Evaluation of Closed-loop TIVA Propofol, Sufentanil and Ketamine Guided by BIS Monitor

Learn more about:
Related Clinical Trial
Ondansetron Effect on Pain Relief After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Different Timing for Early Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Acute Calcular Cholecystitis Prognostic Indicators as Provided by the EPIC ClearView WSES International Register of Emergency Surgery Evaluation of Implementation of a National Point-of-Care Ultrasound Training Program Deep Versus Moderate Neuromuscular Blockade During Laparoscopic Surgery Study Comparing Tigecycline Versus Ceftriaxone Sodium Plus Metronidazole in Complicated Intra-abdominal Infection (cIAI) Cefoperazone/Sulbactam In The Treatment Of Serious Intra-Abdominal And Hepatobiliary Infections. Prospective Validation of “Cholecystectomy First” Strategy for Gallstone Migration ONSD According to the Position During Laparoscopy Risk of Umbilical Trocar-site Hernia After SILC Cholecystectomy Versus Conventional Cholecystectomy Drainage or Not for Laparoscopic Cholecystetomy UDCA for Symptomatic Gallstone Disease Small-incision Open Cholecystectomy or Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Gallbladder Disease Study Comparing Tigecycline Versus Ceftriaxone Sodium Plus Metronidazole in Complicated Intra-abdominal Infection Transvaginal Cholecystectomy Using Endoscopic Assistance Doripenem in the Treatment of Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections Doripenem in the Treatment of Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections The Use of Fluorescent Imaging for Intraoperative Cholangiogram During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy No Need for Neuromuscular Blockade in Daycase Laparoscopic Surgery Efficacy of Proficiency-based Versus Free Laparoscopic Training in Cholecystectomy on a Virtual Reality Simulator Single Port Access (SPA) Cholecystectomy Versus Standard Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus Traditional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Evaluation of PC 6 “Neiguan” With Conventional Acupuncture to Prevent PONV After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Role of the Right Portal Pedicle and Rouviere’s Sulcus as an Anatomic Landmark in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy DGT Versus TPS in Patients With Initial PD Cannulation by Chance; Prospective Multi-center Study Laparoscopic Transvaginal Hybrid Cholecystectomy: a Prospective Data Collection. NOTES-Assisted Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery EUS-guided Transenteric Drainage With a Novel Lumen-apposing Metal Stent Effect of Vitamin C on Postoperative Pain After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy NOVOsyn® for Trocar Incision After Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Cholecystectomy Fluorescence Cholangiography During Cholecystectomy – a RCT Outcome of IV Acetaminophen Use in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies in Patients at Risk of OSA FALCON: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Cholecystectomy First vs Sequential Common Bile Duct Imaging + Cholecystectomy Initial Experience With a New Laparoscopic Based Robotically Assisted Surgical System for Cholecystectomy Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy 3D Versus 4K Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme Versus the Tracheal Tube as an Airway Device in Elective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Effect of Modified Stylet Angulation on the Intubation With GlideScope® Evaluation of Closed-loop TIVA Propofol, Sufentanil and Ketamine Guided by BIS Monitor BDD With UDCA Therapy After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Transmuscular Quadratus Lumborum Block for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Postoperative Pain Results According to Pressure to Form Pneumoperitoneum Benefits of Glycopyrrolate on Intubation With Rigid-videostylet (OptiScope®) Prediction of Postoperative Pain by Injection Pain of Propofol Transient ECG Changes in Patients With Acute Biliary Disease Randomized Control Trial of Intraperitoneal Bupivacaine During Cholecystectomy Establishing Visualization Grading Scale on LESS Cholecystectomy Improving Informed Consent Process for Percutaneous Cholecystostomy in the Emergency Department Natural Orifice Transgastric Endoscopic Surgical Removal of the Gallbladder Anesthesia With Propofol, Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine Infusions for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy