search
Back to results

Comparison of Different Analgesia-Monitors in Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations (AMUPS)

Primary Purpose

Anesthesia

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Germany
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®)
Analgesia monitor (SPI®)
Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®)
Remifentanil
Sponsored by
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Anesthesia focused on measuring Nociception, Analgesia, Intraoperative, Monitoring

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 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

Exclusion Criteria:

  • 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

Sites / Locations

  • Department of Anesthesiology; Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hamburg Eppendorf University Medical Center

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm Type

Other

Arm Label

Analgesia monitoring

Arm Description

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.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

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.

Secondary Outcome Measures

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.

Full Information

First Posted
April 8, 2015
Last Updated
September 24, 2019
Sponsor
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02429960
Brief Title
Comparison of Different Analgesia-Monitors in Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations
Acronym
AMUPS
Official Title
Investigation of the Clinical Use of Different Analgesia-Monitors for Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations During General Anesthesia
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
September 2019
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
April 2015 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
September 2015 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
September 2015 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief 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. 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.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Anesthesia
Keywords
Nociception, Analgesia, Intraoperative, Monitoring

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Single Group Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
N/A
Enrollment
30 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Analgesia monitoring
Arm Type
Other
Arm Description
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.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Analgesia monitor (PhysioDoloris®)
Intervention Description
Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®).
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Analgesia monitor (SPI®)
Intervention Description
Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®).
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Analgesia monitor (AlgiScan®)
Intervention Description
Comparison of three different analgesia monitoring systems (PhysioDoloris®, SPI® and AlgiScan®).
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Remifentanil
Intervention Description
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.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
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
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Differences of sensitivity and specificity of the analgesia monitors in detecting a painful stimulus under different doses of remifentanil.
Description
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.
Time Frame
Observation for approximately 30 minutes after anesthesia induction

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: 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 Exclusion Criteria: 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
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Christian Zoellner, Professor
Organizational Affiliation
Department of Anesthesiology; Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hamburg Eppendorf University Medical Center
Official's Role
Study Director
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Department of Anesthesiology; Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hamburg Eppendorf University Medical Center
City
Hamburg
ZIP/Postal Code
20246
Country
Germany

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Links:
URL
https://anesthesiology.pubs.asahq.org/article.aspx?articleid=2627427
Description
Publication of study results - Validation of Innovative Techniques for Monitoring Nociception during General Anesthesia

Learn more about this trial

Comparison of Different Analgesia-Monitors in Tracing Unconscious Pain Sensations

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs