Skip to content

Regional Blocks of Gynecological Surgeries

Comparison of Dural Puncture Epidural Technique Versus Conventional Epidural Technique for Adequate Anesthesia During Vaginal Surgeries

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03790748
Enrollment
273
Registered
2019-01-02
Start date
2019-02-01
Completion date
2021-07-31
Last updated
2021-09-01

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

Conditions

Gynecologic Disease Requiring Vaginal Operation Under Neuraxial Anesthesia

Keywords

Neuraxial Technique, Epidural Technique, Dural Puncture Epidural Technique, Gynecologic Disease

Brief summary

This study will be conducted on 273 patients of ASA grade I and II aged from 25 to 55 years and presented for elective vaginal surgeries such as vaginal hysterectomy, repair of prolapse Patients will be divided into three equal groups; group A control group for conventional epidural technique(n=91), group B for dural puncture epidural with 27G pencil point Whitacre spinal needle (n=91) and group C for dural puncture epidural with 25G pencil point Whitacre spinal needle(n=91). Randomization will be done using computer generated number and concealed using sequentially numbered sealed opaque envelope.

Interventions

PROCEDUREStandard Lumbar Epidural Technique

Standard Lumbar Epidural Technique at L4-5 inter-space using 0.5%Bupivacaine and Fentanyl.

25G Dural Puncture Epidural Technique at L4-5 inter-space using 0.5%Bupivacaine and Fentanyl.

PROCEDURE27G Dural Puncture Epidural Technique

27G Dural Puncture Epidural Technique at L4-5 inter-space using 0.5%Bupivacaine and Fentanyl.

Sponsors

Cairo University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
25 Years to 55 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* ASA I and II * Height(150-170 cm)

Exclusion criteria

* patient refusal * hypersensitivity to local anesthetic drugs * bleeding disorders and coagulopathy(platelets count less than 80000,INR less than 1.5 or therapeutic dose of anticoagulant).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
incidence of bilateral sacral blockadeUp to 30 minutes after local anesthetic injectionSensory blockade was evaluated using a non-traumatic pinprick stimulus starting at the S2 dermatome and moving in a caudad direction (measured every 2 minutes)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Maximum achieved sensory levelUp to 30 minutes after local anesthetic injection
Time to achieve the maximum sensory levelUp to 30 minutes after local anesthetic injection
Onset of motor blockadeUp to 30 minutes after local anesthetic injection
Time to complete motor blockUp to 30 minutes after local anesthetic injection
Duration of sensory blockAssessed every 20 minutes after achieving highest dermatome level of sensory analgesiaTime to two segmental dermatomes regression
Onset of sensory blockadeUp to 30 minutes after local anesthetic injection
Duration of analgesiaTime for requirement for rescue analgesia or VAS pain score >3 as postoperativelyTime from onset of sensory block to first complain of pain postoperatively as the epidural catheter will be removed after the surgery finished
Number of epidural top-upsNumber of extra doses of local anesthetic given after injection of local anesthetic loading dose till end of the surgery
Sedation scoreAssessed every 20 minutes during the surgical procedure and postoperatively
Hemodynamic parametersAssessed every 5 minutes from the start of anesthetic procedures till transfer the patients to the rooms
Perioperative side effectsDuring surgical period up to 7 days post-operatively
Duration of motor blockAssessed every 20 minutes after achieving Bromage 3 motor blockTime interval from achievement of Bromage 1 to regression of motor blockade to Bromage 1

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

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