative day 4
Amount of fluids given to patient
Up to post-operative day 4
Hypotension
Time Frame: Up to post-operative day 4
Total episodes of hypotension
Up to post-operative day 4

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.
Swedish Medical Center

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Brian E Louie, MD, Swedish Cancer Institute and Medical Center

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.
January 1, 2018

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.
March 1, 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.
March 1, 2020

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).
March 21, 2018

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.
June 25, 2018

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.
June 27, 2018

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.
January 23, 2023

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.
January 19, 2023

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.
January 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

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.
  • STUDY2017000592

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

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

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