ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT00394459Updated May 13, 2011

Safety of Two Epidural Catheters in Thoracic Epidural Anaesthesia (TEA)

A Phase 4 interventional study of Perifix Epidural Anaesthesia Catheter and Perifix Standard in Anesthesia, Epidural and Paraesthesia, sponsored by Maastricht University Medical Center. Completed at 1 site in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 75 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2011-05-13.

Sponsored by Maastricht University Medical Center · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
140
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 75 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Primary Objective: The primary objective is to demonstrate that the safety of Perifix New is non-inferior to using Perifix Standard when applied for thoracic epidural anaesthesia.

Primary Endpoint: Incidence of spontaneous paraesthesia during catheter insertion

Secondary Objectives: The secondary objectives are to determine the safety and performance of the investigational product: frequency of inadvertent vascular cannulation, difficulties involved in insertion and removal of the catheter, other safety features and data for the evaluation of handling characteristics.

Title: Randomised, prospective, single-blind, controlled, study on the safety of two epidural catheters in patients undergoing surgery under thoracic epidural anaesthesia

Investigational Product: Perifix Epidural Anaesthesia Catheter

Test Product: Perifix New

Reference Product: Perifix Standard

Number of Sites and Countries: 1 site in The Netherlands

Indication: Thoracic epidural anaesthesia

Study Design: Randomised, prospective, single-blind, controlled study in 1 study center, phase IV

Perifix New and Perifix Standard meet all the appropriate provisions of the relevant legislation implementing European Directives (both have CE-marking).

Study Duration: 2 year duration

Study Start: March-April 2005

Sample Size: n = 2*70 patients

Read the detailed description

Epidural anaesthesia is a central neuraxial block technique with many applications. Improvements in equipment, drugs and technique have made it a popular and versatile anaesthetic technique, with applications in surgery, obstetrics and pain control. Both single injection and catheter techniques can be used. Its versatility means it can be used as an anaesthetic, as an analgesic adjuvant to general anaesthesia, and for postoperative analgesia in procedures involving the lower limbs, perineum, pelvis, abdomen and thorax.

Although epidural anaesthesia is a safe technique, during the insertion of epidural catheters several side effects may occur, including transient paraesthesia and inadvertent vascular cannulation.

Reported incidences for paraesthesia vary widely between about 0.2% and 50% in different articles, depending on the catheter (catheter material, soft-tipped or firm-tipped catheter), the applied technique (lumbar or thoracic epidural anaesthesia, depth of catheter insertion), the approach (midline or paramedian) and the included patients (obstetrical or non-obstetrical). Paraesthesias are not supposed to lead to permanent neurological sequelae, but are unpleasant and perturbing sensations for the patient.

Besides inadvertent intrathecal location of the catheter, further problems include technical difficulties during threading or removal of the catheter. Here, the catheter shaft material seems to be the crucial factor for the incidence of problems.

Based upon years of experience, a wide range of epidural catheters were created, among them the Perifix catheter of B. Braun. Common features are their high tensile strength and stretch resistance, excellent shaft stability with easy visualisation of blood or spinal fluid due to the crystal clear material, no risk of forming loops or knots, and softening of catheter within a few hours due to water absorption of the polyamide material.

Recently, B. Braun Melsungen AG has developed a new generation of Perifix epidural catheters, which are already CE-labeled. These new catheters are different in their composition compared to the current Perifix Standard catheter with regard to the catheter material and tip configuration. They have an outer poly-urethane liner and an inner polyamide body. Experimental tests have shown that the positive features (e.g. pushability, kink resistance, gliding, withdrawal) of the Perifix Standard catheter can be maintained. Due to the polyurethane outer layer, the catheter gets softer when reaching body temperature immediately upon insertion. Based on this, it is expected that paraesthesias during catheter injection can be reduced by at least 20%.

02

Conditions studied

  • Anesthesia, Epidural
  • Paraesthesia

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Anaesthetic techniques
  • epidural
  • catheters
  • paraesthesia
  • side effects
  • Anesthesia, Epidural [E03.155.086.131]
03

In context

Paresthesia

66 studies on the registry are indexed under Paresthesia; 14 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 140 is above the median of 48 across 52 interventional studies indexed under Paresthesia.

Browse Paresthesia studies →

Lead sponsor

Maastricht University Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 853 studies on the registry; 114 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 75 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients scheduled for thoracic epidural anaesthesia (TEA), with or without general anaesthesia.
  • (ASA) class I-III
  • Patients aged 18 and ≤ 75 years of age

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Anamnestic exclusion criteria are all for epidural anaesthesia.
  • Severe scoliosis, previous surgery on the spine, M. Bechterew disease
  • Non-competent and non-cooperative patients
  • Patients with medicament and drug abuse problems, problems in communication, participating in parallel in another clinical study with experimental drugs or devices, receiving prohibited concomitant therapies
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

ASA physical status

The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
140 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    A

    Perifix Standard

    Device: Perifix Epidural Anaesthesia Catheter · Device: Perifix Standard

  • Experimental
    B

    Perifix New

    Device: Perifix Epidural Anaesthesia Catheter · Device: Perifix New

Interventions

  • DevicePerifix Epidural Anaesthesia Catheter

    Epidural Catheter

  • DevicePerifix Standard

    Perifix Standard

  • DevicePerifix New

    Perifix New

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The primary end-point will be the incidence of spontaneous paraesthesia during catheter insertion in TEA-patients.

    Time frame: 1 hour

Secondary outcomes

  1. The frequency of inadvertent vascular cannulation

    Time frame: 1 hour

  2. Difficulties involved in insertion and removal of the catheter

    Time frame: 1 week

  3. Data on additional complications

    Time frame: 1 week

  4. Data for the evaluation of handling characteristics

    Time frame: 1 week

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University Hospital Maastricht
    Maastricht, 6202 AZ, Netherlands
08

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
Not marked actual or estimatedDates not marked actual or estimated

The record gives a start of Apr 2005, a primary completion of Mar 2008 and a completion of May 2009. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 31, 2006
First posted
Nov 1, 2006
Start
Apr 2005
Primary completionActual
Mar 2008
CompletionActual
May 2009
Last update
May 13, 2011
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 13, 2011, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00394459
First posted
Nov 1, 2006
Start date
Apr 2005
Primary completion
Mar 2008
Completion
May 2009
Last update
May 13, 2011

Study contacts

Mathieu Gielen, MD, PhD
study chair · Radboud University Medical Center
Marco Marcus, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Maastricht University Medical Center

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2011. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion