AnesthesiaAMUPSNCT02429960
Comparison of Different Analgesia-Monitors in Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations
A study testing Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®), Analgesia monitor (SPI®) and Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®) in people with Anesthesia, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
Until today there is no standard-monitoring to specifically reflect the analgesic component of general anesthesia. Quality and safety of general anesthesia are of major clinical importance and can be improved by limiting the administration of opioid analgesics to the minimum dose needed. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Anesthesia
- What is being tested?
- Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®), Analgesia monitor (SPI®) and Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®)
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- Apr 2015to Sep 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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
- American Society of Anesthesiologists Status I and II
- > 18 years
- Elective surgery in Urology/Ear Nose Throat under general anesthesia without the use of muscle relaxants
Who cannot join
- Diseases with impairment of sensitivity (diabetes, gout, polyneuropathy, peripheral arterial obstructive disease)
- Beta blocker and digitalis therapy
- Chronic pain therapy
- Pacemaker therapy
- Dermal diseases with affection of the forearm/hand
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Germany1 site
Department of Anesthesiology; Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hamburg Eppendorf University Medical Center
Hamburg, 20246
About this study
Official title: Investigation of the Clinical Use of Different Analgesia-Monitors for Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations During General Anesthesia
Until today there is no standard-monitoring to specifically reflect the analgesic component of general anesthesia. Quality and safety of general anesthesia are of major clinical importance and can be improved by limiting the administration of opioid analgesics to the minimum dose needed. This study therefore examines the quality of three different monitoring techniques (PhysioDoloris, MetroDoloris, Lille, France, SPI (Surgical Plethysmographic Index), GE Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland and AlgiScan, IDMed, Marseille, France) in assessing the level of analgesia during general anesthesia. Therefore a standardized painful stimulus is applied under different levels of analgesic drugs. The monitor's indices are compared to clinical signs such as an increase in heart rate and blood pressure.
Read the detailed description
This study aims to investigate the capability of different analgesia-monitors (PhysioDoloris, MetroDoloris, Lille, France, SPI (Surgical Plethysmographic Index), GE Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland and AlgiScan, IDMed, Marseille, France) in tracing unconscious pain sensations during general anesthesia. Many surgical procedures require general anesthesia. In order to induce hypnosis and analgesia, which are the main components of general anesthesia, the anesthetist usually combines a hypnotic drug with an opioid analgesic.
Until today, however, there is no standard-monitoring to specifically reflect the analgesic component of general anesthesia. Because over dosage as well as under dosage of opioids (e.g. remifentanil) may increase postoperative pain, the development of a depth-of-analgesia monitor is not only desirable but necessary. Quality and safety of general anesthesia are of major clinical importance and can be improved by limiting the administration of opioid analgesics to the minimum dose needed. This study therefore examines the quality of the monitoring technique, i.e. the sensitivity and specificity in assessing the level of analgesia during general anesthesia under standardized conditions.
Levels of analgesia are traditionally evaluated by clinical signs such as an increase in heart rate, blood pressure, lacrimation, sweating and defensive movements. Recent research has been able to demonstrate the possibility of assessment of the level of nociception-antinociception balance by applying a tetanic stimulation (30 s, 60 milliampere, 50 Hz) above the ulnar side of the wrist using a standard muscle relaxometer on the patients arm. In these investigations the stimulation led to a decrease of the vagal tonus resulting in changes in sinus arrhythmia and in a smaller area under the plethysmographic curve. Different devices were able to reflect a painful stimulus during propofol-remifentanil anesthesia. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no data on the ability of the monitor-devices to detect a reproducible quantified painful stimulus under standardized conditions.
Bromm et al. thus established the intracutaneous pain model in the Department of Neurophysiology at the University-Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf more than 20 years ago. This model involves removing a small core of epidermis from the skin on the pulp of the finger and placing an electrode directly in the vicinity of Aδ- and C-fiber terminals. Corresponding stimulation evokes clear pinprick pain of the patients. Utilizing Bromm et al.'s methodology, we actively contribute to the ongoing debate on the clinical use of analgesia-monitors in tracing unconscious sensation of pain during general anesthesia. For better comparability to previous studies the Bromm et al's methodology will be complemented by a measurement after a tetanic stimulation on each analgesic level.
The hypotheses will be examined in a prospective clinical study by means of tetanic stimulation, tested on presumably 30 elective patients. The study was approved by the Ethics committee of the Medical Board of the City of Hamburg, Germany and informed consent will be obtained from all patients. After induction of deep propofol sedation a laryngeal mask is inserted and sedation is maintained by continuous bispectral index-guided propofol-infusion. Next, remifentanil is increased step-by-step according to the study protocol.
After ensuring a steady-state period of remifentanil infusion of at least 5 minutes, the standardized painful stimuli consisting of the intracutaneous pain model and tetanic stimulation for the time period of 30 s with 80 milliampere, 50 Hz are applied. All stimulations are accompanied by the measurement of the analgesic monitoring-indices. Moreover the investigators measure and inspect changes in heart rate and blood pressure as well as occurrence of defensive movements of the patients.
