CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01516684Updated Sep 6, 2019Results posted

Local Anesthetic Cream in Younger Patients Undergoing Lumbar Punctures

A Phase 2 interventional study of placebo administration and EMLA in Malignant Neoplasm, sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged Up to 22 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-09-06.

Sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences · Phase 2, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
33
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
Up to 22 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This randomized clinical trial studies local anesthetic (EMLA) cream in younger patients undergoing lumbar punctures (LP). A local anesthetic cream may be effective for numbing the skin and reducing movement when applied prior to lumbar punctures and may reduce the amount of sedation necessary

Read the detailed description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:

I. To determine whether the application of a topical anesthetic (EMLA cream) to the LP site will decrease the total dose of propofol administered to pediatric oncology patients who are being sedated for LPs compared to application of a topical placebo cream.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:

I. To determine whether the use of EMLA cream decreases complication rates from sedation.

II. To determine whether the use of EMLA cream decreases traumatic lumbar punctures.

III. To determine whether the use of EMLA cream shortens recovery time. IV. To determine practitioner and parent satisfaction with the use of EMLA cream.

OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 treatment arms.

ARM I: Patients receive topical EMLA cream 60 minutes to 4 hours prior to the LP followed by standard sedation with fentanyl citrate and propofol.

ARM II: Patients receive topical placebo cream 60 minutes to 4 hours prior to the LP followed by standard sedation with fentanyl citrate and propofol.

After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up within 1 week.

02

Conditions studied

  • Malignant Neoplasm

Browse trials for

03

In context

Neoplasms

9,365 studies on the registry are indexed under Neoplasms; 2,489 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 33 is below the median of 50 across 7,253 interventional studies indexed under Neoplasms.

Browse Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Wake Forest University Health Sciences is the lead sponsor of 1,320 studies on the registry; 199 are open to participants now.

Of its 323 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 243 (75%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Up to 22 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Pediatric oncology patients undergoing a lumbar puncture in the Pediatric Sedation Suite; patients may or may not be receiving intrathecal chemotherapy

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

Patients undergoing additional procedures during the same anesthetic such as bone marrow aspirate or biopsy will be excluded because they will likely require higher doses of propofol than those undergoing LP alone Patients who are allergic to or not tolerant of EMLA cream, propofol, or fentanyl will be excluded Patients who are pregnant will be excluded Patients having their LPs done by students will be excluded

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Investigator)
Enrollment
33 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Arm I (EMLA)

    Patients receive topical EMLA cream 60 minutes to 4 hours prior to the LP followed by standard sedation with fentanyl citrate and propofol.

    Drug: EMLA · Drug: propofol · Drug: fentanyl citrate

  • Active comparator
    Arm II (placebo)

    Patients receive topical placebo cream 60 minutes to 4 hours prior to the LP followed by standard sedation with fentanyl citrate and propofol.

    Drug: placebo administration · Drug: propofol · Drug: fentanyl citrate

Interventions

  • Drugplacebo administration

    Given topically

  • DrugEMLA

    Given topically

    Also known as: eutectic mixture of local anesthetics, lidocaine-prilocaine, lidocaine-prilocaine eutectic mixture

  • Drugpropofol

    Given IV

    Also known as: Diprivan

  • Drugfentanyl citrate

    Given IV

    Also known as: Actiq, Oralet, Sublimaze

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Total Dose of Propofol Administered to Each Patient

    Analyzed using descriptive statistics and mixed model regression methods. Raw mean total dose administered and raw percentage of times additional propofol was administered will be presented by sedation group treating each event (sedation with lumbar puncture) as the unit. T-test and chi-square tests will be performed as appropriate.

    Time frame: 20 minutes after sedation

Secondary outcomes

  1. Level of Movement (no Movement, Minor Movement, Major Movement, Other) After EMLA Cream or Placebo Cream Administration

    Time frame: At the time of LP insertion

  2. Complications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, as Well as Post-LP Headache From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream

    Each patient's parent (and/or the patient) will be contacted by telephone within one week of the lumbar puncture (or in person if the next clinic visit is within one week) to ask if the patient had any headache after the lumbar puncture, and if they had any other complications.

    Time frame: Within one week of the LP

  3. Traumatic Lumbar Punctures After EMLA Cream or Placebo Cream Administration

    Traumatic lumbar puncture is defined as lumbar puncture in which cerebrospinal fluid contains at least 10 red blood cells (RBCs) per microliter and bloody lumbar as one in which the cerebrospinal fluid contained at least 500 red blood cells (RBCs) per microliter.

    Time frame: 20 minutes after lumbar puncture

  4. Complications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, Post-LP Back Pain From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream

    Each patient's parent (and/or the patient) will be contacted by telephone within one week of the lumbar puncture (or in person if the next clinic visit is within one week) to ask if the patient had any back pain after the lumbar puncture, and if they had any other complications.

