CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01407666Updated Dec 3, 2014

Comparison Between Epidural and Bilateral Paravertebral Blocks in Liver Resection

An interventional study of paravertebral blocks in Liver Disease and Pain, sponsored by University of Pittsburgh. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2014-12-03.

Sponsored by University of Pittsburgh · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
100
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This prospective, randomized study is intended to assess the efficacy and safety of bilateral continuous paravertebral blocks compared to continuous epidural block for open liver resection. Hypotheses: Bilateral paravertebral blocks are: 1) equally effective in controlling the perioperative pain; and 2) safe, with less frequent complications following open liver resection when compared to continuous epidural block.

Read the detailed description

Background: A number of studies evaluating unilateral continuous paravertebral block demonstrate equal or superior analgesia when compared to epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control (1-7). At the same time, these studies show a decreased incidence of side effects and complications, including: hypotension, pulmonary complications, urinary retention, nausea and vomiting and failed blocks. Several studies also indicate that bilateral paravertebral blocks provide adequate postoperative analgesia (8-14). However, no study has been performed to date that shows a direct comparison between epidural and bilateral paravertebral blocks in patients undergoing open liver resection.Objectives: This prospective, randomized study is intended to assess the efficacy and safety of bilateral continuous paravertebral blocks compared to continuous epidural block for open liver resection. Hypotheses: Bilateral paravertebral blocks are: 1) equally effective in controlling the perioperative pain; and 2) safe, with less frequent complications following open liver resection when compared to continuous epidural block.Methods: A hundred adult patients undergoing elective open liver resection will be randomized to receive a continuous epidural block or continuous bilateral paravertebral blocks for perioperative analgesia. The primary outcome will be the degree of pain control measured by visual analog scale at 24 hours post surgery (at rest and while the patient is performing maximum incentive spirometry). The secondary outcomes will include: 1) Assessment of pain (at rest, with cough, and with ambulation) using the verbal numerical pain scale will be performed postoperatively every 8 hours by floor nursing staff until discharge. During the night the patient will not be awakened for pain assessment. 2) Intravenous opioid requirement: In addition to pain score, postoperative intravenous opioid requirements [hydromorphone (mg)] will also be recorded daily; Frequency of side effects and complications; and other functional status (volume of maximum incentive spirometry, time to extubation, total time for initial ambulation, the length of the hospital stay, time to return of bowel function, readiness for discharge from the hospital, and length of hospital stay). At one month post surgery, health-related quality of life, mortality, and any morbidities will be assessed. Each variable will be compared between the paravertebral group and the epidural group to examine the hypotheses above. Clinical Implications: Bilateral continuous paravertebral blocks could be an equally effective and safe alternative to a continuous epidural block for perioperative pain management in patients who undergo open liver resection.

02

Conditions studied

  • Liver Disease
  • Pain

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • paravertebral block
  • epidural block
  • pain management
  • liver resection
  • comparison
03

In context

Liver Diseases

2,081 studies on the registry are indexed under Liver Diseases; 389 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 100 is above the median of 50 across 1,322 interventional studies indexed under Liver Diseases.

Browse Liver Diseases studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Pittsburgh is the lead sponsor of 1,385 studies on the registry; 167 are open to participants now.

Of its 8 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 4 (50%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASAPS) I to III patients aged over 18 years and scheduled to undergo elective open liver resection at UPMC Presbyterian/Montefiore Hospital will be screened for enrollment in the study. One hundred (100) patients will be enrolled in this study with equal numbers (n = 50) in each arm of the trial. In order to avoid skewed sex difference between the two groups, the sex will be allocated.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • non elective surgery,
  • ASAPS IV or greater,
  • age younger than 18 years,
  • any contraindication to the placement of an epidural catheter or bilateral paravertebral catheters
  • chronic pain conditions
  • preoperative opioid use
  • coagulation abnormalities or patients who are expected to be on therapeutic anticoagulants postoperatively
  • allergy to any of the drugs/agents used our study protocol
  • preoperative chronic renal dysfunction, who requires renal replacement therapy or serum creatinine greater than 1.4 mg/dL
  • altered mental status (not oriented to place, person, or time),
  • any comorbid conditions that, in the judgment of the consulting surgeon or anesthesiologist, would proscribe the patient from any aspect of the study, -
  • inability to provide adequate informed consent
  • refusal to participate in the study.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
100 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Bilateral paravertebral blocks

    Bilateral continuous paravertebral blocks for open liver resection

    Procedure: paravertebral blocks

  • No intervention
    epidural block

    received thoracic epidural block for open liver resection

Interventions

  • Procedureparavertebral blocks

    use bilateral thoracic paravertebral blocks for pain control

    Also known as: regional anesthesia

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pain immediately after maximum incentive spirometry

    Pain will be assessed using an 11-point verbal numerical pain scale (VAS) with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating the worst pain imaginable;(21) pain will be determined 24 hours postoperatively immediately after maximum incentive spirometry.

    Time frame: 24 hours postoperatively

Secondary outcomes

  1. date of the removal of the catheter

    date of the removal of the catheter with any requirement of blood transfusion because of coagulation

    Time frame: up to one week after the surgery

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 3, 2014, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01407666
Lead sponsor
University of Pittsburgh
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 2, 2011
Start date
Aug 2010
Primary completion
Aug 2014
Completion
Nov 2014
Last update
Dec 3, 2014

Study contacts

Tetsuro Sakai, MD, PhD
principal investigator · University of Pittsburgh

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2014. 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