Explicit Recall of Intra-operative EventsPhase 2/3NCT00281489
Study Evaluating Ways of Preventing Patients From Being Awake During High-Risk Surgery and Anesthesia
A Phase 2/3 study testing BIS Monitor guided algorithm and Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm in people with Explicit Recall of Intra-operative Events, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The overall purpose of this study is to see if a Bispectral Index (BIS) monitor, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brain monitoring device, will help to reduce the risk of patients remembering being awake during surgery. The BIS monitor may be able measure how asleep a patient is during surgery. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Explicit Recall of Intra-operative Events
- What is being tested?
- BIS Monitor guided algorithm and Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm
- Type of treatment
- Medical device, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 2,000 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Aug 2005to Oct 2006
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- 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
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- MUST HAVE:
- General Anesthesia with volatile anesthetic
- PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
- Major Criteria (any 1 of the following:)
- Medications - anticonvulsants, abuse of opiates, benzodiazepines, cocaine
- EF<40%
Show all 20Show fewer
- Prior history of awareness (recall)
- History of difficult intubation or anticipated difficult intubation
- ASA IV or V status
- Aortic stenosis
- End stage lung disease
- Marginal exercise tolerance not secondary to musculoskeletal dysfunction
- Pulmonary hypertension
- Daily alcohol consumption
- Minor Criteria (any 2 of the following)
- Beta blockers
- COPD
- Moderate exercise tolerance not secondary to musculoskeletal dysfunction
- Smokes ≥2 packs per day
- Morbid obesity BMI>30 -
Who cannot join
- Surgical procedure that prevents the use of the BIS (e.g surgery of forehead)
- Patient positioning prevents use of the BIS
- Surgery with wake-up test.
- Less than 18 years of age
- Vulnerable populations, such as those with dementia and those unable to provide informed consent.
- Stroke with residual neurological deficits
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: B-Unaware Study: Comparison of BIS-guided Anesthesia With End-Tidal Volatile-Guided Anesthesia to Decrease The Incidence of Awareness During High-Risk Surgery
The overall purpose of this study is to see if a Bispectral Index (BIS) monitor, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brain monitoring device, will help to reduce the risk of patients remembering being awake during surgery. The BIS monitor may be able measure how asleep a patient is during surgery. Using the BIS monitor to guide anesthesia will be compared with using the concentration of anesthetic gas to guide anesthesia.
Read the detailed description
General anesthesia is a state of drug-induced unconsciousness, during which patients should neither perceive nor recall noxious stimuli. Many patients facing surgery dread the prospect of being awake, in pain and unable to move owing to inadequate general anesthesia. A large multi-center study in the USA showed that, despite modern anesthesia techniques, the overall incidence of awareness or conscious recall remains about 0.1-0.2%. For high-risk (for awareness) surgery, such as cardiac surgery, trauma surgery and obstetric surgery, the incidence of conscious recall approaches 1%. This can lead to extreme anxiety and even posttraumatic stress disorder. Several monitors, including the Bispectral Index (BIS), which is based on processed electroencephalographic information, have been developed in an attempt to monitor depth of anesthesia. A recent landmark study suggested that harnessing the information provided by the BIS monitor decreases the incidence of explicit recall during high-risk surgical procedures from almost 1% to 0.1%. The possible impact of this study is enormous. The American Society of Anesthesiologists and the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists do not currently consider neurological monitors an essential part of routine anesthesia care. Increasingly, members of the anesthetic community are suggesting that for every patient undergoing general anesthesia, especially for procedures where the risk of awareness is considered higher, a neurological monitor, such as the BIS monitor, should be routinely applied.
Explicit recall under general anesthesia is a major concern among members of the public and has even been featured on the popular Oprah Winfrey Show. Several patients presenting for surgery at Barnes Jewish Hospital have questioned whether the anesthesia provider would be using a BIS monitor to "prevent awareness". Excluding the cost of the BIS monitor itself, the cost to use BIS is $17.50 for the disposable strip. If this monitor was to be used for every anesthetic administered at Barnes Jewish Hospital, this might translate to an annual cost of about $500,000. Explicit recall, especially when patients have been aware and unable to move, is a serious complication that frequently precipitates posttraumatic stress disorder. If indeed the BIS monitor does decrease the incidence of explicit recall, this could translate into a cost effective and more importantly clinically imperative intervention. Currently BIS monitors, or similar alternatives, are not used routinely to monitor depth of general anesthesia at Barnes Jewish Hospital.
