Continuous L2 Paravertebral Block Versus Continuous Lumbar Plexus Block for Postoperative Analgesia
5 juni 2017 bijgewerkt door: Jacques E. Chelly, University of Pittsburgh
Continuous L2 Paravertebral Block Versus Continuous Lumbar Plexus Block for Postoperative Analgesia After Total Hip Arthroplasty
This prospective study is intended to compare the analgesic efficacy, preservation of lower extremity motor power and side-effect profile of L2 Paravertebral lumbar plexus approach compared to Posterior nerve stimulation guided lumbar plexus approach, continuous local anesthetic infusion postoperative analgesia of Total Hip Arthroplasty.
The L2 Paravertebral technique of lumbar plexus block, as part of a multimodal pain treatment, could be a cost-effective alternative with a equal profile of analgesic efficacy and motor power sparing with greater promotion of early achievement of postoperative physical therapy goals.
Studie Overzicht
Toestand
Voltooid
Conditie
Interventie / Behandeling
Gedetailleerde beschrijving
The nerve stimulator guided technique of continuous lumbar plexus block (LPB) is the accepted standard of care at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) for the management of postoperative analgesia after Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Over 900 continuous lumbar plexus blocks were performed at UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside hospital within the last year alone.
Continuous thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) is also commonly performed at UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside .
Over 2000 are performed annually for a wide variety of surgical procedures.
Recently authors have suggested that a lumbar paravertebral block (LPVB) may represent an alternative approach to the lumbar plexus.
Indeed the L2 paravertebral approach of the lumbar plexus has been described to provide adequate postoperative analgesia following hip arthroscopic surgery.
However, to date, there is no prospective direct comparison between L2 Lumbar plexus approach and the posterior approach for postoperative analgesia after Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Studietype
Ingrijpend
Inschrijving (Werkelijk)
60
Fase
- Niet toepasbaar
Contacten en locaties
In dit gedeelte vindt u de contactgegevens van degenen die het onderzoek uitvoeren en informatie over waar dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd.
Studie Locaties
-
-
Pennsylvania
-
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Verenigde Staten, 15232
- UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside
-
-
Deelname Criteria
Onderzoekers zoeken naar mensen die aan een bepaalde beschrijving voldoen, de zogenaamde geschiktheidscriteria. Enkele voorbeelden van deze criteria zijn iemands algemene gezondheidstoestand of eerdere behandelingen.
Geschiktheidscriteria
Leeftijden die in aanmerking komen voor studie
18 jaar tot 75 jaar (Volwassen, Oudere volwassene)
Accepteert gezonde vrijwilligers
Nee
Geslachten die in aanmerking komen voor studie
Allemaal
Beschrijving
Inclusion Criteria:
- Age between 18-75 years
- No contraindications to placement of a lumbar plexus posterior block or paravertebral block.
- ASA status I-III
- Scheduled for open total hip arthroplasty with the same surgeon.
- Patients without painful conditions or chronic use of opioid or antineuropathic medications.
- Patient who are not expected to receive therapeutic anticoagulation in the postoperative period.
- No Known allergies to the medications used in the study.
- Patients willing to receive spinal anesthesia
Exclusion Criteria:
- Age under 18 years or older than 75 years.
- Any contraindication to a placement of continuous lumbar plexus Block.
- American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status IV or greater.
- Chronic painful conditions.
- Preoperative opioid tolerant use.
- Coagulation Abnormalities or patients who are expected to be on therapeutic anticoagulants postoperatively.
- Allergy to any of the drugs/agents used study protocol.
- Personal or family history of malignant hyperthermia.
- Serum creatinine greater than 1.4 mg/dl.
- Pregnancy
- Having an altered mental status (not oriented to place, person, or time)
- Any comorbid condition that, in the judgment of the consulting orthopedic surgeon, or intraoperative anesthesiologist, would proscribe the patient from any aspect of the study.
- Patient refusal.
