Postdural Puncture HeadachePhase 4PDPHNCT02394457
Cosyntropin Versus Epidural Blood Patch (EBP) for Treatment of Treatment of Post Dural Puncture Headache
A Phase 4 study testing Cosyntropin and Epidural Blood Patch in people with Postdural Puncture Headache, run by United States Naval Medical Center, San Diego.
Trial summary
PDPH is a common problem after either intentional or unintentional Dural puncture. It is especially common in young female patients and in patients undergoing Lumbar Puncture using the typical kit containing large 20 gauge needles (1). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Postdural Puncture Headache
- What is being tested?
- Cosyntropin and Epidural Blood Patch
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 29 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Aug 2010to Apr 2014
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 18 years of age or older,
- Diagnosed by Anesthesia provider as having PDPH
- Agrees to participation in study
Who cannot join
- In-patient status and/or unstable medical condition
- Patient's contraindication to EBP: Local infection at injection site, systemic infection, hemodynamically unstable, severely hypovolemic
- Patient's contraindication to EBP: Known or past reaction to natural ACTH or Cosyntropin
- Signs or symptoms of ICP such as Mental Status changes, Bradycardia and hypertension
- Congestive Heart Failure
- Patient refusal to participate
- Current Pregnancy
About this study
Official title: Cosyntropin Versus Epidural Blood Patch (EBP) for Treatment of Treatment of Post Dural Puncture Headache (PDPH)
PDPH is a common problem after either intentional or unintentional Dural puncture. It is especially common in young female patients and in patients undergoing Lumbar Puncture using the typical kit containing large 20 gauge needles (1).
Hypothesis is that Cosyntropin therapy is at least as effective as current conservative therapy (caffeine/fluid) and/or Epidural Blood Patch.
Read more
Patients will be randomly assigned to undergo either: (1) EBP with IVF therapy or (2)Cosyntropin IV with IVF therapy. Endpoints will be a pain score that is given prior to the procedure, Emergency Department (ED) discharge pain score and post procedural day (PPD) day 1, day 3 and day 7 pain and functional levels. Patients in Cosyntropin arm of the study may request crossover to EBP at anytime after a 24 hour assessment period is completed per Standard of Care for treatment of PDPH, in order to ensure no undue distress is placed on the patient in order to complete this study.
Current treatments consist primarily of non-invasive treatment with intravenous fluids and caffeine therapy and invasive treatment by Epidural Blood Patch. Efficacy of Caffeine 300mg IV bis in die (BID) x 1d doses is approximately 70% (2). However this therapy has been linked to post-treatment seizures. EBP was originally thought to be 90% effective with repeat treatment efficacy approaching >96%. However more recent studies by Taivainen et al (3) have shown only a 61% rate of permanent cure. Additionally, EBP are contraindicated in patients with signs of increased intra-cranial pressure (ICP), coagulation issues, signs/symptoms of Central Nervous System (CNS) /systemic infection or local infection at the site of the EBP, thus resulting in decreased utility. Complications are also quite serious ranging from meningitis, spinal hematoma, repeat dural puncture, localized infection and vagal response to the procedure. EBP are not typically performed until after conservative measures have failed which leads to further prolongation of the patients decreased functional status and pain. Additionally, the cost of both treatments is substantial considering prolonged ED visits for conservative treatments often followed by the time and expense of an EBP.
The goal of this investigation is to aid in the confirmation of case reports advocating the economy, efficacy and safety of synthetic Adrenal CorticTropin Hormone (ACTH) as a treatment of PDPH (4,5,6,7,8,9).
Read the detailed description
PDPH is a common problem after either intentional or unintentional Dural puncture. It is especially common in young female patients and in patients undergoing Lumbar Puncture using the typical kit containing large 20 gauge needles (1).
Current treatments consist primarily of non-invasive treatment with intravenous fluids and caffeine therapy and invasive treatment by Epidural Blood Patch. Efficacy of Caffeine 300mg IV BID x 1d doses is approximately 70% (2). However this therapy has been linked to post-treatment seizures. EBP was originally thought to be 90% effective with repeat treatment efficacy approaching >96%. However more recent studies by Taivainen et al (3) have shown only a 61% rate of permanent cure. Additionally, EBP are contraindicated in patients with signs of increased ICP, coagulation issues, signs/symptoms of CNS/systemic infection or local infection at the site of the EBP, thus resulting in decreased utility. Complications are also quite serious ranging from meningitis, spinal hematoma, repeat dural puncture, localized infection and vagal response to the procedure. EBP are not typically performed until after conservative measures have failed which leads to further prolongation of the patients decreased functional status and pain. Additionally, the cost of both treatments is substantial considering prolonged ED visits for conservative treatments often followed by the time and expense of an EBP.
