Preoperative Gabapentin Versus Bisoprolol for Hemodynamic Optimization During Sinus Surgery

February 1, 2020 updated by: abeer M. elnakera, Zagazig University

Preoperative Gabapentin Versus Bisoprolol for Intraoperative Hemodynamic and Surgical Field Optimization During Endoscopic Sinus Surgery

the current study hypothesized that Gabapentin can be effective as Bisoprolol in reduction of intraoperative bleeding, improving the operative's field visibility and increase the surgeon satisfaction via optimization of blood pressure and heart rate .

A prospective randomized double blinded controlled study. Eligible patients were randomized according to random list generated software and allocated into 3 equal and matched groups (15 patients in each group):-

  • Group G: gabapentin group in which Patients were premedicated with oral gabapentin 1200 mg (Conventin 400mg; Evapharm) with sips of water, 2 hours before induction of anesthesia.
  • Group B: bisoprolol group in which Patients were premedicated with oral bisoprolol 2.5 mg ( Concor 2.5mg ; Merck/Amoun ) with sips of water, 2 hours before induction of anesthesia.
  • Group C: control group in which Patients were premedicated with oral placebo with sips of water, 2 hours before induction of anesthesia.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Hypothesis:

Gabapentin can be effective as Bisoprolol in reduction of intraoperative bleeding, improving the operative's field visibility and increase the surgeon satisfaction via optimization of blood pressure and heart rate.

Objectives Compare the effect of preoperative Gabapentin with Bisoprolol on hemodynamics, surgical field optimization during endoscopic nasal surgeries.

Technical design:

A) Site of study :

The study was conducted at Anesthesia and Surgical intensive care and Otorhinolaryngology departments, faculty of medicine, Zagazig University.

B) Sample Size :

According to 80% power of the study, 95% CI and calculated volume of blood loss 200±40 ml and 150±55ml on Gabapentin (22) and Bisoprolol (15) premedication respectively, the estimated Sample size was 54 patients (open EPI) , 63 patients were included in the study to compensate for drop out.

Randomization was carried out on 63 patients to compensate for drop out . All planned ESS procedures was managed by the same anesthetist and surgeon who were blinded to the used study's premedication. The surgeon was blinded to the monitor recording the hemodynamic variables.

All patients had been preoperatively evaluated according to standard local protocol. Preoperative surgical preparation and proper management of infection were confirmed to every patient.

Patient was premedicated by IV ranitidine 50 mg, midazolam 0.05 mg/kg and atropine 20µg/kg immediately before admission to the operating room.

On admission to the operating room, Standard monitoring included 5 leads ECG, non-invasive blood pressure, Pulse Oximetry and End-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) trace were applied (B40i Monitor - GE Healthcare, Finland).

Anesthesia was induced with IV propofol 2 mg/kg and fentanyl 1 µg/kg was given for analgesia. Cisatracurium 0.15 mg/kg IV was given to facilitate direct laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation. The patient was ventilated at tidal volume 6-8mL/kg and respiratory rate that achieved ETCO2 of 30-35 mmHg. Oropharyngeal pack was inserted.

Anesthesia was maintained by isoflurane based on MAC 1.2 % until a steady state of anesthesia was achieved (defined as a state of anesthesia when no changes in hemodynamic variables take place for at least 10 min). An increase of ≥ 20% of basal value in both HR and MAP was treated with increasing the concentration of isoflurane by 0.5% and increments of fentanyl 1 μg/kg. Muscle relaxation was confirmed by cisatracurium 0.03mg/kg every 20 mins. IV lactated ringer solution was infused at approximately 6ml/kg/hr till the end of the procedure.

All patients were positioned supine and the bed-head of the surgical table was raised by 30° to improve venous drainage.

Before the beginning of surgical procedure, well wrung out cotton pledgets soaked with 4 ml of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 adrenaline were topically applied to the nasal mucous membrane for 10 min (no infiltration).

Technique for hemodynamic optimization:

Target mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 60-70 mmHg during the surgical procedure to achieve Fromm and Boezaart category scale of 2 or 3 which is judged to be optimal for surgery (20).

If the MAP was still ˃70mmHg in spite of increasing isoflurane inhalation to 2.5%, nitroglycerine (1-10 μg/kg/min.) titrated to effect.

If the heart rate was more than 100 beats/ minute, propranolol was titrated 1-3 mg/hour to achieve target MAP.

If mean arterial pressure (MAP) decreased to less than 60 mm Hg, ephedrine in increments of 3 mg was given.

Withdrawal vasoactive agents:

After recording the surgeons' opinion regarding the surgical field and about 15 minutes before ending surgery, the infusion of any vasoactive medication (if used) was stopped and the anesthetic agent was decreased allowing HR and MAP to return to their basal value. If Hypotension (defined as SAP< 90mmHg and bradycardia less than 60 bpm) persisted, they was treated by ephedrine in increments of 3 mg .

On compilation of surgical procedure, anesthesia was discontinued and reversal of neuromuscular blockade was achieved using IV neostigmine 0.08 mg/kg and atropine 20µg/kg. After removal of oropharyngeal pack, oropharyngeal suction was performed. On the start of obeying commands, patients were extubated and shifted to recovery room.

Patients were discharged to the ward after reaching a score ≥ 9 on the Modified Aldrete Scoring System.

During postoperative period up to 6 hours, the patient was monitored for conscious level, oxygen saturation, heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure.

On ward admission, IM diclofenac sodium 75mg was given then every 12 hours. If the patient complained moderate to severe pain (VAS≥ 4) meperidine 25mg increments up to pain relief (maximum 100mg as a single dose) was given.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

63

Phase

  • Phase 4

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

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 50 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • patients who underwent functional endoscopic sinus surgery
  • ability to swallow tablets

Exclusion Criteria:

  • suspected difficult airway
  • basal HR <60/min.
  • chronic cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease
  • bronchial asthma or COPD
  • DM
  • bleeding disorders
  • anemia (Hb level< 10 gm/dl)
  • renal or hepatic insufficiency
  • psychiatric disorders
  • chronic treatment by BBs, gabapentin or drugs that affect coagulation
  • acute nasal infection
  • allergy/contraindications to any of the study's drugs.

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 Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: gabapentin
gabapentin 1200 mg was given to patients of gabapentin group 2 hours preoperative
patients received 1200mg gabapentin 2 hrs preoperative
Other Names:
  • gaptin
Active Comparator: bisoprolol
bisoprolol 2.5 mg was given to patients of bisoprolol group 2 hours preoperative
patients received 2.5mg bisoprolol 2 hrs preoperative
Other Names:
  • concor
Placebo Comparator: control
placebo was given to patients of control group 2 hours preoperative
patients received oral placebo 2 hrs preoperative
Other Names:
  • vitamins

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Changes in Surgical Field Visibility
Time Frame: scale was assessed by the surgeon every 15 minutes from the start of surgical procedure till the end

according to change in Fromm and Boezaart surgical field category scale ranging from 0 (no bleeding) to 5 (severe bleeding) where: 0 No Bleeding.

  1. Slight bleeding- no blood suctioning required.
  2. Slight bleeding- occasional blood suctioning required.
  3. Slight bleeding- frequent blood suctioning required, operative field is visible for some seconds after evacuation.
  4. Moderate bleeding- frequent blood suctioning required, operative field is only visible immediately after evacuation.
  5. Severe bleeding- constant blood suctioning required, bleeding appears faster than can be removed by suction .Surgery is hardly possible, and sometimes impossible.
scale was assessed by the surgeon every 15 minutes from the start of surgical procedure till the end
Blood Loss
Time Frame: at the end of surgery
total intraoperative blood loss (mL)
at the end of surgery

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Heart Rate Change
Time Frame: were recorded before oral premedication (baseline), pre-induction, after induction of anesthesia, 1, 5, 10, 15 minutes after intubation and then every 15 minutes until the end of surgery
effect of intervention on the change of heart rate allover study period
were recorded before oral premedication (baseline), pre-induction, after induction of anesthesia, 1, 5, 10, 15 minutes after intubation and then every 15 minutes until the end of surgery
Mean Arterial Blood Pressure Change
Time Frame: were recorded before oral premedication (baseline), pre-induction, after induction of anesthesia, 1, 5, 10, 15 minutes after intubation and then every 15 minutes until the end of surgery
effect of intervention on the change of mean arterial blood pressure allover study period
were recorded before oral premedication (baseline), pre-induction, after induction of anesthesia, 1, 5, 10, 15 minutes after intubation and then every 15 minutes until the end of surgery

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Surgeon Satisfaction (Categorical)
Time Frame: at the end of surgery
surgeon satisfaction score where given 5 for very satisfied, 4 for satisfied, 3 for neutral, 2 for dissatisfied and 1 for very dissatisfied then number of satisfied (satisfaction score = 5) and disatisfied (satisfaction score less than 5) surgeons was compared between groups
at the end of surgery
Number of Patients Who Recieved Intraoperative IV Nitroglycerin During Operative Procedure
Time Frame: at the end of surgery
need for additional intraoperative IV vasodilators (nitroglycerine
at the end of surgery
Number of Patients Who Recieved Intraoperative IV Propranolol During Operative Procedure
Time Frame: at the end of surgery
the need for additional beta blockers (propranolol)
at the end of surgery
Number of Patients Who Recieve Both IV Nitroglycerin and Propranolol During Operative Procedure
Time Frame: at the end of surgery
need for both IV nitroglycerine and propranolol intraoperatively
at the end of surgery
Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for Postoperative Pain
Time Frame: 1, 3 and 6 hrs. after recovery
postoperative visual analogue score (VAS) for pain where 0 is no pain and 10 severe intolerable pain which was assessed
1, 3 and 6 hrs. after recovery
Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for Postoperative Pain
Time Frame: 0n full recovery, 3 and 6 hrs. after recovery
postoperative visual analogue score (VAS) for pain where 0 is no pain and 10 severe intolerable pain
0n full recovery, 3 and 6 hrs. after recovery
Time to 1st Postoperative Rescue Analgesia
Time Frame: on administration of 1st postoperative rescue analgesia
time to 1st postoperative rescue analgesia (starting from administration of the studied drug)
on administration of 1st postoperative rescue analgesia

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Abeer M. Elnakera, doctorate, Faculty of Medicine - Zagazig University
  • Study Chair: Ayman A. Hassan, doctorate, Zagazig University
  • Study Chair: Maram wagdy, Master, Zagazig University
  • Study Chair: Mohamed W. El-Anwar, doctorate, Zagazig University

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)

August 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2016

Study Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2016

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 18, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 20, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

February 21, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

February 7, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 1, 2020

Last Verified

February 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

IPD Plan Description

collective data sheet was available to all researchers during and after completing the study. individual patient records are available on request for all researchers

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

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.

Clinical Trials on Blood Pressure

Clinical Trials on Gabapentin1200 mg

3
Subscribe