A Clinical Study of Chinese Domestic Surgical Robot Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Study of Left Side of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Tracheal Intubation in Patient With Semi-rigid Collar Immobilization of the Cervical Spine: A Comparison of Fiberoptic Bronchoscope Assisted With Pentax-airway Scope and Fiberoptic Bronchoscope Alone Effect of Intraoperative Nefopam on Acute Pain After Remifentanil Based Anesthesia Ultrasound Guided Subcostal Transversus Abdominis Plane Versus Paravertebral Block in the Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Near Infrared Fluorescence Cholangiography (NIRF-C) During Cholecystectomy Effects of Drainage in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Observation vs Early Removal of LAMS in EUS Guided Cholecystoenterostomy Study of Pain Perception Between Males and Females Following Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Drainage is Not Necessary Procedure After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Due to Severe Acute Cholecystitis Comparison of Morbidity After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acutely Inflamed Gall Bladder With and Without Drain Early Versus Delayed Cholecystectomy If Chronic Gallbladder Diseases Increase the Incidence of PEC Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Patients Undergoing Acute Minor Abdominal Surgery Use of Robotics for Cholecystectomy; Retrospective Review of Outcomes, Set Up and Learning Curves Near Infrared Fluorescence Cholangiography (NIRF-C) During Cholecystectomy — Use in Acute Cholecystitis Sub-Study The Relationship Between Post-ERCP-choledocholithiasis and Gallbladder Status Endoscopic Nasogallbladder Drainage Versus Gallbladder Stenting Before Cholecystecomy Enhanced Recovery in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Empirical Antibiotics in Acute Inflammatory Gallbladder Disease Primary EUS-GBD in Patients With Unresectable Malignant Biliary Obstruction and Cystic Duct Orifice Involvement. Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis After 72 Hours of Symptoms Bile Aspiration vs Drain in Acute Cholecystitis Interest of Intravenous Cholangiography With Indocyanine Green in the Context of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Grade 1 and 2 Acute Gallstone Cholecystitis Fluorescent Cholangiography During Acute Cholecystitis Reduction of Operating Time by a Smoke Electroprecipitation Device for Acute Cholecystitis Piperacllin Versus Placebo in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Acute Cholecystitis Ultrasonically Activated Scalpel Versus Electrocautery Based Dissection in Acute Cholecystitis Trial Is it Fair to Use Antibiotics After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for the Patients With Acutely Inflamed Gallbladder? Percutaneous Transhepatic Cholangiography (PTHC) in Acute Cholecystitis and Clinical Outcomes Acute Cholecystitis – Early Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Antibiotic Therapy and Delayed Elective Cholecystectomy Scoring System in Acute Calculous Cholecystitis Is it Safe to do Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis up to Seven Days? Fast Track Pathway to Accelerated Cholecystectomy Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy or Conservative Treatment in the Acute Cholecystitis of Elderly Patients Efficacy and Safety of Floseal for the Haemostasis During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Acute Cholecystitis (GLA) Acute Cholecystitis: Early Versus Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy; Randomized Prospective Study Short Term Outcomes of Acute Cholecystitis Managed at a University Hospital Harmonic in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis EUS-guided Gallbladder Drainage Instead of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis. A Feasibility Study. Prospective Trial for Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis in High Risk Patients A Randomized Controlled Trial on EGBD vs PC for Acute Cholecystitis. Magnetic Resonance Cholangiography and Intraoperative Cholangiography in Acute Cholecystitis The Role of Ultrasound in Cholecystitis AXIOS™ for Gallbladder Drainage as an Alternative to Percutaneous Drainage IDE Extended Antibiotic Therapy in Postoperative of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Acute Cholecystitis The Real World of Acute Cholecystitis Functional MRC With Eovist for Acute Cholecystitis FDG-PET/CT in the Evaluation of Patients With Suspected Cholecystitis

Brief Title

Evaluation of Closed-loop TIVA Propofol, Sufentanil and Ketamine Guided by BIS Monitor

Official Title

Evaluation of Closed-loop Titration of the Intravenous Anesthetic Propofol, Sufentanil and Ketamine Guided by BIS Monitor

Brief Summary

      The purpose of this study is to compare a closed-loop intravenous anesthetic using Bispectral
      Index as a feedback loop and a controller based on reinforcement learning to titrate dose and
      intravenous anesthetic that is manually controlled or a standard volatile anesthetic agent
      titrated by the anesthesiologist to determine improvement in the following parameters as
      compared to controls: time to discharge from the Post Anesthesia Care Unit, post-operative
      nausea and vomiting, pain scores and sedation scores.
    

Detailed Description

      Recent efforts have focused on the development of new software systems that are able to
      directly titrate anesthesia based on activity of the brain (EEG) as a feedback mechanism .
      Brain activity is used to measure the effect of anesthetic medications (anesthetic "depth"),
      which can vary from person to person despite being given the same amount of medication. There
      is a potential for new systems to considerably improve anesthetic control by using methods
      that are able to adapt to the constant input of brain activity. The purpose of this study is
      to compare a closed -loop intravenous anesthetic (TIVA) using BIS (Bispectral Index) as a
      feedback loop and a controller based on reinforcement learning to titrate dose and TIVA that
      is manually controlled or a standard volatile anesthetic agent titrated by the
      anesthesiologist.

      Propofol is the most frequently applied hypnotic-anesthetic IV drug during anesthesia. In
      "open-loop" controlled propofol administration during anesthesia, initial dosing guidelines
      are based on the typical subject, without taking into account the large inter-individual
      variability. To manage this variability, most clinicians will start by giving a standard
      dose, observes the therapeutic effect and will adapt the dose regimen. Although, "open-loop"
      drug administration is clinically "standard-of-care", the efficiency of this decision process
      highly depends on the expertise of the clinician, is very time consuming and might result in
      a suboptimal therapy.

      The study will be using patient with acute cholecystitis scheduled for laparoscopic
      cholecystectomy surgery and the inclusion/exclusion criteria is described in the appropriate
      sections. Potential subjects will be identified prior to their surgery based on meeting the
      inclusion/exclusion criteria. The subject will be approached in the inpatient unit or
      pre-operative holding area, a private area where curtains can be drawn to maintain privacy.
      This is a place where patients are routinely examined and consented prior to surgery.. The
      subject will be informed that participation or a lack of participation in the study does not
      influence their treatment in any way. The subject will be informed that if they give consent
      for participation in the study that they may withdraw consent at any time before performance
      of the study. This withdrawal of consent may be given to the investigator in oral or written
      form.

      The Investigator will explain the study to the potential subject verbally, providing all
      pertinent information (purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, alternatives to participation,
      etc.), and allow the potential subject ample opportunity to ask questions. Following this
      verbal explanation, the potential subject will be provided with a written consent form and
      given at least one hour to consider whether or not to participate in the research. After
      allowing the potential subject time to read the consent form, an Investigator listed on the
      consent form will meet with the potential subject and answer any additional questions she/he
      may have.

      The subject will have been pre randomized to a study arm (Permuted block randomisation via
      computer generated numbers) and will not be informed which study arm. The three study arms
      are RL-TIVA (experimental), Manual TIVA, and INH-Sevo.

      Premedication and Induction: Premedication with up to 0.05mg/kg IV midazolam

      Prior to arrival in the operating room, a peripheral intravenous line will be inserted in a
      large forearm vein in all patients and 500 ml of saline will be infused. This is required to
      administer drugs and fluids during anesthesia and is routinely done in all patients. On
      arrival in the operating room, vital signs (heart rate, non-invasive blood pressure, blood
      oxygen saturation and end-tidal CO2) will be measured in all patients (standard of care
      during anesthesia). The RL-TIVA group will also have a non-traumatic, commercially available
      unilateral BIS electrode applied at the patient's forehead. This EEG sensor will be connected
      to the BIS (Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA) monitor to calculate the BIS.

      All patients will undergo a standard IV induction using:

      1mg/kg 1% lidocaine up to maximum of 100mg 100mcg fentanyl 2mg/kg propofol up to maximum of
      200mg 0.6mg/kg rocuronium

      Patients will be randomly allocated to standard volatile based anesthesia or BIS-guided
      intravenous anesthesia administration. The protocol for each of the study arms is as follows:

      -RL-TIVA: Propofol, ketamine and sufentanil (PKS) administration will be done via a three way
      stop cock connected directly to the IV catheter to minimize dead space volume. PKS solution
      will contain total of 50ml. Propofol 10mg/ml, Ketamine 1mg/ml (will be omitted in subsequent
      preparations after first 50ml), Sufentanil 0.25 mcg-ml. Drug will be administered using a
      Harvard 33 syringe pump (The Harvard 33 Syringe pump has been used in human trials in prior
      study at Stanford that is pending publication). This pump will be connected via a RS 232
      interface to the study computer running RL (reinforcement learning) control software. This
      software platform collects real time vital signs and BIS values and steer the target
      controlled infusion pumps and the closed-loop controllers.

      Baseline vital signs, including BIS will be recorded for 2 minutes. During induction until 5
      minutes after intubation, NIBP will be measured every minute. Thereafter, NIBP will be
      measured at least every 3 minutes until the end of the case. The start of the baseline
      measures will be considered as the "START CASE" moment.

      IV anesthetic administration will start using the closed-loop system by setting the BIS
      target at 45.

      When required, optimization of the patients' positioning, disinfection and draping will
      ensue. When ready, surgery will start.

      During surgery, anesthesia will be maintained by propofol-ketamine-sufentanil via closed-loop
      at a BIS target of 45.

        -  Manual TIVA: Manually titrated IV anesthetics are routinely done in the operating room
           as an alternative to inhalational anesthetics. Propofol, ketamine and sufentanil (PKS)
           administration will be done via a three way stop cock connected directly to the IV
           catheter to minimize dead space volume. PKS solution will contain total of 50ml.
           Propofol 10mg/ml, Ketamine 1mg/ml (will be omitted in subsequent preparations after
           first 50ml), Sufentanil 0.25 mcg-ml. Drug will be administered using an Alaris infusion
           pump titrated by the anesthesiologist based on blood pressure and heart-rate as is
           traditionally done and is standard of care with intravenous anesthetics.

        -  INH-Sevo: After the patient is intubated Sevoflurane will be started and titrated to
           between 0.8 and 1.5 MAC by the anesthesiologist. At end of surgery, as defined by
           placement of surgical dressing, volatile anesthetic will be discontinued.

      Wake up protocol will be the same for all three arms. Normocapnia will be maintained during
      recovery by mechanical ventilation till spontaneous breathing is resumed. No decrease in the
      Minute Ventilation is allowed during recovery. Moment of return of spontaneous breathing will
      be recorded. Once spontaneous breathing is returned, patients will be asked by their name to
      open their mouth. A positive response will be recorded and the trachea will be extubated.
      Thereafter, patients will be transferred to the PACU. The parameters listed in the
      appropriate section will be evaluated.

      Data Collection: Subject data will be kept in 3 specific locations. A hard copy print out
      will be maintained in a folder that will contain the eligibility criteria, consent form, and
      source document. This will be stored in a locked file cabinet with limited access to the PI
      and Co-Investigators. The electronic data will be stored on an encrypted flash drive kept in
      the locked file cabinet and will be backed up on a secure encrypted Network folder that only
      the PI and Co-Investigators will have authorization to access.

      Statistical Analysis: A power analysis of the previously reported Stanford human volunteer
      study data was performed in order to estimate appropriate sample sizes. To estimate
      "worst-case" conditions, the measured parameter demonstrating greatest variation, MDPE, was
      selected. Assuming comparison with a two-sample, two-tailed t-test and a p-value of 0.05, a
      single-group sample size of 25 produced statistical power values of ~1.0. Given this size, we
      can detect a 10% difference in MDPE under standard deviations of up to 7 and still maintain
      power values > 0.85; thus, we selected n=25 for each of the three study groups, yielding a
      total sample size of 75. We acknowledge that this sample size might prove to be over-powered;
      however, intraoperative study is known to be challenging. For example, all of the measured
      variables should not be expected to demonstrate normal distributions (a critical assumption
      in the above power analysis), and we anticipate limited occurrence of confounding influences,
      such as protocol deviations and interruptions in data collection. Given the vagaries of
      intraoperative study, the chosen sample size of 75 patients seems reasonable.