The goal of this investigation is to aid in the confirmation of case reports advocating the economy, efficacy and safety of synthetic ACTH as a treatment of PDPH (4,5,6,7,8,9).
After patients receive and sign an informed consent form (ICF) Patients will be randomly assigned to undergo either: (1) EBP with IVF therapy or (2)Cosyntropin IV with IVF therapy. Endpoints will be a pain score that is given prior to the procedure, ED discharge pain score and post procedural day (PPD) day 1, day 3 and day 7 pain and functional levels. Patients in Cosyntropin arm of the study may request crossover to EBP at anytime after a 24 hour assessment period is completed per Standard of Care for treatment of PDPH, in order to ensure no undue distress is placed on the patient in order to complete this study.
Investigational New Drug (IND) Exemption for use of Cosyntropin.
Research Objective: To develop an efficacious and cost effective alternative to Epidural Blood Patch and Caffeine therapy for Postdural Puncture Headache.
Two Study Groups: (1) Group A - Cosyntropin 500 mcg in 1000 mili-liters Normal Saline (NS) run over 1 hour (2) Group B - Epidural Blood Patch and 1000 mili-liters NS
- 1liter NS run over 1 hour while waiting for call team to place Epidural Blood Patch
- Std Epidural Kit using 18g tuohy needle to Loss of Resistance (LOR) with providers preferred medium
- Max 20 cc of sterile blood in epidural space with amount dictated by either 20cc or sig pain/pressure
- Pt supine for 30 minutes post procedure
Randomization Procedures: Computer generated random number list with even numbers receiving Cosyntropin and odd numbers receiving traditional epidural blood patch.
Methods and Materials: After referral to an Anesthesiologist and confirmation of PDPH diagnosis, patient will be randomized to either Cosyntropin or Epidural Blood Patch assuring they are negative for pregnancy. If enrolled in Cosyntropin arm a bag of premixed (by pharmacy) Cosyntropin 500mcg in a 1 liter Normal Saline bag of Intravenous Fluid will be run over 1 hour. Please see above for further details. Additionally, there will be a telephone follow-up questionnaire performed by a person not directly involved with the study to collect data as described above.
Standard of Care: Patients are evaluated by the ED, clinic, labor deck or pre-op area and if PDPH is suspected patient is offered and given conservative treatment with intravenous caffeine. If this treatment fails and/or the patient requests it, the Anesthesia team is notified for possible EBP.
Experimental Procedure: Randomly selected patients will receive Cosyntropin 500mcg IV in 1 liter NS vs EBP
Research Material Collected: Verbal Analogue Scale scores and improvement in functional status. Pt's will be identified by a Patient ID number which will not be the same as the patient's hospital Identification (ID) or Social Security Number (SSN). Contact information will be kept on a separate patient tracking sheet (see attached) and kept electronically on a password protected computer.
Subject Recruiting: All patients meeting inclusion requirements will be offered enrollment at time of diagnosis/treatment.
Justification of Subject Population: Patient's with PDPH often have significant pain levels and subsequent decreases in function. Recent literature notes decreased efficacy of invasive Epidural Blood Patches. Alternate, less invasive techniques, could decrease time to relief and allow treatment patients with contra-indications to Epidural Blood Patch.
Risks: Local Infection, meningitis, allergic reaction, spinal hematoma, nerve damage, paralysis, failure of procedure, new dural puncture. Incidence of adverse events will be tracked.
- Justification of Risks- Control arm is current standard of care for this patient population. Experimental group utilizes a medication that has a very low risk profile. This medication is often used in the ICU setting on the most critical ill without increased risk.
- Minimization of Risks- Control arm is current standard of care. Experimental group will be treated in monitored settings of either the Emergency Department, Post- Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) or L\&D PACU
- Medical Monitor- A medical Monitor will be appointed
Benefits: Optimization of pain control for patients with PDPH. Will provide an alternative method to treat those patients with PDPH who have contra-indications to EBP. Will significantly reduce cost/personnel for treatment of PDPH and give options to medical providers in remote regions of care without the training/equipment to perform EBP.
Statistical Analysis: Data analysis will be accomplished using descriptive and inferential statistics. Demographic data will be analyzed using Student's t-test. Frequency data will be compared with the Chi-square test. A student's t-test will be used to compare the verbal pain scores. The satisfaction scores will be compared with a Mann-Whitney U test. A p-value of < 0.05 will be considered significant. All analysis will be performed utilizing Intention-to-Treat analysis and clearly state in the results section the number of persons that switch from the cosyntropin group to epidural blood patch therapy. The efficacy of the EBP for the study group and for this "crossover" group will also be noted.
- Conditions
- Postdural Puncture Headache
- Being tested
- Cosyntropin, Epidural Blood Patch
- Keywords
- Postdural puncture headache, Epidural Blood Patch, Cosyntropin, PDPH, Regional anesthesia, Lumbar puncture, ACTH, Tetracosactin
- Medical subject headings
- Post-Dural Puncture Headache
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
CosyntropinDrug
Also called Tetracosactin
Intravenous Drug Infusion over 1 hour and a half
Epidural Blood PatchProcedure or surgery
Also called Blood patch
Blood drawn from subject and then same Blood placed into Epidural space by anesthesia personnel.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intravenous Cosyntropin Group A | Experimental | Cosyntropin 500 mcg in 1000cc Normal Saline Receives: Drug: Cosyntropin |
| Epidural Blood Patch Group B | Active comparator | Epidural Blood Patch and I000cc Normal Saline Receives: Procedure: Epidural Blood Patch |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Headache Pain Score
Numerical 0-10 (0 no pain, 10 worst pain)
Measured: 1 day post procedure
Headache Pain Score
Numerical 0-10 (0 no pain, 10 worst pain)
Measured: 3 days post procedure
Headache Pain Score
Numerical 0-10 (0 no pain, 10 worst pain)
Measured: 7 days post procedure
Secondary outcomes (3)
Functioning Score
Functional score 0-10 (0 being able to function all tasks of daily living, 10 not able to complete activities of daily living (ADLs)
Measured: 1 day post procedure
Functioning Score
Functional score 0-10 (0 being able to function all tasks of daily living, 10 not able to complete ADLs
Measured: 3 day post procedure
Functioning Score
Functional score 0-10 (0 being able to function all tasks of daily living, 10 not able to complete ADLs
Measured: 7 day post procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2010
- Primary completionApr 2014
- Study completionApr 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Postdural Puncture HeadacheStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 29 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- United States Naval Medical Center, San Diego
- Sponsor type
- US federal agency
- Collaborators
- United States Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Steven Hanling, MD, Principal investigator, NavalMCSD Pain Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02394457
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NMCSD.2006.0026
- Acronym
- PDPH
- Status last verified
- Sep 2016
- First submitted
- 18 Feb 2015
- Last updated
- 1 Nov 2016
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
VANDAM LD, DRIPPS RD. Long-term follow-up of patients who received 10,098 spinal anesthetics; syndrome of decreased intracranial pressure (headache and ocular and auditory difficulties). J Am Med Assoc. 1956 Jun 16;161(7):586-91. doi: 10.1001/jama.1956.02970070018005. No abstract available.
PubMed 13318967Sechzer PH, Abel L. Post-spinal anesthesia headache treated with caffeine. Evaluation with demand method. Part I. Curr Therap Res 1978; 24:307-12.
Taivainen T, Pitkanen M, Tuominen M, Rosenberg PH. Efficacy of epidural blood patch for postdural puncture headache. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1993 Oct;37(7):702-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1993.tb03793.x.
PubMed 8249562Collier BB. Treatment for post dural puncture headache. Br J Anaesth. 1994 Mar;72(3):366-7. doi: 10.1093/bja/72.3.366-c. No abstract available.
PubMed 8130064Foster P. ACTH treatment for post-lumbar puncture headache. Br J Anaesth. 1994 Sep;73(3):429. doi: 10.1093/bja/73.3.429-a. No abstract available.
PubMed 7946882Carter BL, Pasupuleti R. Use of intravenous cosyntropin in the treatment of postdural puncture headache. Anesthesiology. 2000 Jan;92(1):272-4. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200001000-00043. No abstract available.
PubMed 10638928Gupta S, Agrawal A. Postdural puncture headache and ACTH. J Clin Anesth. 1997 May;9(3):258. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(97)00042-1. No abstract available.
PubMed 9172038
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Nov 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cosyntropin Versus Epidural Blood Patch (EBP) for Treatment of Treatment of Post Dural Puncture Headache (PDPH)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02394457
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PDPH / NMCSD.2006.0026
- Conditions
- Postdural Puncture Headache
- Keywords
- Postdural puncture headache, Epidural Blood Patch, Cosyntropin, PDPH, Regional anesthesia, Lumbar puncture, ACTH, Tetracosactin
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 29 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- United States Naval Medical Center, San DiegoUS federal agency
- Collaborators
- United States Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth
- Study start
- Aug 2010
- Primary completion
- Apr 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 1 Nov 2016
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
PDPH is a common problem after either intentional or unintentional Dural puncture. It is especially common in young female patients and in patients undergoing Lumbar Puncture using the typical kit containing large 20 gauge needles (1).
Hypothesis is that Cosyntropin therapy is at least as effective as current conservative therapy (caffeine/fluid) and/or Epidural Blood Patch.
Patients will be randomly assigned to undergo either: (1) EBP with IVF therapy or (2)Cosyntropin IV with IVF therapy. Endpoints will be a pain score that is given prior to the procedure, Emergency Department (ED) discharge pain score and post procedural day (PPD) day 1, day 3 and day 7 pain and functional levels. Patients in Cosyntropin arm of the study may request crossover to EBP at anytime after a 24 hour assessment period is completed per Standard of Care for treatment of PDPH, in order to ensure no undue distress is placed on the patient in order to complete this study.
Current treatments consist primarily of non-invasive treatment with intravenous fluids and caffeine therapy and invasive treatment by Epidural Blood Patch. Efficacy of Caffeine 300mg IV bis in die (BID) x 1d doses is approximately 70% (2). However this therapy has been linked to post-treatment seizures. EBP was originally thought to be 90% effective with repeat treatment efficacy approaching >96%. However more recent studies by Taivainen et al (3) have shown only a 61% rate of permanent cure. Additionally, EBP are contraindicated in patients with signs of increased intra-cranial pressure (ICP), coagulation issues, signs/symptoms of Central Nervous System (CNS) /systemic infection or local infection at the site of the EBP, thus resulting in decreased utility. Complications are also quite serious ranging from meningitis, spinal hematoma, repeat dural puncture, localized infection and vagal response to the procedure. EBP are not typically performed until after conservative measures have failed which leads to further prolongation of the patients decreased functional status and pain. Additionally, the cost of both treatments is substantial considering prolonged ED visits for conservative treatments often followed by the time and expense of an EBP.
The goal of this investigation is to aid in the confirmation of case reports advocating the economy, efficacy and safety of synthetic Adrenal CorticTropin Hormone (ACTH) as a treatment of PDPH (4,5,6,7,8,9).
Detailed description
PDPH is a common problem after either intentional or unintentional Dural puncture. It is especially common in young female patients and in patients undergoing Lumbar Puncture using the typical kit containing large 20 gauge needles (1).
Current treatments consist primarily of non-invasive treatment with intravenous fluids and caffeine therapy and invasive treatment by Epidural Blood Patch. Efficacy of Caffeine 300mg IV BID x 1d doses is approximately 70% (2). However this therapy has been linked to post-treatment seizures. EBP was originally thought to be 90% effective with repeat treatment efficacy approaching >96%. However more recent studies by Taivainen et al (3) have shown only a 61% rate of permanent cure. Additionally, EBP are contraindicated in patients with signs of increased ICP, coagulation issues, signs/symptoms of CNS/systemic infection or local infection at the site of the EBP, thus resulting in decreased utility. Complications are also quite serious ranging from meningitis, spinal hematoma, repeat dural puncture, localized infection and vagal response to the procedure. EBP are not typically performed until after conservative measures have failed which leads to further prolongation of the patients decreased functional status and pain. Additionally, the cost of both treatments is substantial considering prolonged ED visits for conservative treatments often followed by the time and expense of an EBP.
The goal of this investigation is to aid in the confirmation of case reports advocating the economy, efficacy and safety of synthetic ACTH as a treatment of PDPH (4,5,6,7,8,9).
