Skip to content

Liposomal Bupivacaine Intercostal Nerve Block vs Thoracic Epidural for Regional Analgesia in Multiple Rib Fractures

Protocol for a Single Center Randomized Controlled Trial of Liposomal Bupivacaine Intercostal Nerve Blockade Versus Continuous Thoracic Epidural for Regional Analgesia in Patients With Multiple Rib Fractures

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03574376
Enrollment
258
Registered
2018-07-02
Start date
2018-08-29
Completion date
2021-08-01
Last updated
2020-03-09

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

Conditions

Pain, Acute, Trauma, Trauma Injury

Keywords

Rib trauma, intercostal nerve block, liposomal bupivacaine

Brief summary

Management of traumatic rib fractures continues to be a challenge for trauma surgeons. Currently, many analgesic options are available to patients suffering from rib fractures. Formulations currently used for conventional intercostal nerve blocks (CINB) are relatively safe, do not require additional equipment or specialized anesthesia personnel, do not require catheter repositioning, and provide improved analgesia immediately over the aforementioned systemic therapies. A goal of these authors to introduce an additional safe option for extended local analgesia in the setting of multiple rib fractures given the inconclusive evidence supporting or refuting the current standard of care

Detailed description

The objective of this study is to quantify and draw inferences on the efficacy of a multiple level liposomal bupivacaine intercostal nerve blockade (LBINB) in patients with multiple traumatic rib fractures. The primary objective is to assess the quality and duration of analgesia based on numeric grading pain scale, improvement in pulmonary function parameters, reduction pulmonary complications, and duration of hospitalization in patients receiving LBINBs relative to those receiving the current standard of care, CEA, in patients recovering from multiple traumatic rib fractures. The secondary objective of this study is to assess cost and rate of complications associated with LBINB relative to CEA. This is a two arm, randomized trial. Patients suffering multiple traumatic rib fractures will be offered CEA or LBINB. As the current standard of care, CEA will serve as the control, and outcomes measured in patients receiving LBINB will be statistically evaluated relative to the CEA control group. All patients will receive standardized NSAID and opioid analgesia protocol for break through pain, as well as standardized routines for pulmonary hygiene and physiotherapy. Indications for CEA and LBINB in this study include patients suffering from traumatic thoracic injury with greater than or equal to 3 fractured ribs

Interventions

Under ultrasound guidance, corresponding ribs will be identified. 3-5 ml of a 1.3% (13.3 mg/mL) of liposomal bupivacaine will be drawn into a syringe with a 1.5-in, 22-gauge needle. The needle will then be advanced 20° cephalad to the skin 3-4 cm lateral to midline at the level of each fractured rib, and 1-2 ribs levels above and below injury. The needle will be advanced 3 mm below the inferior margin of the rib, placing the tip in the space containing the neurovascular bundle. Following negative aspiration for blood or air, 3-5 mL of local anesthetic will be infused and the needle withdrawn. No more than 266 mg, or 20 ml, of the 1.3% (13.3 mg/mL) liposomal bupivacaine solution will be injected

DRUGBupivacaine

The anesthesia department will manage CEA. If possible, the patient will be in the sitting position. The skin will be prepped with chlorhexidine and sterilely draped. 3 mL of lidocaine 1% will be infiltrated the closest interspace to the rib fractures between T4 -T12. A Touhy needle will be inserted, the epidural space identified by loss of resistance technique. An epidural catheter will then be inserted to a depth of 12cm. 3 mL of test solution with lidocaine 1.5% with epinephrine, 1:200,000 will be injected with continuous EKG and SpO2 monitoring. Delivery of a 0.125% bupivacaine solution be continuously infused and titrated based on the patient's clinical status

Sponsors

University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria
CollaboratorOTHER
OSF Healthcare System
CollaboratorOTHER
Chadrick Evans
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Masking description

No participants are blinded to treatment arms. Patients and investigators are aware of which patients are assigned to each treatment group.

Intervention model description

This is a two arm, randomized trial. Patients suffering multiple traumatic rib fractures will be offered CEA or LBINB. As the current standard of care, CEA will serve as the control, and outcomes measured in patients receiving LBINB will be statistically evaluated relative to the CEA control group. All patients will receive standardized NSAID and opioid analgesia protocol for break through pain, as well as standardized routines for pulmonary hygiene and physiotherapy.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* All patients 18 years of age or older suffering 3 or more rib fractures treated by University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria (UICOMP) attending or resident physicians at OSF St. Francis Medical Center (OSFMC) are potentially eligible for enrollment in the trial.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with any of the following will not be eligible since they are contraindications to CEA, LBINB, or both: 1. Intracranial hemorrhage 2. Fever >101 degrees Fahrenheit for ≥ 1 hour(s) 3. Rash at site of catheter insertion or administration of nerve block 4. Hemodynamic instability 5. Spinal cord injury 6. Vertebral fractures 7. Allergy to bupivacaine 8. Systemic therapeutic anticoagulation required for duration of hospital admission 20 9. Altered mental status without medical decision maker to provide consent 10. Patients without the capacity to consent or the lack of a medical decision maker to consent 11. Patients that are pregnant 12. Legally confined patients.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in pain relief96 hoursQuality of analgesia provided measured by numeric grading pain scale assessment every 24 hours over a 96-hour period. Pain will be rated using the Numerical Rating Scale, ranging from 0-10. Zero represents no pain; worsening pain signified by increasing reported numbers with 10 being the upper limit and the worst pain possible. Only the numbers can be answers, meaning that there are only 11 possible answers on the 0-10 scale.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Length of pain medicationevery 24hours for 96hoursDuration of analgesia provided measured by numeric grading pain scale assessment every 24hours. Quality of analgesia provided measured by numeric grading pain scale assessment every 24 hours over a 96-hour period. Pain will be rated using the Numerical Rating Scale, ranging from 0-10. Zero represents no pain; worsening pain signified by increasing reported numbers with 10 being the upper limit and the worst pain possible. Only the numbers can be answers, meaning that there are only 11 possible answers on the 0-10 scale.
Pulmonary function96 hoursPulmonary function measured by incentive spirometry
Supplemental oxygen96 hoursSupplemental oxygen requirements
Oxygen saturation96 hoursOxygen saturation levels
Pulmonary complications96 hoursDevelopment of pulmonary complications: atelectasis, pneumonia, respiratory failure
Quantity of pain medication96 hoursAmount of breakthrough analgesia required in morphine equivalents
Overall length of stay96 hoursLength of stay
ICU stay96 hoursDuration of ICU days
Costs96 hoursCosts associated with administration of epidural vs exparel
Overall complication rate96 hoursOverall rate of complications associated with epidural vs exparel
Ventilator96 hoursVentilator days

Countries

United States

Contacts

Primary ContactChadrick R Evans, MD
cevans@peoriasurgical.com309-655-2383
Backup ContactJonathan Jou, MD
jjou3@uic.edu312-835-0993

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026