CLONidine and ROPivacaine in peripheral nerve blocks in children

ISRCTN ISRCTN90832436
DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN90832436
Secondary identifying numbers N/A
Submission date
28/02/2011
Registration date
15/03/2011
Last edited
24/01/2020
Recruitment status
No longer recruiting
Overall study status
Completed
Condition category
Musculoskeletal Diseases
Prospectively registered
Protocol
Statistical analysis plan
Results
Individual participant data

Plain English Summary

Not provided at time of registration

Contact information

Dr Kalliopi Petroheilou
Scientific

8 V. Mela str
Holargos, Athens
15561
Greece

Study information

Study designSingle-centre interventional prospective randomised controlled study
Primary study designInterventional
Secondary study designRandomised controlled trial
Study setting(s)Hospital
Study typeTreatment
Participant information sheet Not available in web format, please use the contact details below to request a patient information sheet
Scientific titleSciatic lateral popliteal block with clonidine alone or clonidine plus 0.2% ropivacaine: effect on the intra- and postoperative analgesia for lower extremity surgery in children, a randomised prospective controlled study
Study acronymCLON, ROP
Study hypothesisOur hypothesis was that clonidine alone or combined with 0.2% ropivacaine could produce a long lasting sciatic lateral popliteal block (SLPB) after foot and ankle surgery, adequate for the first postoperative day.
Ethics approval(s)Scientific Ethics Committee of General Children's Hospital, Penteli, Athens approved on 20/05/2008
ConditionDisturbances of Achilles tendon and club foot
InterventionBetween January 2009 to May 2010, 77 consecutive children, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, aged 5-14 years were scheduled for elective mild to moderate painful foot and ankle surgery.

66 children were randomly assigned to three groups by means of a computer generated table to receive either isotonic saline (n=21) or clonidine (n =23) or clonidine plus 0.2% ropivacaine (n=22), during performance of a sciatic lateral popliteal block (SLPB) plus femoral block. The investigators were blind to the group assignment. The placebo or the treatment solutions were prepared by the pharmacy and supplied to the Department of Anaesthesia in syringes labelled with predetermined code for each solution. There were two syringes for the SLPB and the femoral block respectively.

In the SLPB, the syringes contained
1. For the control group isotonic saline 10 ml plus 0.25 ml/kg and saline 0.13 ml/kg
2. For the clonidine group isotonic saline 10 ml plus 0.25 ml/kg and clonidine 2 µg/kg (0.13 ml/kg) respectively
3. Finally in the clonidine plus 0.2% ropivacaine group the syringes contained 0.2% ropivacaine 10 ml plus 0.25 ml/kg (maximum 25 ml) and clonidine 2 µg/kg (0.13 ml/kg) respectively.

Similarly in the femoral block the syringes contained
1. For the control group isotonic saline: 0.4 ml/kg and 0.065 ml/kg respectively
2. For the clonidine group isotonic saline 0.4 ml/kg and clonidine 1µg/kg (0.065 ml/kg) respectively
3. For clonidine plus 0.2% ropivacaine group 0.2% ropivacaine 0.4 ml/kg and clonidine 1µg/kg (0.065 ml/kg) respectively. The maximum dose of 0.2% ropivacaine was decided to be 3.5 mg/kg and for clonidine 3 µg/kg.

In the anaesthetised children in the supine position, the SLPB was performed, using 100 mm or 50 mm, 21 gauge insulated stimulated needle. An additional femoral block became necessary for the use of tourniquet in the area around the thigh. After the performance of blocks a pneumatic tourniquet at 150 mmHg was applied to the mid-thigh.

Postoperative analgesia was assessed by by means of a color analogue scale (CAS). Patients with mild or moderate postoperative pain (CAS score > 30 to 45 mm and 46 to 55 mm respectively) received nalbuphine 0.2 mg/kg and 0.3 mg/kg respectively.
Intervention typeDrug
Pharmaceutical study type(s)
PhaseNot Applicable
Drug / device / biological / vaccine name(s)Clonidine, ropivacaine
Primary outcome measureTime to first analgesic request of nalbuphine after the surgery by Kaplan- Meier analysis. Postoperative analgesia was assessed by means of a colour analogue scale (CAS). Pain CAS score at rest, was assessed in the recovery room (0), 2, 4, 6, 8, 18, 24 hours postoperatively and the tourniquet pain (0). Total number of rescue nalbuphine doses and the total amount of nalbuphine for the 24 hours observational period.
Secondary outcome measures1. Classification of motor and sensory block
2. Restlessness based on dichotomous(yes or no)
3. Incidence of nausea and/or vomiting
4. Sedation level using a four-point scale
5. Children’s parents satisfaction score was assessed on the second postoperative day, using a numerical scale.
Overall study start date01/01/2009
Overall study end date31/05/2010

Eligibility

Participant type(s)Patient
Age groupChild
SexBoth
Target number of participants77
Total final enrolment66
Participant inclusion criteria1. Children who underwent Achilles lengthening
2. Children with club foot
Participant exclusion criteria1. Children with neurologic or neuromuscular disease or problems in communication
2. Children’s parents refusal
3. Skin infection at the site of needle insertion
Recruitment start date01/01/2009
Recruitment end date31/05/2010

Locations

Countries of recruitment

  • Greece

Study participating centre

8 V. Mela str
Holargos, Athens
15561
Greece

Sponsor information

The Pharmacy Department of General Children's Hospital (Greeece)
Hospital/treatment centre

8 Hippocratous str
P.Penteli, Athens
15236
Greece

ROR logo "ROR" https://ror.org/05xt49662

Funders

Funder type

Hospital/treatment centre

Department of Anesthesiology & the Pharmacy Department of General Children's Hospital (Greece)

No information available

Results and Publications

Intention to publish date
Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to shareNo
IPD sharing plan summaryNot provided at time of registration
Publication and dissemination planNot provided at time of registration
IPD sharing plan

Study outputs

Output type Details Date created Date added Peer reviewed? Patient-facing?
Results article results 01/02/2012 24/01/2020 Yes No

Editorial Notes

24/01/2020: The following changes have been made:
1. Publication reference added.
2. The final enrolment number has been added from the reference.