Skip to content

Randomized, double-blind, phase IV trial comparing the efficacy of two methods of sedation in patients scheduled for outpatient diagnostic-therapeutic colonoscopy.

Randomized, double-blind, phase IV trial comparing the efficacy of two methods of sedation in patients scheduled for outpatient diagnostic-therapeutic colonoscopy.

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
EU CTR
Registry ID
EUCTR2013-000290-73-ES
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2013-04-09
Start date
2013-06-21
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2014-06-10

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Sedation in patients (whose colonoscopy has been scheduled) with inhalatory sevorane versus standard intravenous sedation. MedDRA version: 16.0 Level: LLT Classification code 10049124 Term: Sedation during medical procedure System Organ Class: 100000004865

Interventions

Trade Name: SEVORANE 1 mL volatile liquid for inhalation Pharmaceutical Form: Inhalation vapour, liquid INN or Proposed INN: Sevoflurane CAS Number: 28523-86-6 Current Sponsor code: SEVORANE Other des

Sponsors

FUNDACION C.V. HOSPITAL PROVINCIAL DE CASTELLON
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: (1) Patient scheduled to undergo outpatient diagnostic-therapeutic colonoscopy who are referred from health centers in the province of Castellón. (2) Age between 18 and 65 years of age. (3) Informed consent signed prior to inclusion in the study. Are the trial subjects under 18? no Number of subjects for this age range: F.1.2 Adults (18-64 years) yes F.1.2.1 Number of subjects for this age range 278 F.1.3 Elderly (>=65 years) no F.1.3.1 Number of subjects for this age range 0

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: (1) Refusal of the patient to participate in the study. (2) Minors (3) Pregnancy or lactation (4) History of liver or kidney disease. (5) History of psychotropic substance abuse (6) Psychiatric illness (7) Difficulty in communication with the patient for reasons of language or intellectual deficit. (8) Bearded patients, due to difficulties in achieving a facial mask seal. (9) Difficulty in placing the facial mask (facial injuries or malformations). (10) Scheduled double exploration (gastroscopy and colonoscopy). (11) Contraindication to any of the study drugs. (12) Allergies to any of the components of the study drugs. (13) Hemodynamic or respiratory instability or decompensation. (14) Worsening of concomitant disease described in the basline visit.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Main Objective: To compare the efficacy of sedation using a conventional intravenous technique versus another pure inhalation technique in patients scheduled for outpatient diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy. This effectiveness is to be determined by the quality of sedation as assessed by the endoscopist.;Secondary Objective: The specific objectives are: To compare the frequency of completed colonoscopies. To compare the frequency of patients with arterial desaturation, apnea or who require respiratory maneuvers to open the airway and ventilatory support. To compare the frequency of patients who present with movements which make exploration difficult. To compare the frequency of patients who develop cardiopulmonary complications. To compare the frequency of patients who present with over-sedation. To compare the frequency of hospital admissions. To compare the frequency of patients discharged after the first post-anesthetic assessment. To compare the extent of recovery 24 hours after exploration. To compare opinions and the satisfaction of patients.;Primary end point(s): The quality of sedation (during the colonoscopy) as assessed by the endoscopist.;Timepoint(s) of evaluation of this end point: The statistical analysis is set out when 278 patients has been sedated in order to perform a colonoscopy.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Timepoint(s) of evaluation of this end point: The statistical analysis is set out when 278 patients has been sedated in order to perform a colonoscopy.;Secondary end point(s): To compare the frequency of completed colonoscopies. To compare the frequency of patients with arterial desaturation, apnea or who require respiratory maneuvers to open the airway and ventilatory support. To compare the frequency of patients who present with movements which make exploration difficult. To compare the frequency of patients who develop cardiopulmonary complications. To compare the frequency of patients who present with over-sedation. To compare the frequency of hospital admissions. To compare the frequency of patients discharged after the first post-anesthetic assessment. To compare the extent of recovery 24 hours after exploration. To compare opinions and the satisfaction of patients.

Countries

Spain

Contacts

Public ContactDAVID PERAL SANCHEZ

FUNDACION C.V. HOSPITAL PROVINCIAL DE CASTELLON

davidperalsanchez@yahoo.es

Outcome results

None listed

Source: EU CTR (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026