Efficacy of patient-controlled paravertebral block for single intercostal video assisted thoracic surgery
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN24097424 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN24097424 |
| Protocol serial number | N/A |
| Sponsor | Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University |
| Funder | Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University (China) |
- Submission date
- 24/10/2016
- Registration date
- 18/11/2016
- Last edited
- 11/07/2018
- Recruitment status
- No longer recruiting
- Overall study status
- Completed
- Condition category
- Signs and Symptoms
Plain English summary of protocol
Background and study aims
Video-assisted thoracic surgery is a type of surgery where a camera is used to view the inside of the chest cavity after making only very small incisions. It is considered to be less painful, safer and requires a shorter hospital stay compared with thoracotomy (surgical opening of the chest). However, pain remains an issue after surgery, especially for the first three days after surgery. Paravertebral block, where local anaesthetic is injected through a catheter (tube) to ‘block’ the spinal nerve, has been proven to control pain after thoracotomy. The aim of this study is to find out whether patient-controlled paravertebral block can provide pain relief for patients compared with the usual pain management.
Who can participate?
Patients aged 18 to 80 who require video-assisted thoracic surgery
What does the study involve?
Participants are randomly allocated into one of two groups. Participants in the first group undergo surgery and afterwards receive patient-controlled paravertebral block for pain relief. Participants in the second group undergo surgery and afterwards receive patient-controlled pain relief intravenously (injected into a vein). All participants’ pain levels are assessed, and the number of patients who require extra medication on the three days after the operation is recorded.
What are the possible benefits and risks of participating?
Participants may benefit from pain relief and fewer side effects. The possible risk is that the treatment may fail to relieve pain.
Where is the study run from?
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University (China)
When is the study starting and how long is it expected to run for?
June 2015 to January 2017
Who is funding the study?
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University (China)
Who is the main contact?
Prof. Ming Wu
Contact information
Scientific
Department of Thoracic Surgery
The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University
Hangzhou
31000
China
Study information
| Primary study design | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Study design | Single-center randomized study |
| Secondary study design | Randomised parallel trial |
| Study type | Participant information sheet |
| Scientific title | A randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy of patient-controlled paravertebral block versus intravenous patients controlled analgesia for patients undergoing single intercostal video assisted thoracic surgery |
| Study objectives | Paravertebral block has been proven to be effective for pain control after thoracotomy and the traditional approach in performing paravertebral block is by inserting a needle 2.5 to 4 cm lateral to the spinous process of the thoracic vertebra and using the loss of resistance as the superior costotransverse ligament is traversed. In this study, a catheter was placed in the paravertebral space under thoracoscopic guidance by the surgeon for patients undergoing single intercostal video assisted thoracic surgery and this randomized study was designed to testify this technique can also provide effective analgesia for patients comparing with our usual single intercostal video assisted thoracic surgery pain management. Hypothesis: Patients controlled paravertebral block after single intercostal video assisted thoracic surgery can provide effective analgesia and fewer side effects than intravenous patients controlled analgesia. |
| Ethics approval(s) | Ethics Committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, 08/05/2015 |
| Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied | Pain in the postoperative period |
| Intervention | Patients are randomised into two groups: 1. In the PVB group, patients receive single intercostal video-assisted thoracic surgery and patient-controlled paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia. 2. In the PCA group, patients receive single intercostal video-assisted thoracic surgery and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for postoperative analgesia. Intramuscular dezocine is used as a rescue medication for both groups. The chest tube is removed when there is no air leakage during coughing and the volume of drainage is less than 100ml/24h. Patients are discharged after removal. |
| Intervention type | Procedure/Surgery |
| Primary outcome measure(s) |
Pain after surgery, measured using visual analogue score (VAS) until day 3 after surgery |
| Key secondary outcome measure(s) |
1. The number of patients who receive rescue medication, measured on postoperative days 0, 1, 2 and 3 |
| Completion date | 31/01/2017 |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Patient |
|---|---|
| Age group | Adult |
| Lower age limit | 18 Years |
| Sex | All |
| Target sample size at registration | 260 |
| Key inclusion criteria | 1. Patients diagnosed with solitary pulmonary nodule and spontaneous pneumothorax 2. Suitable for single intercostal video assisted thoracic surgery 3. Aged 18 to 80 |
| Key exclusion criteria | 1. Patients with unresectable tumors 2. Older than 80 years old |
| Date of first enrolment | 01/06/2015 |
| Date of final enrolment | 31/12/2016 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- China
Study participating centre
Hangzhou
310000
China
Results and Publications
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | Yes |
|---|---|
| IPD sharing plan summary | Available on request |
| IPD sharing plan | The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are/will be available upon request from Zixiang Wu (zixiang0717@126.com) |
Study outputs
| Output type | Details | Date created | Date added | Peer reviewed? | Patient-facing? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results article | results | 01/09/2018 | Yes | No | |
| Participant information sheet | Participant information sheet | 11/11/2025 | 11/11/2025 | No | Yes |
Editorial Notes
11/07/2018: Publication reference added.
12/10/2017: internal review.