However, there are several concerns regarding the studies that have been conducted using the BIS monitor. There have been no parameters guiding administration of anesthesia in the control groups. BIS data have not been collected for patients in control groups, which prevents retrospective analysis and assessment of the true sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the BIS recordings. Most of the studies have been funded by the manufacturer of the device, which introduces a potential conflict of interest and investigator bias. In view of the current pressure to adopt BIS monitoring or an equivalent into the standard of anesthesia care, it is essential to conduct a study to address some of the concerns. The hypothesis of this proposed study is that an anesthetic algorithm can be designed for high-risk surgical patients such that the incidence of awareness will be equivalent to or lower than that in a group where anesthesia depth is guided by the BIS monitor.
- Being tested
- BIS Monitor guided algorithm, Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm
- Keywords
- Recall, Awareness, BIS, Anesthesia, Explicit Recall
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
BIS Monitor guided algorithmDevice
BIS guided algorithm (BIS target 40 to 60) during anesthesia. Alarms when BIS is outside this range.
Volatile anesthetic guided algorithmBehavioural
Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm. Target anesthetic concentration 0.7 to 1.3 minimum alveolar concentration during anesthesia. Alarms when anesthetic concentration not in this range.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| BIS Monitor guided algorithm | Experimental | BIS guided algorithm (BIS target 40 to 60) during anesthesia. Alarms when BIS is outside this range. Receives: Device: BIS Monitor guided algorithm |
| Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm | Active comparator | Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm. Target anesthetic concentration 0.7 to 1.3 minimum alveolar concentration during anesthesia. Alarms when anesthetic concentration not in this range. Receives: Behavioral: Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The incidence of explicit recall of events during the surgical and anesthetic periods.
Measured: 30 days
Secondary outcomes (7)
1 Anesthetic concentrations & BIS values in each group.
Measured: 1 day
2 Implicit memory (number).
Measured: 30 days
3 Dreaming.
Measured: 30 days
4 One-year mortality (and "anesthetic depth").
Measured: 1 year
5 Relation of assessment to BIS value.
Measured: 30 days
6 Relation of events (e.g. movement) to BIS & ETAG.
Measured: 1 day
7 Relation of EMG to BIS.
Measured: 1 day
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Jan 2006 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2005
- Primary completionOct 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Explicit Recall of Intra-operative EventsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Washington University School of MedicineThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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 2/3
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 2,000 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Michael Avidan, Washington University School of Medicine
- Investigators
- Michael S Avidan, MBBCh, Principal investigator, Washington University School of MedicineBeth Burnside, Study director, Washington University School of Medicine
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00281489
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 04-1112
- Status last verified
- Jul 2012
- First submitted
- 20 Jan 2006
- Last updated
- 23 Jul 2012
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Myles PS, Leslie K, McNeil J, Forbes A, Chan MT. Bispectral index monitoring to prevent awareness during anaesthesia: the B-Aware randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004 May 29;363(9423):1757-63. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16300-9.
PubMed 15172773Willingham M, Ben Abdallah A, Gradwohl S, Helsten D, Lin N, Villafranca A, Jacobsohn E, Avidan M, Kaiser H. Association between intraoperative electroencephalographic suppression and postoperative mortality. Br J Anaesth. 2014 Dec;113(6):1001-8. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu105. Epub 2014 May 22.
PubMed 24852500Avidan MS, Palanca BJ, Glick D, Jacobsohn E, Villafranca A, O'Connor M, Mashour GA; BAG-RECALL Study Group. Protocol for the BAG-RECALL clinical trial: a prospective, multi-center, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether a bispectral index-guided protocol is superior to an anesthesia gas-guided protocol in reducing intraoperative awareness with explicit recall in high risk surgical patients. BMC Anesthesiol. 2009 Nov 30;9:8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-9-8.