After patients receive and sign an informed consent form (ICF) Patients will be randomly assigned to undergo either: (1) EBP with IVF therapy or (2)Cosyntropin IV with IVF therapy. Endpoints will be a pain score that is given prior to the procedure, ED discharge pain score and post procedural day (PPD) day 1, day 3 and day 7 pain and functional levels. Patients in Cosyntropin arm of the study may request crossover to EBP at anytime after a 24 hour assessment period is completed per Standard of Care for treatment of PDPH, in order to ensure no undue distress is placed on the patient in order to complete this study.
Investigational New Drug (IND) Exemption for use of Cosyntropin.
Research Objective: To develop an efficacious and cost effective alternative to Epidural Blood Patch and Caffeine therapy for Postdural Puncture Headache.
Two Study Groups: (1) Group A - Cosyntropin 500 mcg in 1000 mili-liters Normal Saline (NS) run over 1 hour (2) Group B - Epidural Blood Patch and 1000 mili-liters NS
- 1liter NS run over 1 hour while waiting for call team to place Epidural Blood Patch
- Std Epidural Kit using 18g tuohy needle to Loss of Resistance (LOR) with providers preferred medium
- Max 20 cc of sterile blood in epidural space with amount dictated by either 20cc or sig pain/pressure
- Pt supine for 30 minutes post procedure
Randomization Procedures: Computer generated random number list with even numbers receiving Cosyntropin and odd numbers receiving traditional epidural blood patch.
Methods and Materials: After referral to an Anesthesiologist and confirmation of PDPH diagnosis, patient will be randomized to either Cosyntropin or Epidural Blood Patch assuring they are negative for pregnancy. If enrolled in Cosyntropin arm a bag of premixed (by pharmacy) Cosyntropin 500mcg in a 1 liter Normal Saline bag of Intravenous Fluid will be run over 1 hour. Please see above for further details. Additionally, there will be a telephone follow-up questionnaire performed by a person not directly involved with the study to collect data as described above.
Standard of Care: Patients are evaluated by the ED, clinic, labor deck or pre-op area and if PDPH is suspected patient is offered and given conservative treatment with intravenous caffeine. If this treatment fails and/or the patient requests it, the Anesthesia team is notified for possible EBP.
Experimental Procedure: Randomly selected patients will receive Cosyntropin 500mcg IV in 1 liter NS vs EBP
Research Material Collected: Verbal Analogue Scale scores and improvement in functional status. Pt's will be identified by a Patient ID number which will not be the same as the patient's hospital Identification (ID) or Social Security Number (SSN). Contact information will be kept on a separate patient tracking sheet (see attached) and kept electronically on a password protected computer.
Subject Recruiting: All patients meeting inclusion requirements will be offered enrollment at time of diagnosis/treatment.
Justification of Subject Population: Patient's with PDPH often have significant pain levels and subsequent decreases in function. Recent literature notes decreased efficacy of invasive Epidural Blood Patches. Alternate, less invasive techniques, could decrease time to relief and allow treatment patients with contra-indications to Epidural Blood Patch.
Risks: Local Infection, meningitis, allergic reaction, spinal hematoma, nerve damage, paralysis, failure of procedure, new dural puncture. Incidence of adverse events will be tracked.
- Justification of Risks- Control arm is current standard of care for this patient population. Experimental group utilizes a medication that has a very low risk profile. This medication is often used in the ICU setting on the most critical ill without increased risk.
- Minimization of Risks- Control arm is current standard of care. Experimental group will be treated in monitored settings of either the Emergency Department, Post- Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) or L\&D PACU
- Medical Monitor- A medical Monitor will be appointed
Benefits: Optimization of pain control for patients with PDPH. Will provide an alternative method to treat those patients with PDPH who have contra-indications to EBP. Will significantly reduce cost/personnel for treatment of PDPH and give options to medical providers in remote regions of care without the training/equipment to perform EBP.
