CClinicalTrials.gg
WithdrawnNCT03283865Updated Feb 24, 2020

Does Use of Ultrasound Reduce the Rate of Sham Caudal Block in Children

An interventional study of Ultrasound guidance for caudal block in Regional Anesthesia Morbidity, sponsored by Baylor College of Medicine. Withdrawn at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged Up to 7 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-02-24.

Sponsored by Baylor College of Medicine · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Why this study was withdrawn
doesnt meet criteria for clinical trial reporting
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
0
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
Up to 7 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Caudal blocks are one of the most commonly performed regional anesthetics in children and are performed daily for a host of infra-umbilical surgical procedures. A caudal block is an epidural injection, most commonly of local anesthetic into the epidural space as accessed via the sacral hiatus. In children, the sacral hiatus is a normally occurring aperture in which the epidural space may be accessed with extremely minimal risk; as neural tissue ends more proximally. Due to this measure of safety, caudal blocks are preferred in children when compared with standard lumbar epidurals. Caudal blocks are performed blindly using palpation and tactile feedback to assess if the medication is being administered in the correct location. As a result of blind injection, administration of local anesthetic totally or partially outside of the correct site can often be unnoticed or identified after a significant volume has already been injected. With the potential for toxicity of local anesthetic, this may result in either the inability to give a complete dose or an unintentional and often unnoticed sham block "incorrect site of injection".

Read the detailed description

Caudal blocks are one of the most commonly performed regional anesthetics in children and are performed daily for a host of infra-umbilical surgical procedures. A caudal block is an epidural injection, most commonly of local anesthetic into the epidural space as accessed via the sacral hiatus. In children, the sacral hiatus is a normally occurring aperture in which the epidural space may be accessed with extremely minimal risk; as neural tissue ends more proximally. Due to this measure of safety, caudal blocks are preferred in children when compared with standard lumbar epidurals. Caudal blocks are performed blindly using palpation and tactile feedback to assess if the medication is being administered in the correct location. As a result of blind injection, administration of local anesthetic totally or partially outside of the correct site can often be unnoticed or identified after a significant volume has already been injected. With the potential for toxicity of local anesthetic, this may result in either the inability to give a complete dose or an unintentional and often unnoticed sham block "incorrect site of injection".

Use of ultrasound has been proposed for identification of caudal block placement and correct medication spread. However, a recent review of the Pediatric Regional Anesthesia Network database reveals that ultrasound is reportedly only used in less that 3% of blocks. The benefit of ultrasound is safe and real-time confirmation of injection. Ultrasound allows the provider to determine with minimal local anesthetic or even saline injection if the correct space is accessed. Without ultrasound, failed blocks are either identified after significant percentage of the total dose of local anesthetic is incorrectly administered or intra or post operatively when the patient demonstrates a significant opioid requirement. This is problematic given that one of the primary benefits of a caudal block in children is the ability to avoid opioids.

Review of local practice here at Texas Children's Hospital for quality improvement purposes revealed a failure rate of caudal blocks to be 18%. Failure was defined as a heart rate increase with incision of >20% despite a caudal block and >1MAC of gas for the patient age. These patients all required opioids both intra and post operatively in addition to surgical levels of inhaled anesthetic agent.

02

Conditions studied

  • Regional Anesthesia Morbidity
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Up to 7 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Children ages 0-84 months
  • Infra-umbilical procedure for which a caudal block is already planned
  • American Society of Anesthesiology classifications of 1,2 or 3

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Incarcerated hernias
  • Emergency procedures
  • Local Anesthetic allergy
  • Sacral dimple
  • Rash over sacrum
  • Parents/legal guardians unable to consent for surgical procedure in English language Foster Care/Child protective services as guardians
  • Parental Refusal for caudal block or study participation
  • American Society of Anesthesiology classifications other than 1,2 or 3
04

Study design

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

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Ultrasound

    The attending anesthesiologist will perform or instruct the placement of a caudal block according to their standard of practice. At the time of administration of local anesthetic into the caudal space, the study collaborator (SC) will ultrasound the caudal space keeping the provider placing the block blinded to the imaging. The provider placing the block will inject 0.5mL of saline. The provider will then be asked to state if they are correctly in the caudal space or not. If the provider feels they are not in the caudal space, they will re-do the procedure. If the provider fails to identify incorrect location and this is noted by ultrasound, the SC will inform the provider to re-do the procedure. All study participants will have ultrasound used for caudal block.

    Diagnostic Test: Ultrasound guidance for caudal block

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testUltrasound guidance for caudal block

    The attending anesthesiologist will perform or instruct the placement of a caudal block according to their standard of practice. At the time of administration of local anesthetic into the caudal space, the study collaborator (SC) will ultrasound the caudal space keeping the provider placing the block blinded to the imaging. The provider placing the block will inject 0.5mL of preservative free saline. The provider will then be asked to state if they are correctly in the caudal space or not. If the provider feels they are not in the caudal space, they will re-do the procedure. If the provider fails to identify incorrect location and this is noted by ultrasound, the SC will inform the provider to re-do the procedure

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Identify the rate at which blindly placed caudal blocks are not within the epidural space

    Assess the percentage of providers not recognizing wrong site of injection without ultrasound

    Time frame: 15 minutes

Secondary outcomes

  1. Identify the rate at which ultrasound can guide a wrong block into the correct location

    Assess the number of blocks that are require the use of ultrasound to redirect needle into caudal space

    Time frame: 15 minutes

  2. Identify if lack of heart rate change on incision can predict successful placement when medication administration is successfully confirmed with ultrasound

    With ultrasound identification of correct caudal injection, (successful block), does lack of heart rate change correlated with successful block

    Time frame: 15 minutes

  3. Identify if after using ultrasound to visualize placement, if concentrations of inhaled agents may be reduced in children

    With demonstration of successful caudal injection, can inhaled agent concentration be reduced as calculated by MAC hours

    Time frame: 30 minutes to 3 hours

06

Study locations

1 site
  • Texas childrens Hospital
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
07

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · May 4, 2017

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

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03283865
Lead sponsor
Baylor College of Medicine
Responsible party
Adam Adler MD, MS, FAAP (Assistant Professor, Baylor College of Medicine) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 14, 2017
Start date
Jun 30, 2017
Primary completion
Oct 30, 2017
Completion
Oct 30, 2017
Last update
Feb 24, 2020

Study contacts

Adam C Adler, MD, FAAP
principal investigator · Texas Childrens Hospital

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is withdrawn, as verified in Feb 2020. 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