NCT01599403

Brief Summary

The primary objective of this study is to investigate whether continuous PVB is equal in efficacy to epidural anesthesia in terms of analgesia in patients with INR lower than 1.2, or is continuous ICNB equal in efficacy to PCA in terms of analgesia, if patients have INRs equal to or greater than 1.2.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
50

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Apr 2012

Longer than P75 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

February 28, 2012

Completed
1 month until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

April 1, 2012

Completed
2 months until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

May 16, 2012

Completed
4.7 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

February 1, 2017

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

February 1, 2017

Completed
Last Updated

February 13, 2017

Status Verified

February 1, 2017

Enrollment Period

4.8 years

First QC Date

February 28, 2012

Last Update Submit

February 9, 2017

Conditions

Keywords

Rib FractureIntercostal Nerve BlockParavertebral Nerve Block

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Primary Outcome: Difference in Pain Scores at 48hrs

    The primary question investigators wish to answer in this study is whether continuous PVB is equal in efficacy to epidural anesthesia in terms of analgesia in patients with INR lower than 1.2, or is continuous ICNB equal in efficacy to PCA in terms of analgesia, if patients have INRs equal to or greater than 1.2 as measured by visual analog pain scales at 48 hours post treatment.

    2 days

Study Arms (4)

Paravertebral Block

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Patients will receive 1 or 2 paravertebral catheters for ongoing infusion of local anesthestic

Procedure: Paravertebral Block

Patient Controlled Anesthesia

NO INTERVENTION

Standard usual care

Epidural Block

EXPERIMENTAL

Intervention: Patients will have epidural catheters placed for the infusion of local anesthetic solution to control pain (if qualified for this approach and randomized here)

Procedure: Epidural Block

Intercostal Nerve Block

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Patients will receive intercostal catheters for the infusion of local anesthetic solution to control pain(if qualified for this arm and randomized here)

Procedure: Intercostal Nerve Block

Interventions

The paravertebral block consists of injection of local anesthetics into the area next to the spinal column and results in regional pain control. This technique of this block may be performed on multiple levels if there are extensive rib fractures and may be performed on both sides of the rib cage depending on injury.

Paravertebral Block

The intercostal nerve block will consist of placing a catheter which delivers pain medication into the area between the ribs. This technique of this block may be performed on multiple levels if there are extensive rib fractures and may be performed on both sides of the rib cage depending on injury.

Intercostal Nerve Block

The epidural block consists of continuous infusion of local anesthetics into the epidural catheter placed into the epidural space (next to the spinal column) and results in regional pain control. This technique of this block may be performed at the appropriate level so the pain of rib fracture may be better controlled.

Epidural Block

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 100 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Subjects 18 years of age and greater
  • Inpatient on the BWH SICU, MICU, or hospital floor ward
  • Non-intubated at the time of block placement
  • Traumatic Rib Fractures three or greater
  • Block able to be placed within 12-24 hours of presentation to the emergency room
  • Ability to provide written informed consent.
  • Compliance with all ASRA and BWH Regional Anesthesia in Anticoagulated Patient guidelines for coagulation status.

You may not qualify if:

  • Subject is pregnant
  • Subject not expected to survive 48 hours due to traumatic injuries
  • Allergy to Ropivacaine or other local anesthetic
  • Any significant concomitant injuries potentially confounding data acquisition (e.g., traumatic brain injury, long bone fractures, intra-abdominal injuries)
  • Known allergy to lidocaine
  • Inability to provide written, informed consent
  • Known opioid medication dependence
  • Non-compliance with ARSA and BWH Regional Anesthesia in Anticoagulated Patient Guidelines.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, 02115, United States

Location

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Rib Fractures

Interventions

Anesthesia, Epidural

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Fractures, BoneWounds and InjuriesThoracic Injuries

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Anesthesia, ConductionAnesthesiaAnesthesia and Analgesia

Study Officials

  • Gyorgy Frendl, MD, PhD

    Brigham and Women's Hospital

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE CARE
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Director, Surgical ICU Translational Research (STAR) Center

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

February 28, 2012

First Posted

May 16, 2012

Study Start

April 1, 2012

Primary Completion

February 1, 2017

Study Completion

February 1, 2017

Last Updated

February 13, 2017

Record last verified: 2017-02

Locations