Statistical Analysis: Data analysis will be accomplished using descriptive and inferential statistics. Demographic data will be analyzed using Student's t-test. Frequency data will be compared with the Chi-square test. A student's t-test will be used to compare the verbal pain scores. The satisfaction scores will be compared with a Mann-Whitney U test. A p-value of < 0.05 will be considered significant. All analysis will be performed utilizing Intention-to-Treat analysis and clearly state in the results section the number of persons that switch from the cosyntropin group to epidural blood patch therapy. The efficacy of the EBP for the study group and for this "crossover" group will also be noted.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intravenous Cosyntropin Group A | Experimental | Drug: CosyntropinCosyntropin 500 mcg in 1000cc Normal Saline |
| Epidural Blood Patch Group B | Active comparator | Procedure: Epidural Blood PatchEpidural Blood Patch and I000cc Normal Saline |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- 18 years of age or older,
- Diagnosed by Anesthesia provider as having PDPH
- Agrees to participation in study
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- In-patient status and/or unstable medical condition
- Patient's contraindication to EBP: Local infection at injection site, systemic infection, hemodynamically unstable, severely hypovolemic
- Patient's contraindication to EBP: Known or past reaction to natural ACTH or Cosyntropin
- Signs or symptoms of ICP such as Mental Status changes, Bradycardia and hypertension
- Congestive Heart Failure
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 |
|---|---|---|
| CosyntropinAlso: TetracosactinIntravenous Drug Infusion over 1 hour and a half | Drug | Intravenous Cosyntropin Group A |
| Epidural Blood PatchAlso: Blood patchBlood drawn from subject and then same Blood placed into Epidural space by anesthesia personnel. | Procedure or surgery | Epidural Blood Patch Group B |
Primary outcome
Headache Pain Score
Time frame: 1 day post procedure
Numerical 0-10 (0 no pain, 10 worst pain)
Headache Pain Score
Time frame: 3 days post procedure
Numerical 0-10 (0 no pain, 10 worst pain)
Headache Pain Score
Time frame: 7 days post procedure
Numerical 0-10 (0 no pain, 10 worst pain)
3 secondary outcomes
Functioning Score
Time frame: 1 day post procedure
Functioning Score
Time frame: 3 day post procedure
Functioning Score
Time frame: 7 day post procedure
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 Nov 2016.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 13318967VANDAM LD, DRIPPS RD. Long-term follow-up of patients who received 10,098 spinal anesthetics; syndrome of decreased intracranial pressure (headache and ocular and auditory difficulties). J Am Med Assoc. 1956 Jun 16;161(7):586-91. doi: 10.1001/jama.1956.02970070018005. No abstract available.
- BackgroundSechzer PH, Abel L. Post-spinal anesthesia headache treated with caffeine. Evaluation with demand method. Part I. Curr Therap Res 1978; 24:307-12.
- Background: PubMed 8249562Taivainen T, Pitkanen M, Tuominen M, Rosenberg PH. Efficacy of epidural blood patch for postdural puncture headache. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1993 Oct;37(7):702-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1993.tb03793.x.
- Background: PubMed 8130064Collier BB. Treatment for post dural puncture headache. Br J Anaesth. 1994 Mar;72(3):366-7. doi: 10.1093/bja/72.3.366-c. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 7946882Foster P. ACTH treatment for post-lumbar puncture headache. Br J Anaesth. 1994 Sep;73(3):429. doi: 10.1093/bja/73.3.429-a. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 10638928Carter BL, Pasupuleti R. Use of intravenous cosyntropin in the treatment of postdural puncture headache. Anesthesiology. 2000 Jan;92(1):272-4. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200001000-00043. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 9172038Gupta S, Agrawal A. Postdural puncture headache and ACTH. J Clin Anesth. 1997 May;9(3):258. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(97)00042-1. No abstract available.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Postdural Puncture Headache
RecruitingObservational study
Epidural Hydroxyethyl Starch for Post-Dural Puncture Headache in Parturients
Parturients, Accidental Puncture of Dura During Anaesthesia
Active, not recruitingObservational study
The Effect of Magnesium on Post-spinal Headaches
Post-spinal Headache
RecruitingPhase 2/3
Oral Gabapentin Versus Intravenous Neostigmine/Atropine Versus Combination of Both for Prevention of PDPH
Postdural Puncture Headache (PDPH)
Not yet recruiting
Dural Puncture Epidural With 27G vs 26G Needles Versus Standard Epidural for Elective Cesarean Delivery
Cesarean Section, Anesthesia, Obstetrical
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Spinal, Epidural, and Dural Puncture Epidural Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: Hemodynamics and Block Quality
Hypotension After Neuraxial Anesthesia, Cesarean Section
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.
Steven Hanling, MD principal investigator
NavalMCSD Pain Center
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Cosyntropin and Epidural Blood Patch in people with Postdural Puncture Headache, run by United States Naval Medical Center, San Diego.
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 3 inclusion and 7 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 1 Nov 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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 phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 1 Nov 2016). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Headache Pain Score (time frame: 1 day post procedure). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT02394457, which also lists 7 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 1 Nov 2016.