Skip to content

Evaluating the Efficacy and Utility of the Automated Pupillometer in Pain Assessment and Opioid Administration Guidance During the Perioperative Period: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluating the Efficacy and Utility of the Automated Pupillometer in Pain Assessment and Opioid Administration Guidance During the Perioperative Period: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07614607
Enrollment
68
Registered
2026-05-29
Start date
2026-05-01
Completion date
2027-02-01
Last updated
2026-05-29

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

Conditions

Postoperative Pain, Postoperative Pain Management

Keywords

pupillometry, automated pupillometry, post-operative pain, post-operative opiod consumption

Brief summary

Effective intraoperative and postoperative pain management is critical for patient comfort and recovery, yet traditional methods for assessing pain under general anaesthesia are limited by their subjective nature and reliance on vital signs. Automated pupillometry, which gives the parameters of the pupillary light reflex (PLR) components, offers an objective and quantitative approach to evaluating nociception and pain. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the automated pupillometry in enhancing early postoperative pain control and to assess its utility in guiding opioid administration during the perioperative period. A prospective, non-blinded randomized controlled trial will be conducted with 68 patients undergoing laparotomy for gastrointestinal surgery. Participants will be randomly assigned to either an interventional group, where analgesia is guided by automated pupillometry measurements, or a control group receiving standard pain management. Key outcomes include the time to first rescue analgesia, self-reported pain scores, opioid consumption. The automated pupillometry measurements will be taken at key surgical moments, including before induction, pre-incision, and during recovery. Pain scores and rescue analgesia use will be compared between groups using appropriate statistical tests, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves will analyze time to first rescue analgesia. Regression analyses will explore the relationship between pupillometry readings and postoperative pain. It is anticipated that the automated pupillometry guided group will experience longer intervals before requiring rescue analgesia and report lower pain scores, suggesting improved pain management and reduced opioid use. This study could validate automated pupillometry as an innovative tool for optimizing postoperative pain management, potentially improving patient outcomes by enabling more precise and effective analgesia in surgical settings.

Interventions

Participants in the interventional group will receive an initial dose of 100 mcg IV fentanyl during induction. Remifentanil will be administered via effect-site target-controlled infusion (TCI), with a concentration effect (Ce) ranging from 2 to 8 ng/ml. TCI remifentanil is increased by 0.5 ng/ml if pupillary diameter changes \> 20% of the baseline after induction. The automated pupillometry measurement is repeated 5 mins after increment. Prior to skin closing, IV morphine 0.1 mg/kg during skin closing and automated pupillometry measurement is repeated to aim pupillary diameter is within 20% of baseline. Analgesics is titrated according to the anaesthetist's discretion and reason is documented if it is deviated from the protocol.

For both arms, automated pupillometry will be measured before induction , after induction(baseline), before the surgical incision, after surgical incision, during skin closure, at PACU 10 mins and at PACU 30 mins. For intervention arm only, the additional automated pupillometry measurement will be performed after administration of analgesia.

Sponsors

University of Malaya
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

prospective, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* 1\. Patients aged 18 - 70 years old scheduled for elective/emergency laparotomy with clear awareness and good communication * 2\. ASA (American Society of Anaesthesiologists) physical status I-III * 3\. Expected to have moderate to severe pain in the early postoperative period

Exclusion criteria

* 1\. Patient with known pupillary abnormality (such as anisocoria, pharmacologic dilation, previous intraocular surgery) * 2\. Pre-existing neurological disorder affecting pupillary reflexes * 3\. Patients on chronic opioid therapy or with a history of substance abuse * 4\. Non-consenting patients or those with cognitive impairments affecting informed consent

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
post operative opioid consumptionfirst 24 hours post operativelythe amount of post operative opioid consumption including rescue analgesia and patient controlled analgesia morphine usage would be recorded

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
The correlation between pupillary response metrics (% change, constriction velocity, dilatation velocity, NPi) and opioid dosage administered.automated pupillometry measurements will be done before induction, after induction, before skin incision, during skin incision, after skin incision, during skin closure, and at post anaesthesia recovery unit 10 min and 30 min.To find the measurement changes or correlation with opioiod administration, and to analyse it statistically

Countries

Malaysia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: May 30, 2026