17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessing the feasibility of a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the role of intraperitoneal ropivacaine in gastric bypass surgery: a protocol

      protocol

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Postoperative pain control remains a major challenge for surgical procedures, including laparoscopic gastric bypass. Pain management is particularly relevant in obese patients who experience a higher number of cardiovascular and pulmonary events. Effective pain management may reduce their risk of serious postoperative complication, such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary emboli. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic, ropivacaine, to reduce postoperative pain in patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

          Methods and analysis

          A randomised controlled trial will be conducted to compare intraperitoneal ropivacaine (intervention) versus normal saline (placebo) in 120 adult patients undergoing bariatric bypass surgery. Ropivacaine will be infused over the oesophageal hiatus and throughout the abdomen. Patients in the control arm will undergo the same treatment with normal saline. The primary end point will be postoperative pain at 1, 2 and 4 h postoperatively. Pain measurements will then occur every 4 h for 24 h and every 8 h until discharge. Secondary end points will include opioid use, peak expiratory flow, 6 min walk distance and quality of life assessed in the immediate postoperative period. Intention-to-treat analysis will be used and repeated measures will be analysed using mixed modelling approach. Post-hoc pairwise comparison of the treatment groups at different time points will be carried out using multiple comparisons with adjustment to the type 1 error. Results of the study will inform the feasibility of recruitment and inform sample size of a larger definitive randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of intraperitoneal ropivacaine.

          Ethics and dissemination

          This study has been approved by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board and Health Canada in April 2014. The findings of the study will be disseminated through national and international conferences and peer-reviewed journals.

          Trial registration number

          Clinicaltrial.gov NCT02154763.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-40.

          Quality of recovery after anaesthesia is an important measure of the early postoperative health status of patients. We attempted to develop a valid, reliable and responsive measure of quality of recovery after anaesthesia and surgery. We studied 160 patients and asked them to rate postoperative recovery using three methods: a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), a nine-item questionnaire and a 50-item questionnaire; the questionnaires were repeated later on the same day. From these results, we developed a 40-item questionnaire as a measure of quality of recovery (QoR-40; maximum score 200). We found good convergent validity between QoR-40 and VAS (r = 0.68, P < 0.001). Construct validity was supported by a negative correlation with duration of hospital stay (rho = -0.24, P < 0.001) and a lower mean QoR-40 score in women (162 (SD 26)) compared with men (173 (17)) (P = 0.002). There was also good test-retest reliability (intra-class ri = 0.92, P < 0.001), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.93, P < 0.001) and split-half coefficient (alpha = 0.83, P < 0.001). The standardized response mean, a measure of responsiveness, was 0.65. The QoR-40 was completed in less than 6.3 (4.9) min. We believe that the QoR-40 is a good objective measure of quality of recovery after anaesthesia and surgery. It would be a useful end-point in perioperative clinical studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Central nervous and cardiovascular effects of i.v. infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and placebo in volunteers.

            We have compared the incidence of CNS symptoms and changes in echocardiography and electrophysiology during i.v. infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and placebo. Acute tolerance of i.v. infusion of 10 mg min-1 was studied in a crossover, randomized, double-blind study in 12 volunteers previously acquainted with the CNS effects of lignocaine. The maximum tolerated dose for CNS symptoms was higher after ropivacaine in nine of 12 subjects and higher after bupivacaine in three subjects. The 95% confidence limits for the difference in mean dose between ropivacaine and bupivacaine were -30 and 7 mg. The maximum tolerated unbound arterial plasma concentration was twice as high after ropivacaine (P < 0.001). Muscular twitching occurred more frequently after bupivacaine (P < 0.05). The time to disappearance of all symptoms was shorter after ropivacaine (P < 0.05). A threshold for CNS toxicity was apparent at a mean free plasma concentration of approximately 0.6 mg litre-1 for ropivacaine and 0.3 mg litre-1 for bupivacaine. Bupivacaine increased QRS width during sinus rhythm compared with placebo (P < 0.001) and ropivacaine (P < 0.01). Bupivacaine reduced both left ventricular systolic and diastolic function compared with placebo (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively), while ropivacaine reduced only systolic function (P < 0.01).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Analgesic treatment after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a critical assessment of the evidence.

              Acute pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is complex in nature. The pain pattern does not resemble pain after other laparoscopic procedures, suggesting that analgesic treatment might be procedure specific and multimodal. Randomized trials of analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy were identified by systematic electronic literature searches (1985 to June 2005) supplemented with manual searching. The trials were categorized by well-defined criteria into high, moderate, or poor methodologic quality. Conclusions were based on trials of high and moderate methodologic quality. In total, 64 randomized analgesic trials were identified, comprising a total of 5,018 evaluated patients. The literature suggests a multimodal analgesic regimen consisting of a preoperative single dose of dexamethasone, incisional local anesthetics (at the beginning or at the end of surgery, depending on preference), and continuous treatment with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors) during the first 3-4 days. Opioids should be used only when other analgesic techniques fail.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2014
                9 August 2014
                : 4
                : 8
                : e005823
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The Ottawa Hospital General Campus , Department of Surgery, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [2 ]The Ottawa Health Research Institute , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [3 ]Montfort Hospital, Department of Surgery, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [4 ]The Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus , Department of Surgery, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Joseph Mamazza; jmamazza@ 123456toh.on.ca
                Article
                bmjopen-2014-005823
                10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005823
                4127924
                df9a53c3-274d-4d45-a48b-85125984a30d
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 30 May 2014
                : 8 July 2014
                : 14 July 2014
                Categories
                Surgery
                Protocol
                1506
                1737
                1682
                1843
                1710

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article