    Time frame: Within one week of the LP

07

Results

Posted Sep 6, 2019

Participant flow

Originally 33 participants were registered, with 170 trials; each participant had between 1-14 trials (median=4). Five of these participants did not end up receiving the procedure and 1 was a screen fail, leaving 27 participants with between 1-14 trials (median=5).

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneArm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)
StartedNANA
CompletedNANA
Not completedNANA

Outcome measures

PrimaryTotal Dose of Propofol Administered to Each Patient

Analyzed using descriptive statistics and mixed model regression methods. Raw mean total dose administered and raw percentage of times additional propofol was administered will be presented by sedation group treating each event (sedation with lumbar puncture) as the unit. T-test and chi-square tests will be performed as appropriate.

Time frame:
20 minutes after sedation
Reported as:
Least squares mean · mg/kg
Total Dose of Propofol Administered to Each Patient
mg/kgArm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)
Total Dose of Propofol Administered to Each Patient2.94 ± 0.253.22 ± 0.19
Statistical analysis
  • Arm A (EMLA) vs Arm B (Placebo) · T-test and chi-square · p = 0.036
SecondaryLevel of Movement (no Movement, Minor Movement, Major Movement, Other) After EMLA Cream or Placebo Cream Administration
Time frame:
At the time of LP insertion
Reported as:
Count of units · Trials
Level of Movement (no Movement, Minor Movement, Major Movement, Other) After EMLA Cream or Placebo Cream Administration
TrialsArm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)
No movement5029
Minor movement712
Major movement827
Other109
SecondaryComplications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, as Well as Post-LP Headache From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream

Each patient's parent (and/or the patient) will be contacted by telephone within one week of the lumbar puncture (or in person if the next clinic visit is within one week) to ask if the patient had any headache after the lumbar puncture, and if they had any other complications.

Time frame:
Within one week of the LP
Reported as:
Mean · Probability of experiencing headache
Complications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, as Well as Post-LP Headache From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream
Probability of experiencing headacheArm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)
Complications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, as Well as Post-LP Headache From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream0.194 ± 0.0410.289 ± 0.057
Statistical analysis
  • Arm A (EMLA) vs Arm B (Placebo) · Mixed Models Analysis · p = 0.094
SecondaryTraumatic Lumbar Punctures After EMLA Cream or Placebo Cream Administration

Traumatic lumbar puncture is defined as lumbar puncture in which cerebrospinal fluid contains at least 10 red blood cells (RBCs) per microliter and bloody lumbar as one in which the cerebrospinal fluid contained at least 500 red blood cells (RBCs) per microliter.

Time frame:
20 minutes after lumbar puncture
Reported as:
Count of units · Trials
Traumatic Lumbar Punctures After EMLA Cream or Placebo Cream Administration
TrialsArm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)
Atraumatic6357
Traumatic65
Bloody14
Statistical analysis
  • Arm A (EMLA) vs Arm B (Placebo) · Chi-squared · p = 0.382
SecondaryComplications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, Post-LP Back Pain From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream

Each patient's parent (and/or the patient) will be contacted by telephone within one week of the lumbar puncture (or in person if the next clinic visit is within one week) to ask if the patient had any back pain after the lumbar puncture, and if they had any other complications.

Time frame:
Within one week of the LP
Reported as:
Mean · Probability of experiencing back pain
Complications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, Post-LP Back Pain From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream
Probability of experiencing back painArm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)
Complications Including Any Change in Vital Signs That Requires Intervention by the Sedation Team, Post-LP Back Pain From Sedation With or Without EMLA Cream0.211 ± 0.0490.250 ± 0.054
Statistical analysis
  • Arm A (EMLA) vs Arm B (Placebo) · Mixed Models Analysis · p = 0.426

Adverse events

Collected over Up to one week after lumbar puncture. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Arm A (EMLA)0/75 (0%)0/75 (0%)0/75 (0%)
Arm B (Placebo)0/77 (0%)0/77 (0%)0/77 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Participants were not randomized to the arms. The trials for each arm were randomized so we are using the trials to report demographics by arm.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Arm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)Total
Mean7.7 ± 5.48.8 ± 5.38.2 ± 5.4
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Trials)Arm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)Total
Female222244
Male5355108
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Trials)Arm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)Total
Hispanic or Latino101020
Not Hispanic or Latino6567132
Unknown or Not Reported000
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Trials)Arm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)Total
American Indian or Alaska Native000
Asian000
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American141832
White6056116
More than one race134
Unknown or Not Reported000
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(Trials completed)Arm A (EMLA)Arm B (Placebo)Total
United States7577152
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences
    Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157, United States
09

References and documents

Study documents

  • Informed consent form · Aug 26, 2015
  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Jul 19, 2012

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 6, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01516684
Lead sponsor
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Collaborators
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 25, 2012
Start date
May 14, 2012
Primary completion
Jun 26, 2018
Completion
Jun 26, 2018
Results posted
Sep 6, 2019
Last update
Sep 6, 2019

Study contacts

Dudley Hammon
principal investigator · Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2019. 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