PubMed 19948045Avidan MS, Zhang L, Burnside BA, Finkel KJ, Searleman AC, Selvidge JA, Saager L, Turner MS, Rao S, Bottros M, Hantler C, Jacobsohn E, Evers AS. Anesthesia awareness and the bispectral index. N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 13;358(11):1097-108. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707361.
PubMed 18337600
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Jul 2012. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- B-Unaware Study: Comparison of BIS-guided Anesthesia With End-Tidal Volatile-Guided Anesthesia to Decrease The Incidence of Awareness During High-Risk Surgery
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00281489
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 04-1112
- Keywords
- Recall, Awareness, BIS, Anesthesia, Explicit Recall
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 2,000 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital
- Study start
- Aug 2005
- Primary completion
- Oct 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Jan 2006 (estimated)
- 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 overall purpose of this study is to see if a Bispectral Index (BIS) monitor, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brain monitoring device, will help to reduce the risk of patients remembering being awake during surgery. The BIS monitor may be able measure how asleep a patient is during surgery. Using the BIS monitor to guide anesthesia will be compared with using the concentration of anesthetic gas to guide anesthesia.
Detailed description
General anesthesia is a state of drug-induced unconsciousness, during which patients should neither perceive nor recall noxious stimuli. Many patients facing surgery dread the prospect of being awake, in pain and unable to move owing to inadequate general anesthesia. A large multi-center study in the USA showed that, despite modern anesthesia techniques, the overall incidence of awareness or conscious recall remains about 0.1-0.2%. For high-risk (for awareness) surgery, such as cardiac surgery, trauma surgery and obstetric surgery, the incidence of conscious recall approaches 1%. This can lead to extreme anxiety and even posttraumatic stress disorder. Several monitors, including the Bispectral Index (BIS), which is based on processed electroencephalographic information, have been developed in an attempt to monitor depth of anesthesia. A recent landmark study suggested that harnessing the information provided by the BIS monitor decreases the incidence of explicit recall during high-risk surgical procedures from almost 1% to 0.1%. The possible impact of this study is enormous. The American Society of Anesthesiologists and the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists do not currently consider neurological monitors an essential part of routine anesthesia care. Increasingly, members of the anesthetic community are suggesting that for every patient undergoing general anesthesia, especially for procedures where the risk of awareness is considered higher, a neurological monitor, such as the BIS monitor, should be routinely applied.
Explicit recall under general anesthesia is a major concern among members of the public and has even been featured on the popular Oprah Winfrey Show. Several patients presenting for surgery at Barnes Jewish Hospital have questioned whether the anesthesia provider would be using a BIS monitor to "prevent awareness". Excluding the cost of the BIS monitor itself, the cost to use BIS is $17.50 for the disposable strip. If this monitor was to be used for every anesthetic administered at Barnes Jewish Hospital, this might translate to an annual cost of about $500,000. Explicit recall, especially when patients have been aware and unable to move, is a serious complication that frequently precipitates posttraumatic stress disorder. If indeed the BIS monitor does decrease the incidence of explicit recall, this could translate into a cost effective and more importantly clinically imperative intervention. Currently BIS monitors, or similar alternatives, are not used routinely to monitor depth of general anesthesia at Barnes Jewish Hospital.
However, there are several concerns regarding the studies that have been conducted using the BIS monitor. There have been no parameters guiding administration of anesthesia in the control groups. BIS data have not been collected for patients in control groups, which prevents retrospective analysis and assessment of the true sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the BIS recordings. Most of the studies have been funded by the manufacturer of the device, which introduces a potential conflict of interest and investigator bias. In view of the current pressure to adopt BIS monitoring or an equivalent into the standard of anesthesia care, it is essential to conduct a study to address some of the concerns. The hypothesis of this proposed study is that an anesthetic algorithm can be designed for high-risk surgical patients such that the incidence of awareness will be equivalent to or lower than that in a group where anesthesia depth is guided by the BIS monitor.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| BIS Monitor guided algorithm | Experimental | Device: BIS Monitor guided algorithmBIS guided algorithm (BIS target 40 to 60) during anesthesia. Alarms when BIS is outside this range. |
| Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm | Active comparator | Behavioral: Volatile anesthetic guided algorithmVolatile anesthetic guided algorithm. Target anesthetic concentration 0.7 to 1.3 minimum alveolar concentration during anesthesia. Alarms when anesthetic concentration not in this range. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (20 listed)
- General Anesthesia with volatile anesthetic
- PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
- Major Criteria (any 1 of the following:)
- Medications - anticonvulsants, abuse of opiates, benzodiazepines, cocaine
- EF<40%
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Surgical procedure that prevents the use of the BIS (e.g surgery of forehead)
- Patient positioning prevents use of the BIS
- Surgery with wake-up test.
- Less than 18 years of age
- Vulnerable populations, such as those with dementia and those unable to provide informed consent.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| BIS Monitor guided algorithmBIS guided algorithm (BIS target 40 to 60) during anesthesia. Alarms when BIS is outside this range. | Device | BIS Monitor guided algorithm |
| Volatile anesthetic guided algorithmVolatile anesthetic guided algorithm. Target anesthetic concentration 0.7 to 1.3 minimum alveolar concentration during anesthesia. Alarms when anesthetic concentration not in this range. | Behavioural | Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm |
Primary outcome
The incidence of explicit recall of events during the surgical and anesthetic periods.
Time frame: 30 days
7 secondary outcomes
1 Anesthetic concentrations & BIS values in each group.
Time frame: 1 day
2 Implicit memory (number).
Time frame: 30 days
3 Dreaming.
Time frame: 30 days
4 One-year mortality (and "anesthetic depth").
Time frame: 1 year
5 Relation of assessment to BIS value.
Time frame: 30 days
6 Relation of events (e.g. movement) to BIS & ETAG.
Time frame: 1 day
7 Relation of EMG to BIS.
Time frame: 1 day
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 23 Jul 2012.
- Background: PubMed 15172773Myles PS, Leslie K, McNeil J, Forbes A, Chan MT. Bispectral index monitoring to prevent awareness during anaesthesia: the B-Aware randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004 May 29;363(9423):1757-63. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16300-9.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 24852500Willingham M, Ben Abdallah A, Gradwohl S, Helsten D, Lin N, Villafranca A, Jacobsohn E, Avidan M, Kaiser H. Association between intraoperative electroencephalographic suppression and postoperative mortality. Br J Anaesth. 2014 Dec;113(6):1001-8. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu105. Epub 2014 May 22.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 19948045Avidan MS, Palanca BJ, Glick D, Jacobsohn E, Villafranca A, O'Connor M, Mashour GA; BAG-RECALL Study Group. Protocol for the BAG-RECALL clinical trial: a prospective, multi-center, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether a bispectral index-guided protocol is superior to an anesthesia gas-guided protocol in reducing intraoperative awareness with explicit recall in high risk surgical patients. BMC Anesthesiol. 2009 Nov 30;9:8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-9-8.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 18337600Avidan MS, Zhang L, Burnside BA, Finkel KJ, Searleman AC, Selvidge JA, Saager L, Turner MS, Rao S, Bottros M, Hantler C, Jacobsohn E, Evers AS. Anesthesia awareness and the bispectral index. N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 13;358(11):1097-108. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707361.
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.
Michael S Avidan, MBBCh principal investigator
Washington University School of Medicine
Beth Burnside study director
Washington University School of Medicine
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2/3 study testing BIS Monitor guided algorithm and Volatile anesthetic guided algorithm in people with Explicit Recall of Intra-operative Events, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
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 20 inclusion and 6 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 23 Jul 2012. 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 United States. 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.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
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?
The incidence of explicit recall of events during the surgical and anesthetic periods. (time frame: 30 days). 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 NCT00281489, which also lists 4 linked publications.
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 23 Jul 2012.