ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03409536Updated Feb 19, 2020

Somatosensory Evoked Potential (SSEP) Monitoring for Brachial Plexus Injury

An observational study in Brachial Plexus Injury and Peripheral Nerve Injuries, sponsored by London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute and Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 95 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-02-19.

Sponsored by London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute and Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
40
Ages
18 Years to 95 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Brachial plexus block is a common regional anesthesia technique which is performed by anesthesiologists to anesthetize the arm for surgery. In this study, we are investigating the relationship between the nerve conduction (induced by brachial plexus block) and the patients' symptoms before and after the brachial plexus block. We will attach a nerve conduction device (SSEP device) to monitor the patients' arm conduction and we will assess the patients' symptoms simultaneously.

Read the detailed description

Perioperative peripheral nerve injury (PNI) is an under-recognized and under-investigated complication of general anesthesia and continues to impact postoperative recovery resulting in patient disability malpractice claims.(1-5) In the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Closed Claims Analysis (published in 1999), PNI was the second most common cause of claims other than death. (6-7) This claim pattern has remained essentially unchanged over the past 3 decades and the average settlement was $123,000 US Dollar/claim (unpublished data from ASA closed claims analysis). The overall incidence of PNI varies across different surgical procedures, and it is significantly affected by the underlying patient comorbidities and pre-existing peripheral neuropathy. Despite considerable implications of PNI to both the patients and clinicians, little progress has been made in the past three decades in developing a reliable intraoperative monitoring technique for its early detection and prevention. SSEP monitoring has long been used in neurology as a means to diagnose peripheral neuropathy and has been used for the early detection of intraoperative PNI caused by improper patient positioning. A few retrospective studies have found that reversal of intraoperative SSEP signal changes (e.g. correct the patient's arm position in the event of a positioning related peripheral nerve compromise) prevented postoperative neuropathy, suggesting SSEP could be used to detect intraoperative PNI and that prompt intervention could reverse neurological injury (8-10). However, to date, there has not been a study that clearly defines how the magnitudes of SSEP changes relate to the severity of peripheral nerve dysfunction. Due to this lack of information, the current thresholds that are used for diagnosing PNI in a variety of surgical procedures are largely based on the results of SSEP monitoring in spinal cord injury. The traditional diagnostic criteria (used in spinal cord injury) might not be applicable for PNI. Fundamentally, there is also a lack of a clinical study that defines significant and non-significant changes for PNI. Most current available evidence regarding SSEP in PNI is retrospective and mainly derived from patients being monitored for spinal cord or cerebral injury during neurosurgical procedures. The lack of well-validated diagnostic criteria is one of the key issues in preventing the use of SSEP for monitoring peripheral nerves during surgery. As such, further studies are required to characterize the relationship between SSEP changes and peripheral nerve dysfunction and re-define the threshold (or cut-off values) for significant SSEP change for PNI.