- Conditions
- Anesthesia
- Being tested
- Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®), Analgesia monitor (SPI®), Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®), Remifentanil
- Keywords
- Nociception, Analgesia, Intraoperative, Monitoring
- Medical subject headings
- Agnosia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®)Device
Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®).
Analgesia monitor (SPI®)Device
Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®).
Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®)Device
Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®).
RemifentanilDrug
Remifentanil will be increased step-by-step from 0.05 mcg/kg/min to 0.2 mcg/kg/min. After ensuring a steady-state period of remifentanil infusion of at least 5 minutes, the standardized painful stimuli will be applied.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Analgesia monitoring | Other | Remifentanil is increased step-by-step according to the study protocol. After ensuring a steady-state period of remifentanil infusion of at least 5 minutes, the standardized painful stimuli consisting of the intracutaneous pain model and tetanic stimulation for the time period of 30 s with 80 milliampere, 50 Hz are applied. All stimulations are accompanied by the measurement of the analgesic monitoring-devices (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®). Moreover the investigators measure and inspect changes in heart rate and blood pressure as well as occurrence of defensive movements of the patients. Receives: Device: Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®); Device: Analgesia monitor (SPI®); Device: Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®); Drug: Remifentanil |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Comparison of the Pearson correlation coefficient between the dose of analgesic medication (remifentanil) on the one hand and the changes in heart rate, blood pressure and output of the analgesia monitoring systems on the other hand.
Measured: Observation for approximately 30 minutes after anesthesia induction
Secondary outcomes (1)
Differences of sensitivity and specificity of the analgesia monitors in detecting a painful stimulus under different doses of remifentanil.
Sensitivity and specificity of the analgesia monitors are compared to the sensitivity and specificity of the changes in heart rate and blood pressure after a painful stimulus.
Measured: Observation for approximately 30 minutes after anesthesia induction
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Apr 2015 (estimated)
- Study startApr 2015
- Primary completionSep 2015
- Study completionSep 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for AnesthesiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfThe 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. med. Rainer Nitzschke, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
- Investigators
- Christian Zoellner, Professor, Study director, Department of Anesthesiology; Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hamburg Eppendorf University Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02429960
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AMUPS-012013
- Acronym
- AMUPS
- Status last verified
- Sep 2019
- First submitted
- 8 Apr 2015
- Last updated
- 26 Sep 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Sep 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Investigation of the Clinical Use of Different Analgesia-Monitors for Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations During General Anesthesia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02429960
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AMUPS / AMUPS-012013
- Conditions
- Anesthesia
- Keywords
- Nociception, Analgesia, Intraoperative, Monitoring
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Apr 2015
- Primary completion
- Sep 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Apr 2015 (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.
Until today there is no standard-monitoring to specifically reflect the analgesic component of general anesthesia. Quality and safety of general anesthesia are of major clinical importance and can be improved by limiting the administration of opioid analgesics to the minimum dose needed. This study therefore examines the quality of three different monitoring techniques (PhysioDoloris, MetroDoloris, Lille, France, SPI (Surgical Plethysmographic Index), GE Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland and AlgiScan, IDMed, Marseille, France) in assessing the level of analgesia during general anesthesia. Therefore a standardized painful stimulus is applied under different levels of analgesic drugs. The monitor's indices are compared to clinical signs such as an increase in heart rate and blood pressure.
Detailed description
This study aims to investigate the capability of different analgesia-monitors (PhysioDoloris, MetroDoloris, Lille, France, SPI (Surgical Plethysmographic Index), GE Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland and AlgiScan, IDMed, Marseille, France) in tracing unconscious pain sensations during general anesthesia. Many surgical procedures require general anesthesia. In order to induce hypnosis and analgesia, which are the main components of general anesthesia, the anesthetist usually combines a hypnotic drug with an opioid analgesic.
Until today, however, there is no standard-monitoring to specifically reflect the analgesic component of general anesthesia. Because over dosage as well as under dosage of opioids (e.g. remifentanil) may increase postoperative pain, the development of a depth-of-analgesia monitor is not only desirable but necessary. Quality and safety of general anesthesia are of major clinical importance and can be improved by limiting the administration of opioid analgesics to the minimum dose needed. This study therefore examines the quality of the monitoring technique, i.e. the sensitivity and specificity in assessing the level of analgesia during general anesthesia under standardized conditions.
Levels of analgesia are traditionally evaluated by clinical signs such as an increase in heart rate, blood pressure, lacrimation, sweating and defensive movements. Recent research has been able to demonstrate the possibility of assessment of the level of nociception-antinociception balance by applying a tetanic stimulation (30 s, 60 milliampere, 50 Hz) above the ulnar side of the wrist using a standard muscle relaxometer on the patients arm. In these investigations the stimulation led to a decrease of the vagal tonus resulting in changes in sinus arrhythmia and in a smaller area under the plethysmographic curve. Different devices were able to reflect a painful stimulus during propofol-remifentanil anesthesia. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no data on the ability of the monitor-devices to detect a reproducible quantified painful stimulus under standardized conditions.
