Dataset Information

GASS Trial study protocol: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised clinical trial comparing general anaesthesia and sedation during intra-arterial treatment for stroke.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Treatment of acute stroke has drastically changed in the last 10 years. Endovascular therapy is now the standard of care for patients with a stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. The impact of the type of anaesthesia (general anaesthesia or conscious sedation) during endovascular therapy on the outcome of the patients is still a matter of debate. Previous studies are mostly retrospective and/or focused on the early postprocedure outcome and/or without blood pressure goals and/or single-centre small size studies. We therefore designed a multicentre study hypothesising that conscious sedation is associated with a better functional outcome 3 months after endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke compared with general anaesthesia. METHODS/ANALYSIS:The General Anesthesia vs Sedation for Stroke (GASS) Trial is a randomised, parallel, single-blind, multicentre study of 350 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive either a general anaesthesia or a conscious sedation. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin score assessed 3 months after the treatment. Data will be analysed on the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION:The GASS Trial has been approved by an independent ethics committee for all study centres. Participant recruitment begins in September 2016. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02822144.

SUBMITTER: Maurice A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6550003 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients who have severe narrowing at or near the origin of the internal carotid artery as a result of atherosclerosis have a high risk of ischaemic stroke ipsilateral to the arterial lesion. Previous trials have shown that carotid endarterectomy improves long-term outcomes, particularly when performed soon after a prior transient ischaemic attack or mild ischaemic stroke. However, complications may occur during or soon after surgery, the most serious of which is stroke, which can be fatal. It has been suggested that performing the operation under local anaesthesia, rather than general anaesthesia, may be safer. Therefore, a prospective, randomised trial of local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy was proposed to determine whether type of anaesthesia influences peri-operative morbidity and mortality, quality of life and longer term outcome in terms of stroke-free survival.Methods/designA two-arm, parallel group, multicentre randomised controlled trial with a recruitment target of 5000 patients. For entry into the study, in the opinion of the responsible clinician, the patient requiring an endarterectomy must be suitable for either local or general anaesthesia, and have no clear indication for either type. All patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic internal carotid stenosis for whom open surgery is advised are eligible. There is no upper age limit. Exclusion criteria are: no informed consent; definite preference for local or general anaesthetic by the clinician or patient; patient unlikely to be able to co-operate with awake testing during local anaesthesia; patient requiring simultaneous bilateral carotid endarterectomy; carotid endarterectomy combined with another operation such as coronary bypass surgery; and, the patient has been randomised into the trial previously. Patients are randomised to local or general anaesthesia by the central trial office. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients alive, stroke free (including retinal infarction) and without myocardial infarction 30 days post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients alive and stroke free at one year; health related quality of life at 30 days; surgical adverse events, re-operation and re-admission rates; the relative cost of the two methods of anaesthesia; length of stay and intensive and high dependency bed occupancy.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN00525237.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In women with abnormal uterine bleeding, fibroids are a frequent finding. In case of heavy menstrual bleeding and presence of submucosal type 0-1 fibroids, hysteroscopic resection is the treatment of first choice, as removal of these fibroids is highly effective. Hysteroscopic myomectomy is currently usually performed in the operating theatre. A considerable reduction in costs and a higher patient satisfaction are expected when procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol (PSA) in an outpatient setting is applied. However, both safety and effectiveness - including the necessity for re-intervention due to incomplete resection - have not yet been evaluated. METHODS:This study is a multicentre randomised controlled trial with a non-inferiority design and will be performed in the Netherlands. Women > 18 years with a maximum of 3 symptomatic type 0 or 1 submucosal fibroids with a maximum diameter of 3.5 cm are eligible to participate in the trial. After informed consent, 205 women will be randomised to either hysteroscopic myomectomy using procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol in an outpatient setting or hysteroscopic myomectomy using general anaesthesia in a clinical setting in the operating theatre. Primary outcome will be the percentage of complete resections, based on transvaginal ultrasonography 6 weeks postoperatively. Secondary outcomes are cost effectiveness, menstrual blood loss (Pictorial blood assessment chart), quality of life, pain, return to daily activities/work, hospitalization, (post) operative complications and re-interventions. Women will be followed up to one year after hysteroscopic myomectomy. DISCUSSION:This study may demonstrate comparable effectiveness of hysteroscopic myomectomy under procedural sedation and analgesia versus general anaesthesia in a safe and patient friendly environment, whilst achieving a significant cost reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Dutch trial register, number NTR5357 . Registered 11th of August 2015.

Project description:IntroductionThe use of Bispectral Index (BIS) monitors for assessing depth of sedation has led to a reduction in both the incidence of awareness and anaesthetic consumption in total intravenous anaesthesia. However, these monitors are vulnerable to artefacts. In addition to the processed number, the raw frontal electroencephalogram (EEG) can be displayed as a curve on the same monitor. Anaesthesia practitioners can learn to interpret the EEG in a short tutorial and may be quicker and more accurate thanBIS in assessing anaesthesia depth by recognising EEG patterns. We hypothesise that quality of recovery (QoR) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery is better, if propofol is titrated by anaesthesia practitioners able to interpret the EEG.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, double-blind (patients and outcome assessors) randomised controlled trial taking place in four Swiss hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing laparoscopic procedures with general anaesthesia using propofol and anaesthesia practitioners with more than 2 years experience will be eligible. The primary study outcome is the difference in QoR 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes are propofol consumption, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postoperative delirium.QoR and propofol consumption are compared between both groups using a two-sample t-test. Fisher's exact test is used to compare the incidences of PONV and delirium. A total of 200 anaesthesia practitioners (and 200 patients) are required to have an 80% chance of detecting the minimum relevant difference for the QoR-15 as significant at the 5% level assuming a SD of 20.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained from all responsible ethics committees (lead committee: Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz, 16 January 2021). The findings of the trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at international conferences, and may lead to a change in titrating propofol in clinical practice.Trial registration numberwww.Clinicaltrialsgov:NCT04105660.

Project description:BackgroundHSK3486 (ciprofol) is a 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative that acts like propofol as an agonist at the gamma-aminobutyric acid-A (GABA A ) receptor.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of HSK3486 for general anaesthesia induction and maintenance.DesignA single-blinded, randomised, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.SettingInvolving 10 study centres, from November 24, 2020 to January 25, 2021.PatientsA total of 129 patients undergoing nonemergency, noncardiothoracic, and nonneurosurgical elective surgery.InterventionPatients were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio into HSK3486 or propofol groups, to receive HSK3486 (0.4 mg kg -1 ) or propofol (2.0 mg kg -1 ) for induction before a maintenance infusion at initial rates of 0.8 and 5.0 mg kg -1 h -1 , and were adjusted to maintain a bispectral index (BIS) of 40-60 until the end of surgery.Main outcome measuresNoninferiority between the drugs was evaluated as the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the between-group difference in the success rate of anesthetic maintenance (primary outcome) >-8%. Secondary outcomes included successful anaesthetic induction, full alertness and spontaneous breathing recovery, time until leaving the postanaesthesia care unit and changes in BIS. Safety profiles were also measured.ResultsOf 129 enrolled patients, 128 completed the trial, with 86 in the HSK3486 group and 42 in the propofol group. The success rate for the maintenance of general anaesthesia was 100% for both groups, and noninferiority of HSK3486 was confirmed (95% CI -4.28% to 8.38%). No significant differences were found between the two groups of patients with regard to secondary outcomes (all P > 0.05). There appeared to be a comparable incidence of treatment for emergency adverse events (TEAEs) (80.2% vs. 81.0%, P = 1.000) and drug-related TEAEs (57.0% vs. 64.3%, P = 0.451) in the HSK3486 and propofol groups.ConclusionHSK3486 had a noninferior efficacy profile compared to propofol, exhibiting excellent tolerance.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT04511728.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have suggested that monitoring the levels of both hypnosis and antinociception could reduce periods of inadequate anaesthesia. However, the evidence regarding associated benefits of this monitoring is still limited.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to confirm that guidance of anaesthesia by depth of hypnosis and antinociception monitoring decreases the number of inadequate anaesthesia events in comparison with standard clinical practice.DesignA multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial.SettingThe study was conducted in four European University hospitals in four different countries between December 2013 and November 2016.PatientsThe study population consisted of a total of 494 adult patients undergoing elective surgery requiring tracheal intubation.InterventionsThe patients were allocated to one of two groups. The first group was treated using Entropy for depth of hypnosis and surgical pleth index to determine depth of antinociception (adequacy of anaesthesia group; AoA group). The second group was monitored using standard monitoring alone (control group). Anaesthesia was conducted with target-controlled infusions of propofol and remifentanil.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome of the study was the number of total unwanted events for example signs of inadequately light or unintentionally deep anaesthesia.ResultsEvidence of inadequate anaesthesia had an incidence of around 0.7 events per patient in both groups with no difference between groups (P?=?0.519). In the AoA group, the overall consumption of propofol was significantly reduced (6.9 vs. 7.5?mg?kg?h, P?=?0.008) in comparison with the control group. The consumption of remifentanil was equal in both groups. The times to emergence [8.0 vs. 9.6?min (P?=?0.005)] and full recovery in the postanaesthesia care unit (P?=?0.043) were significantly shorter in the AoA group. No differences were seen in postoperative pain scores or in the use of analgesics.ConclusionIn the current study, the guidance of total intravenous anaesthesia by Entropy and surgical pleth index in comparison with standard monitoring alone was not able to validate reduction of unwanted anaesthesia events. However, there was a reduction in the use of propofol, and shorter times for emergence and time spent in the postanaesthesia care unit.Trial registrationat ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01928875.

Project description:BackgroundPreclinical data suggest that general anaesthetics affect brain development. There is mixed evidence from cohort studies that young children exposed to anaesthesia can have an increased risk of poor neurodevelopmental outcome. We aimed to establish whether general anaesthesia in infancy has any effect on neurodevelopmental outcome. Here we report the secondary outcome of neurodevelopmental outcome at 2 years of age in the General Anaesthesia compared to Spinal anaesthesia (GAS) trial.MethodsIn this international assessor-masked randomised controlled equivalence trial, we recruited infants younger than 60 weeks postmenstrual age, born at greater than 26 weeks' gestation, and who had inguinal herniorrhaphy, from 28 hospitals in Australia, Italy, the USA, the UK, Canada, the Netherlands, and New Zealand. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either awake-regional anaesthesia or sevoflurane-based general anaesthesia. Web-based randomisation was done in blocks of two or four and stratified by site and gestational age at birth. Infants were excluded if they had existing risk factors for neurological injury. The primary outcome of the trial will be the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence Third Edition (WPPSI-III) Full Scale Intelligence Quotient score at age 5 years. The secondary outcome, reported here, is the composite cognitive score of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III, assessed at 2 years. The analysis was as per protocol adjusted for gestational age at birth. A difference in means of five points (1/3 SD) was predefined as the clinical equivalence margin. This trial is registered with ANZCTR, number ACTRN12606000441516 and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00756600.FindingsBetween Feb 9, 2007, and Jan 31, 2013, 363 infants were randomly assigned to receive awake-regional anaesthesia and 359 to general anaesthesia. Outcome data were available for 238 children in the awake-regional group and 294 in the general anaesthesia group. In the as-per-protocol analysis, the cognitive composite score (mean [SD]) was 98.6 (14.2) in the awake-regional group and 98.2 (14.7) in the general anaesthesia group. There was equivalence in mean between groups (awake-regional minus general anaesthesia 0.169, 95% CI -2.30 to 2.64). The median duration of anaesthesia in the general anaesthesia group was 54 min.InterpretationFor this secondary outcome, we found no evidence that just less than 1 h of sevoflurane anaesthesia in infancy increases the risk of adverse neurodevelopmental outcome at 2 years of age compared with awake-regional anaesthesia.FundingAustralia National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Health Technologies Assessment-National Institute for Health Research UK, National Institutes of Health, Food and Drug Administration, Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, Pfizer Canada, Italian Ministry of Heath, Fonds NutsOhra, and UK Clinical Research Network (UKCRN).

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of therapeutic suggestions played to patients through earphones during surgery on postoperative pain and opioid use.DesignBlinded randomised controlled study.SettingFive tertiary care hospitals in Germany.Participants385 of 400 patients consecutively recruited from January to December 2018 who were to undergo surgery for 1-3 hours under general anaesthesia. In the per protocol analysis 191 patients were included in the intervention group and 194 patients in the control group.InterventionThe intervention comprised an audiotape of background music and positive suggestions based on hypnotherapeutic principles, which was played repeatedly for 20 minutes followed by 10 minutes of silence to patients through earphones during general anaesthesia. Patients in the control group were assigned to a blank tape.Main outcome measuresThe main outcome was dose of opioid administered by patient controlled analgesia or nurse controlled analgesia within the first postoperative 24 hours, based on regular evaluation of pain intensity on a numerical rating scale (range 0-10, with higher scores representing more severe pain).ResultsCompared with the control group, the intervention group required a significantly (P=0.002) lower opioid dose within 24 hours after surgery, with a median of 4.0 mg (interquartile range 0-8) morphine equivalents versus 5.3 (2-12), and an effect size (Cohen's d) of 0.36 (95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.56). The number of patients who needed opioids postoperatively was significantly (P=0.001) reduced in the intervention group: 121 of 191 (63%, 95% confidence interval 45% to 70%) patients in the intervention group versus 155 of 194 (80%, 74% to 85%) in the control group. The number needed to treat to avoid postoperative opioids was 6. Pain scores were consistently and significantly lower in the intervention group within 24 hours after surgery, with an average reduction of 25%. No adverse events were reported.ConclusionsTherapeutic suggestions played through earphones during general anaesthesia could provide a safe, feasible, inexpensive, and non-drug technique to reduce postoperative pain and opioid use, with the potential for more general use. Based on the finding of intraoperative perception by a considerable number of patients, surgeons and anaesthetists should be careful about background noise and conversations during surgery.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Register DRKS00013800.

Dataset Information

GASS Trial study protocol: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised clinical trial comparing general anaesthesia and sedation during intra-arterial treatment for stroke.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets