CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02241304NEAT-3Updated Jan 28, 2016

Neurostimulation and Electromyographic Assessment of the TetraGraph (NEAT) In Patients (NEAT-3)

An observational study in Neuromuscular Blockade, sponsored by University of Debrecen. Completed at 1 site in Hungary. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-01-28.

Sponsored by University of Debrecen · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
50
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

TetraGraph is a newly developed EMG-based, quantitative, battery-powered neuromuscular monitoring system intended for daily clinical use. The primary aim of this clinical investigation is to examine the applicability (ease of use, equipment need, etc.), repeatability (precision or internal consistency) and performance (signal quality, accuracy of outcome, voltage of stimulation output before and during a stimulus) of the Tetragraph device in patients undergoing elective surgeries requiring neuromuscular blockade.

Read the detailed description

The TetraGraph will be tested in 50 consenting patients undergiong elective surgeries requiring neuromuscular blockade. The left of right hand of the patients will be randomly studied. After the induction of anesthesia but before the administration of muscle relaxant train-of-four (TOF) stimulation will be started with 30 mA current intensity, 0.2 msec pulse duration at 20 sec intervals. The stimulation will be left to run until extubation. The TetraGraph device will be set not to show measurement results on the screen but save them on the SD card for later analysis. This way TetraGraph will not influence clinical decisions and patient care. During the operations we will record the number of muscle twitches in return to stimulation, the time and dose of muscle relaxant and opioid administration, the time of use of electrocautery and the skin temperature.

02

Conditions studied

  • Neuromuscular Blockade

Keywords

  • electromyography
  • neuromuscular blockade
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of Debrecen is the lead sponsor of 23 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.

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
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients undergoing elective surgeries requiring muscle relaxation

Inclusion criteria

  1. Age 18 years or older.
  2. American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status I-III criteria (Table I).
  3. Subject has provided written informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Presence of an underlying neuromuscular disease.
  2. Presence of renal or hepatic disease.
  3. Subject has open skin sores in the locations needed for electrode application (forearms).
  4. Patient is taking anti-seizure medication
  5. Patient is taking oral anti-cholinesterase (e.g., therapy for myasthenia gravis)
  6. Magnesium sulfate administration is required
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
50 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Elective surgery with muscle relaxation

    ASA I-II-III patients. Fentanyl (2-3 ug/kg) - Propofol (2 mg/kg) induction, sevoflurane anesthesia, type and dose of muscle relaxant up to the decision of attending anesthetist. Neuromuscular stimulation with TetraGraph (30mA current intensity, 0.2 msce pulse duration, 20 sec intervals)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Primary performance assessment of TetraGraph device

    The primary objective of this study is to provide safety \& performance data of the TetraGraph device in anesthetized patients. Performance will be assessed post hoc by analyzing objective EMG data from the SD card and correlating the responses to annotations made during the surgical procedure (e.g., correlating the EMG responses to the time of NMBA or reversal agent administration). No clinical decisions will be made based on any objective measurements made by the TetraGraph. There are no specific timepoints concerning the primary outcome measure of the study.

    Time frame: participants will be followed for the duration of their hospital stay, an expected avarage of five days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Secondary performance assessment of TetraGraph Device

    The secondary outcome measures is a composite of several safety and performance data examined during the operations and the hospital stay: 1. Acceptable levels of electrical noise when no stimulus is being applied; 2. Ensuring that the stimulus artifact does not obscure the EMG response when a stimulus is applied; 3. Appearance of an EMG response at threshold stimulation levels, just sufficient to elicit a palpable twitch response; 4. Consistency of the EMG response amplitudes during repeated (ST and TOF) protocols (variability \<10%); 5. Consistency of EMG response characteristics independent of patient age, gender, or weight; 6. Consistency of EMG response characteristics independent whether the right or left arm is stimulated; 7. Skin reaction to stimulation or recording electrodes; 8. Overall usability of the device for clinicians and operators; collecting recommendations for improving ease of use.

    Time frame: participants will be followed for the duration of the hospital stay, an expected avarage of 5 days

  2. Safety of TetraGraph device

    The safety of Tetragraph device will be assesses by checking the stimulating and recording electrode positions for skin reactions.

    Time frame: participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an expected avarage of 5 days

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Debrecen
    Debrecen, 4032, Hungary
08

References and documents

Publications

  • 1. Gätke MR, Viby-Mogensen J, Rosenstock C, Jensen FS, Skovgaard LT. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2002;46:207-13. 2. Berg H, Viby-Mogensen J, Roed J, Mortensen CR, Engbaek J, Skovgaard LT, Krintel JJ. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1997;41:1095-103. 3. Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Marymont JH, Greenberg SB, Avram MJ, Vender JS. Anesth Analg 2008;107:130-7. 4. Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Marymont JH, Greenberg SB, Avram MJ, Vender JS, Nisman M. Anesthesiology 2008;109:389-98. 5. Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Avram MJ, Greenberg SB, Marymont JH, Vender JS, Gray J, Landry E, Gupta DK. Anesthesiology 2011;115:946-54. 6. Murphy GS, Brull SJ. Anesth Analg 2010;111:120-8. 7. Hemmerling TM, Le N. Can J Anesth 2007;54: 58-72. 8. Gätke MR, Viby-Mogensen J, Rosenstock C, Jensen FS, Skovgaard LT. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2002; 46: 207-13. 9. Brull SJ, Silverman DG. Anesth Analg 1993;77:352-5. 10. Grayling M, Sweeney BP. Anaesthesia 2007; 62:806-9. 11. Liang SS, Stewart PA, Phillips S. Anesth Analg 2013;117:373-9.
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 28, 2016, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02241304
Lead sponsor
University of Debrecen
Responsible party
Tamas Vegh, MD (MD, PHD, University of Debrecen) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 16, 2014
Start date
Jul 2014
Primary completion
Dec 2015
Completion
Dec 2015
Last update
Jan 28, 2016

Study contacts

Bela Fulesdi, MD,PhD,DSci
principal investigator · UNIVERSITY OF DEBRECEN FACULTY OF MEDICINE Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Debrecen, Hungary, 4032

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2016. 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