Bromm et al. thus established the intracutaneous pain model in the Department of Neurophysiology at the University-Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf more than 20 years ago. This model involves removing a small core of epidermis from the skin on the pulp of the finger and placing an electrode directly in the vicinity of Aδ- and C-fiber terminals. Corresponding stimulation evokes clear pinprick pain of the patients. Utilizing Bromm et al.'s methodology, we actively contribute to the ongoing debate on the clinical use of analgesia-monitors in tracing unconscious sensation of pain during general anesthesia. For better comparability to previous studies the Bromm et al's methodology will be complemented by a measurement after a tetanic stimulation on each analgesic level.
The hypotheses will be examined in a prospective clinical study by means of tetanic stimulation, tested on presumably 30 elective patients. The study was approved by the Ethics committee of the Medical Board of the City of Hamburg, Germany and informed consent will be obtained from all patients. After induction of deep propofol sedation a laryngeal mask is inserted and sedation is maintained by continuous bispectral index-guided propofol-infusion. Next, remifentanil is increased step-by-step according to the study protocol.
After ensuring a steady-state period of remifentanil infusion of at least 5 minutes, the standardized painful stimuli consisting of the intracutaneous pain model and tetanic stimulation for the time period of 30 s with 80 milliampere, 50 Hz are applied. All stimulations are accompanied by the measurement of the analgesic monitoring-indices. Moreover the investigators measure and inspect changes in heart rate and blood pressure as well as occurrence of defensive movements of the patients.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Analgesia monitoring | Other | Device: Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®), Device: Analgesia monitor (SPI®), Device: Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®), Drug: RemifentanilRemifentanil is increased step-by-step according to the study protocol. After ensuring a steady-state period of remifentanil infusion of at least 5 minutes, the standardized painful stimuli consisting of the intracutaneous pain model and tetanic stimulation for the time period of 30 s with 80 milliampere, 50 Hz are applied. All stimulations are accompanied by the measurement of the analgesic monitoring-devices (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®). Moreover the investigators measure and inspect changes in heart rate and blood pressure as well as occurrence of defensive movements of the patients. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- American Society of Anesthesiologists Status I and II
- > 18 years
- Elective surgery in Urology/Ear Nose Throat under general anesthesia without the use of muscle relaxants
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Diseases with impairment of sensitivity (diabetes, gout, polyneuropathy, peripheral arterial obstructive disease)
- Beta blocker and digitalis therapy
- Chronic pain therapy
- Pacemaker therapy
- Dermal diseases with affection of the forearm/hand
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®)Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®). | Device | Analgesia monitoring |
| Analgesia monitor (SPI®)Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®). | Device | Analgesia monitoring |
| Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®)Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®). | Device | Analgesia monitoring |
| RemifentanilRemifentanil will be increased step-by-step from 0.05 mcg/kg/min to 0.2 mcg/kg/min. After ensuring a steady-state period of remifentanil infusion of at least 5 minutes, the standardized painful stimuli will be applied. | Drug | Analgesia monitoring |
Primary outcome
Comparison of the Pearson correlation coefficient between the dose of analgesic medication (remifentanil) on the one hand and the changes in heart rate, blood pressure and output of the analgesia monitoring systems on the other hand.
Time frame: Observation for approximately 30 minutes after anesthesia induction
1 secondary outcome
Differences of sensitivity and specificity of the analgesia monitors in detecting a painful stimulus under different doses of remifentanil.
Time frame: Observation for approximately 30 minutes after anesthesia induction
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 26 Sep 2019.
- Publication of study results - Validation of Innovative Techniques for Monitoring Nociception during General AnesthesiaLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Anesthesia
Not yet recruitingObservational study
"Comparison of Oxygen Reserve Index (ORI), End-Tidal Oxygen, and Time-Based Preoxygenation Targets With Arterial Blood Gas During Preoxygenation
Preoxygenation Adequacy Assessed by Oxygen Reserve Index, End-tidal Oxygen and Arterial Blood Gas
RecruitingObservational study
Comparison of Hemodynamic Responses During Anesthesia Induction Using Eleveld and Schnider
Spinal (Fusion) Surgery, Total Intravenous Anesthesia
Not yet recruiting
A Randomized Controlled SaCo-VLM Trial
General Anaesthesia Using Supraglotic Airway
Not yet recruiting
Bispectral Index-Guided Propofol Sedation During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Deep Sedation, Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
RecruitingPhase 4
Comparison of Hemodynamics and Respiratory Function Between Ciprofol and Propofol in Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-intubated General Anesthesia
Comparison of Hemodynamics and Respiratory Function Between Ciprofol and Propofol in Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-intubated General Anesthesia
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.
Christian Zoellner, Professor study director
Department of Anesthesiology; Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hamburg Eppendorf University Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®), Analgesia monitor (SPI®) and Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®) in people with Anesthesia, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
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 5 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 26 Sep 2019. 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 Germany. 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.
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?
Comparison of the Pearson correlation coefficient between the dose of analgesic medication (remifentanil) on the one hand and the changes in heart rate, blood pressure and output of the analgesia monitoring systems on the other hand. (time frame: Observation for approximately 30 minutes after anesthesia induction). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 26 Sep 2019.