This is a prospective cohort study to evaluate the relationship between the peripheral nerve dysfunction, and SSEP signal changes in patients who will receive a brachial plexus block for their surgical procedure. Brachial plexus block is a regional anesthesia technique routinely performed by anesthesiologists where the nerves in the arm are blocked with local anesthetics to prohibit movement and sensation. In LHSC, the average brachial plexus block performed is around 10-15 patients/day for various upper limb surgeries. In this study, the patients with brachial plexus block will be used as a model of brachial plexus injury to assess the relationship between intraoperative brachial plexus injury and the SSEP changes. Brachial plexus block in awake patients is an attractive model to study brachial plexus injury, because it provides transient and progressive de-afferentation state of brachial plexus dysfunction (mimicking brachial plexus injury), allows for real-time assessment of the relationship between clinical symptoms and SSEP changes (awake patients), and overcomes obvious practical limitations of investigating intraoperative PNI (small sample size of patients with intraoperative brachial plexus injury). In this study, 50 consecutive patients who required a brachial plexus block for their surgery, will be recruited. This study will be performed in the "Block Room" of either London Health Science Centre or St Joesph Hospital, London, Ontario. After obtaining informed consent, an independent assessor (hand specialist) will perform a baseline assessment of the sensory and motor function of the upper limb. The sensory function will be quantified by a two-point discrimination test in each dermatome. The motor function will be quantified by the motor score in each myotome. The patients will be attached to the automated SSEP monitor to obtain baseline upper limb SSEP signals. Median, ulnar and radial nerves will be monitored. After satisfactory baseline SSEP recordings have been obtained, a brachial plexus block will be performed in the usual fashion to achieve complete sensory and motor blockage (approx. 30 min). This provides a unique experimental condition to assess the relationship between the brachial plexus dysfunction and the SSEP signal changes. An independent assessor (hand specialist) will re-assess the patients' sensory and motor function every 5 minutes (up to 30 minutes during the onset of the block). SSEP recording will be concomitantly obtained. A total of 300 data pairs (6 data pairs for each patient) will be obtained for analysis. In this study, the Evoked Potential Assessment Device (EPAD®, SafeOp Surgical, Hunt Valley, MD) SSEP machine will be used. It is a novel, simplified, automated SSEP monitoring device (FDA approved), designed to detect intraoperative PNI. The key features of EPAD® are that only the surface adhesive electrodes (i.e. no subdermal needle electrodes) will be used, as well as there is newly artifact rejection and optimization algorithm that permit SSEP recording in awake patients.

Prior to performing the brachial plexus block in the "Block room", a complete neurological examination will be performed including motor score and 2-point discrimination test. Eligible patients will be recruited after obtained informed consent. The baseline SSEP of the participants will be recorded using the EPAD@ device. After the participants received the brachial plexus block (as part of their standard of care), the participants will be monitoring the progressive changes of SSEP signals while the effect of brachial plexus block gradually onset (usually takes around 30 minutes). An independent assessor (hand specialist blinded to the SSEP results) will concomitantly re-assess the patients' sensory and motor function every 5 minutes (up to 30 minutes during the onset of the block).

The primary analysis will be on describing the relationship between the severity of the neurological deficits (impaired sensory and/or motor function) and SSEP changes (amplitude and/or latency changes). Secondarily, an optimal cut-off limit using Youden index and/or logistic regression-derived likelihood ratio functions will be determined. A Receiver-operating-curve for the new cut-off limits will be assessed. REDCapTM will be used for electronic data collection and STATA (version 14) will be used for statistical analysis in all the studies. These new cut-off limits in comparison with conventional criteria in our subsequent clinical studies will be compared.

02

Conditions studied

  • Brachial Plexus Injury
  • Peripheral Nerve Injuries

Keywords

  • SSEP Monitoring
  • Diagnostic threshold
03

In context

Peripheral Nerve Injuries

90 studies on the registry are indexed under Peripheral Nerve Injuries; 24 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 40 is below the median of 63 across 24 observational studies indexed under Peripheral Nerve Injuries.

Browse Peripheral Nerve Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute and Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's is the lead sponsor of 351 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 95 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

All adult patients who are scheduled to have elective upper limb surgeries and require a brachial plexus block as part of their standard of care.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • All adult patients who are scheduled to have elective upper limb surgeries and require a brachial plexus block as part of their standard of care.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients unable to perform a complete neurological examination (e.g. dementia, upper limb fracture).
  • Patients who refuse to participate or unable to provide .
  • Patients who are for SSEP monitoring.
  • Patients who have known pre-existing peripheral neuropathy or brachial plexus injury.
  • Patients who are contraindicated to brachial plexus block.
  • Patients who are not undergoing brachial plexus block for their procedures (e.g. elective C5 nerve root block).
  • Patients who had failed brachial plexus block.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

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

Groups and cohorts

  • SSEP Monitoring

    participants will receive a brachial plexus block for their surgery and will be monitored for brachial plexus injury using the automated SSEP monitor.

    Device: SSEP monitoring

Interventions

  • DeviceSSEP monitoring

    Participants will be monitored using the SSEP device both before and after induction of a brachial plexus block.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Neurological symptoms (including sensory and motor)

    Neurological symptoms (including sensory and motor)

    Time frame: 0-30 minutes after receiving the brachial plexus block

07

Study locations

1 site
  • St Joeshp Hospital
    London, Ontario N6G5A5, Canada
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wojtkiewicz DM, Saunders J, Domeshek L, Novak CB, Kaskutas V, Mackinnon SE. Social impact of peripheral nerve injuries. Hand (N Y). 2015 Jun;10(2):161-7. doi: 10.1007/s11552-014-9692-0. PubMed 26034424 ↗
  • Grocott HP, Clark JA, Homi HM, Sharma A. "Other" neurologic complications after cardiac surgery. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2004 Sep;8(3):213-26. doi: 10.1177/108925320400800304. PubMed 15375481 ↗
  • Sharma AD, Parmley CL, Sreeram G, Grocott HP. Peripheral nerve injuries during cardiac surgery: risk factors, diagnosis, prognosis, and prevention. Anesth Analg. 2000 Dec;91(6):1358-69. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200012000-00010. No abstract available. PubMed 11093980 ↗
  • Tajiri O, Tateda T, Sugihara H, Yokoyama H, Nishikido O, Mukumoto C. [Brachial plexus neuropathy following open-heart surgery]. Masui. 2004 Apr;53(4):407-10. Japanese. PubMed 15160668 ↗
  • Fitzgerald M, McKelvey R. Nerve injury and neuropathic pain - A question of age. Exp Neurol. 2016 Jan;275 Pt 2:296-302. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2015.07.013. Epub 2015 Jul 26. PubMed 26220898 ↗
  • Kroll DA, Caplan RA, Posner K, Ward RJ, Cheney FW. Nerve injury associated with anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1990 Aug;73(2):202-7. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199008000-00002. PubMed 2382845 ↗
  • Cheney FW, Domino KB, Caplan RA, Posner KL. Nerve injury associated with anesthesia: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 1999 Apr;90(4):1062-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199904000-00020. PubMed 10201678 ↗
  • Larson SJ, Gandhoke GS, Kaur J, et al. Incidence of position related neuropraxia in 4489 consecutive patients undergoing spine surgery. Role of SSEP monitoring? Journal of Neurosurgery 2016; 124 (4): A1182
  • Ying T, Wang X, Sun H, Tang Y, Yuan Y, Li S. Clinical Usefulness of Somatosensory Evoked Potentials for Detection of Peripheral Nerve and Brachial Plexus Injury Secondary to Malpositioning in Microvascular Decompression. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2015 Dec;32(6):512-5. doi: 10.1097/WNP.0000000000000212. PubMed 26629760 ↗
  • Araus-Galdos E, Delgado P, Villalain C, Martin-Velasco V, Castilla JM, Salazar A. Prevention of brachial plexus injury due to positioning of patient in spinal surgery. Value of multimodal intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM). Clinical Neurophysiology 2011; 122: S113
  • Chui J, Freytag A, Glimore G, Dhir S, Rachinsky M, Murkin J. A novel approach of using brachial plexus blockade as an experimental model for diagnosis of intraoperative nerve dysfunction with somatosensory evoked potentials: a blinded proof-of-concept study. Can J Anaesth. 2021 Jul;68(7):1018-1027. doi: 10.1007/s12630-021-01975-7. Epub 2021 Mar 31. PubMed 33791897 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Jan 2018 to primary completion in Dec 2019, 23 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jan 18, 2018
First posted
Jan 24, 2018
StartActual
Jan 1, 2018
Primary completionActual
Dec 31, 2019
CompletionActual
Dec 31, 2019
Last update
Feb 19, 2020
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 19, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03409536
Responsible party
Jason Chui (Assistant Professor, Anesthesiologist, London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute and Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 24, 2018
Start date
Jan 1, 2018
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2019
Completion
Dec 31, 2019
Last update
Feb 19, 2020

Study contacts

Jason Chui, MBChB
principal investigator · London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute and Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, 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