CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT00450099Updated Dec 17, 2007

Minimum Local Anesthetic Volume of Bupivacaine in Labour Epidurals

An interventional study of bupivacaine in Acute Pain, sponsored by Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 50 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2007-12-17.

Sponsored by Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
50
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 50 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

Different medications can be used as analgesics in labor epidurals. Bupivacaine is one of the most commonly used drugs for that purpose. The efficacy of a certain medication injected epidurally depends on the dose that is given. A certain dose can be administered in different concentrations, which will consequently mean different volumes. Our hypothesis is that for each concentration of a certain drug, there has to be a minimum effective volume that will be associated with the best possible performance of the drug. This study is being conducted to find the minimum volume of bupivacaine (a local anesthetic) that produces successful analgesia in 95% of patients in labor.

Read the detailed description

Epidural administration of local anesthetics during labor produces analgesia, sympathetic block and motor block. The characteristics of the block depend on the volume and concentration of the local anesthetic that is used as well as the potential use of adjuncts. Although many researchers have investigated the efficacy of different drugs at different concentrations, the volumes used have been arbitrary. There is limited data regarding the minimum volume that is necessary for a successful anesthetic for a given concentration of bupivacaine.

This study is conducted as a prospective, randomized, up-down sequential allocation trial. The aim is to determine the minimum volume of 0.125% bupivacaine that will provide effective analgesia for 95% of parturients in the first stage of labor. The verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS) is used to rate the pain felt over the first 20 minutes, where 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain imaginable. After 20 minutes, if the VNRS was greater than 2, the volume of bupivacaine was considered inadequate and additional medication was given.

The volume of bupivacaine for the first patient was arbitrarily chosen as 8 ml, and the dose for each subsequent patient depends on the outcome of the previous injection. Doses will be increased or decreased in increments of 1 ml. If the previous response was ineffective, the next patient will receive 1 ml more than the last patient. If the response of the previous patient is effective, the Narayana rule, which is used to cluster doses around EV95, will be applied to determine if the dose remains the same or decreases.

50 patients will be included in the study. An estimate of EV95 will be calculated based on a logistic model with non-log-transformed doses, fit using Firth's penalized maximum likelihood approach for small sample bias correction. Confidence intervals will be calculated based on the profile likelihood approach.

02

Conditions studied

  • Acute Pain

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Epidural
  • Labor Analgesia
  • Bupivacaine
  • Dose-response
  • Minimum effective volume
03

In context

Acute Pain

876 studies on the registry are indexed under Acute Pain; 154 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 50 is below the median of 90 across 732 interventional studies indexed under Acute Pain.

Browse Acute Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital is the lead sponsor of 135 studies on the registry; 17 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 50 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • ASA I or II
  • Full term (more than 37 weeks gestation)
  • Singleton pregnancy, vertex presentation
  • Regular painful contractions occurring at least every 5 minutes
  • Cervical dilatation \< 5 cm

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Any contraindication to epidural anesthesia
  • Accidental dural puncture
  • Allergy or hypersensitivity to bupivacaine
  • Women who have received opioids or sedative medications within the last 4 hours
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
50 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    1

    Epidural, bupivacaine

    Drug: bupivacaine

Interventions

  • Drugbupivacaine

    0.125% bupivacaine in a volume determined according to the biased coin up-down sequential allocation model, starting at 8mL.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Verbal Numeric Rating Scale (VNRS) less than or equal to 2 out of 10 during contraction

    Time frame: 20 minutes

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Mount Sinai Hospital
    Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X5, Canada
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 17, 2007, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00450099
Lead sponsor
Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital
First posted
Mar 21, 2007
Start date
Oct 2005
Completion
Aug 2007
Last update
Dec 17, 2007

Study contacts

Jose CA Carvalho, MD PhD
principal investigator · MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2007. 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