- Lumbar plexus block performed with loss of resistance technique
- Patient requiring postoperative management in the ICU
Studie plan
Dit gedeelte bevat details van het studieplan, inclusief hoe de studie is opgezet en wat de studie meet.
Hoe is de studie opgezet?
Ontwerpdetails
- Primair doel: Behandeling
- Toewijzing: Gerandomiseerd
- Interventioneel model: Parallelle opdracht
- Masker: Dubbele
Wapens en interventies
Deelnemersgroep / Arm |
Interventie / Behandeling |
|---|---|
|
Experimenteel: L2 Paravertebral peripheral nerve block
L2 paravertebral peripheral nerve block catheter will be placed.
|
A continuous L2 paravertebral catheter will be placed according to UPMC standard of care practices.
|
|
Actieve vergelijker: Continuous Lumbar plexus peripheral nerve block
Continuous unilateral lumbar plexus peripheral nerve block catheter will be placed.
|
A continuous unilateral lumbar plexus catheter will be placed according to UPMC standard of care practices.
|
Wat meet het onderzoek?
Primaire uitkomstmaten
Uitkomstmaat |
Maatregel Beschrijving |
Tijdsspanne |
|---|---|---|
|
Postoperative Opiate consumption
Tijdsspanne: 24 postoperatively
|
Postoperative Opiate consumption will be recorded as Morphine IV mg equivalent, for the first 24 hours.
|
24 postoperatively
|
Secundaire uitkomstmaten
Uitkomstmaat |
Maatregel Beschrijving |
Tijdsspanne |
|---|---|---|
|
NRS Pain Score (at rest)
Tijdsspanne: 24 and 48 hours postoperatively
|
Pain scores at Rest will be recorded at 24 and 48 Hours
|
24 and 48 hours postoperatively
|
|
NRS Pain Score during physical therapy
Tijdsspanne: 24 and 48 hours postoperatively
|
Pain scores at Rest and During physical therapy will be recorded at 24 and 48 Hours
|
24 and 48 hours postoperatively
|
|
TUG (Timed Up and Go)
Tijdsspanne: 24 hours postoperatively
|
The timed get up and go test is a measurement of mobility.
It includes a number of tasks such as standing from a seating position, walking, turning, stopping, and sitting down which are all important tasks needed for a person to be independently mobile.
|
24 hours postoperatively
|
|
Straight Leg Raise(SLR)
Tijdsspanne: 24 hours postoperatively
|
In supine position with the extremity being tested and contralateral flexed LE with foot flat on surface.
Patient is instructed to lift extremity to level of contralateral knee.
Inability to lift entire LE off of the surface to the level of the contralateral knee would be indicative of hip flexor weakness.
If the patient is able to lift LE off of the surface, however the knee flexes/unable to maintain full knee extension, this is indicative of quad weakness.
|
24 hours postoperatively
|
|
Long arc quad (LAQ)
Tijdsspanne: 24 hours postoperatively
|
In sitting position at the edge of the bed or chair.
Patient is asked to extend lower leg fully on side that is being tested.
If able, this is indicative that quad function is intact.
If unable to fully extend knee, would indicate quad weakness.
|
24 hours postoperatively
|
Medewerkers en onderzoekers
Hier vindt u mensen en organisaties die betrokken zijn bij dit onderzoek.
Sponsor
Publicaties en nuttige links
De persoon die verantwoordelijk is voor het invoeren van informatie over het onderzoek stelt deze publicaties vrijwillig ter beschikking. Dit kan gaan over alles wat met het onderzoek te maken heeft.
Algemene publicaties
- Lee EM, Murphy KP, Ben-David B. Postoperative analgesia for hip arthroscopy: combined L1 and L2 paravertebral blocks. J Clin Anesth. 2008 Sep;20(6):462-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2008.04.012.
- Capdevila X, Macaire P, Dadure C, Choquet O, Biboulet P, Ryckwaert Y, D'Athis F. Continuous psoas compartment block for postoperative analgesia after total hip arthroplasty: new landmarks, technical guidelines, and clinical evaluation. Anesth Analg. 2002 Jun;94(6):1606-13, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200206000-00045.
- Marino J, Russo J, Kenny M, Herenstein R, Livote E, Chelly JE. Continuous lumbar plexus block for postoperative pain control after total hip arthroplasty. A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Jan;91(1):29-37. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00079.
- Siddiqui ZI, Cepeda MS, Denman W, Schumann R, Carr DB. Continuous lumbar plexus block provides improved analgesia with fewer side effects compared with systemic opioids after hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2007 Sep-Oct;32(5):393-8. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2007.04.008.
- Ilfeld BM, Ball ST, Gearen PF, Le LT, Mariano ER, Vandenborne K, Duncan PW, Sessler DI, Enneking FK, Shuster JJ, Theriaque DW, Meyer RS. Ambulatory continuous posterior lumbar plexus nerve blocks after hip arthroplasty: a dual-center, randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2008 Sep;109(3):491-501. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318182a4a3.
- Chudinov A, Berkenstadt H, Salai M, Cahana A, Perel A. Continuous psoas compartment block for anesthesia and perioperative analgesia in patients with hip fractures. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999 Nov-Dec;24(6):563-8. doi: 10.1016/s1098-7339(99)90050-0.
- Kaloul I, Guay J, Cote C, Fallaha M. The posterior lumbar plexus (psoas compartment) block and the three-in-one femoral nerve block provide similar postoperative analgesia after total knee replacement. Can J Anaesth. 2004 Jan;51(1):45-51. doi: 10.1007/BF03018546. Erratum In: Can J Anaesth. 2005 Jan;52(1):119.
- Farny J, Drolet P, Girard M. Anatomy of the posterior approach to the lumbar plexus block. Can J Anaesth. 1994 Jun;41(6):480-5. doi: 10.1007/BF03011541.
- Mannion S, O'Callaghan S, Walsh M, Murphy DB, Shorten GD. In with the new, out with the old? Comparison of two approaches for psoas compartment block. Anesth Analg. 2005 Jul;101(1):259-64, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000153866.38440.43.
- Williams BA, Murinson BB. Diabetes mellitus and subclinical neuropathy: a call for new paths in peripheral nerve block research. Anesthesiology. 2008 Sep;109(3):361-2. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181829f0d. No abstract available.
- Zink W, Sinner B, Zausig Y, Graf BM. [Myotoxicity of local anaesthetics: experimental myth or clinical truth?]. Anaesthesist. 2007 Feb;56(2):118-27. doi: 10.1007/s00101-006-1121-5. German.
Studie record data
Deze datums volgen de voortgang van het onderzoeksdossier en de samenvatting van de ingediende resultaten bij ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieverslagen en gerapporteerde resultaten worden beoordeeld door de National Library of Medicine (NLM) om er zeker van te zijn dat ze voldoen aan specifieke kwaliteitscontrolenormen voordat ze op de openbare website worden geplaatst.
Bestudeer belangrijke data
Studie start
1 juni 2009
Primaire voltooiing (Werkelijk)
1 oktober 2010
Studie voltooiing (Werkelijk)
1 juni 2015
Studieregistratiedata
Eerst ingediend
2 april 2012
Eerst ingediend dat voldeed aan de QC-criteria
4 april 2012
Eerst geplaatst (Schatting)
5 april 2012
Updates van studierecords
Laatste update geplaatst (Werkelijk)
7 juni 2017
Laatste update ingediend die voldeed aan QC-criteria
5 juni 2017
Laatst geverifieerd
1 juni 2017
Meer informatie
Termen gerelateerd aan deze studie
Trefwoorden
Andere studie-ID-nummers
- PRO09010511
Deze informatie is zonder wijzigingen rechtstreeks van de website clinicaltrials.gov gehaald. Als u verzoeken heeft om uw onderzoeksgegevens te wijzigen, te verwijderen of bij te werken, neem dan contact op met register@clinicaltrials.gov. Zodra er een wijziging wordt doorgevoerd op clinicaltrials.gov, wordt deze ook automatisch bijgewerkt op onze website .