      Descriptive statistics Categorical data:, sex, age, weight, height, induction times, times to
      accurate control (time to reach target, overshoot in BIS), % of time for accurate control and
      hemodynamic stability, recovery times, nausea, vomiting, sedation score, pain score, and drug
      concentrations. Closed-loop control performance data (see below).

      Continuous variables: BIS, heart rate, blood pressure, saturation, EtCO2 Univariate analysis,
      Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test will be used will be used to compare numerical data
      and performance parameters.

      Chi-squared will be used to analyse qualitative data. RMANOVA will be used to analyze the
      continuous data.

      Safety: An anesthesiologist or resident will be present for the entire duration of the
      anesthetic as is standard of care. If at any time there is hardware or software failure, the
      infusion can be disconnected and conventional volatile anesthetic can be rapidly instituted.
      LIMITS OF THE CLOSED-LOOP (safety) : In the closed-loop control software, safety limits have
      been installed.

      Procedure for Analysis and Interpretation of the Safety Data: The monitoring entity will be
      Benjamin Wallisch, MD. He will oversee the research participant's safety, monitor for
      unanticipated problems involving risks to participants or others, and assure that such events
      are reported to the IRB. Integrity and appropriate handling (confidentiality) of the
      following data will be monitored: Demographic and morphometrics data, vital signs, bispectral
      (BIS) index values, infusion pump flow rate, and recording of occurrence and severity of drug
      side effects. Monitoring will occur after every study patient is enrolled. Should unexpected
      adverse events occur. All effort will be made to identify the source causing the event.
      Source identification may mandate the temporary halting of the study as well as protocol
      adjustments (e.g. reduction of drug doses). Serious adverse events will be reported by
      Benjamin Wallisch, MD within 2 business days. Serious adverse events will be brought to the
      attention of the IRB within 24 hours.

      Deviations to the study protocol or adverse events will be addressed by the IRB protocol. A
      log will be kept of Adverse events and Protocol Deviation kept on the encrypted flash drive
      and backed up on the encrypted network drive. The reporting of events will be as above
      stated.

      An annual progress report will be submitted to the IRB for review.
    


Study Type

Interventional


Primary Outcome

Time to discharge from PACU

Secondary Outcome

 Post operative Nausea and/or vomiting

Condition

Acute Cholecystitis

Intervention

TIVA - Hypotension

Study Arms / Comparison Groups

 RL-TIVA Group
Description:  Propofol, ketamine and sufentanil administration for a TIVA (total intravenous anesthetic) will be administered using a Harvard 33 syringe pump connected via a RS 232 interface to the study computer running the RL (Reinforcement Learning) control software. This software platform will collect real time vitals and BIS valises and steer the target controlled infusion pumps and the closed loop controllers. The anesthesiologist will provide interventions based on protocol for TIVA - Hypotension, TIVA - Hypertension, TIVA - Bradycardia and TIVA - Tachycardia .

Publications

* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by National Clinical Trials Identifier (NCT ID) in Medline.

Recruitment Information


Recruitment Status

Procedure

Estimated Enrollment

4

Start Date

September 2013

Completion Date

August 2014

Primary Completion Date

April 2014

Eligibility Criteria

        Inclusion Criteria:

          -  18-65 years of age

          -  Body mass index lower or equal to 40 m2/kg

          -  Subjects must be able to comprehend spoken and written English or Spanish

        Exclusion Criteria:

          -  Any type of psychiatric, neurological, or neuromuscular disorder

          -  Thyroid disease

          -  Alcohol consumption which exceeds 2 drinks per day and/or drug abuse.

          -  Allergy to study medication proposal, soy or egg proteins

          -  history of drug abuse

          -  chronic or acute use of opioids, or other medications affecting the central nervous
             system

          -  pregnancy
      

Gender

All

Ages

18 Years - 65 Years

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Contacts

Erik Boatman, M.D., , 

Location Countries

United States

Location Countries

United States

Administrative Informations


NCT ID

NCT01942356

Organization ID

HSC20130047H


Responsible Party

Sponsor

Study Sponsor

The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio


Study Sponsor

Erik Boatman, M.D., Principal Investigator, University of Texas


Verification Date

January 2015