Dexmedetomidine after deep brain stimulation for prevention of delirium in elderly patients with Parkinson's disease: protocol for a single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in China

INTRODUCTION

Parkinson's disease is one of the most common neurodegenerative diseases. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) can improve motor symptoms in patients with middle and late Parkinson's disease, reduce the use of levodopa, and thus reduce drug-related side effects. Postoperative delirium can significantly reduce the short-term and long-term quality of life in elderly patients, which can be alleviated by dexmedetomidine (DEX). However, whether prophylactic DEX could reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium in patients with Parkinson's disease was still unknown.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled group trial. A total of 292 patients aged 60 years and above elected for DBS will be stratified according to DBS procedure, subthalamic nucleus or globus pallidus interna, then randomly allocated to the DEX group or the placebo control group with a 1:1 ratio, respectively. In the DEX group, patients will be injected with the DEX continuously with an electronic pump at a rate of 0.1 µg/kg/hour for 48 hours at the beginning of general anaesthesia induction. In the control group, normal saline will be administered at the same rate for patients as in the DEX group. The primary endpoint is the incidence of postoperative delirium within 5 days after surgery. Postoperative delirium is assessed by the combination of the Richmond Anxiety Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) for the intensive care unit or the 3-minute diagnostic interview for CAM as applicable. The secondary endpoints include the incidence of adverse events and non-delirium complications, the length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital and all-cause 30-day mortality after the operation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Beijing Tiantan Hospital of Capital Medical University (KY2022-003-03). The results of this study will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and publication in scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05197439.

Choice of anaesthesia in microelectrode recording-guided deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease (CHAMPION): study protocol for a single-centre, open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) implantation under general anaesthesia (GA) has been applied to patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) with severe comorbidities or disabling off-medication symptoms. However, general anaesthetics may affect intraoperative microelectrode recording (MER) to varying degrees. At present, there are few studies on the effects of sedatives or general anaesthetics on multiunit activity characteristics performed by MER in patients with PD during DBS. Therefore, the effect of the choice of anaesthesia on MER remains unclear.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a prospective randomised controlled, non-inferiority study that will be carried out at Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University. Patients undergoing elective bilateral subthalamic nucleus (STN)-DBS will be enrolled after careful screening for eligibility. One hundred and eighty-eight patients will be randomised to receive either conscious sedation (CS) or GA at a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the proportion of high normalised root mean square (NRMS) recorded by the MER signal.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Beijing Tiantan Hospital of Capital Medical University (KY2022-147-02). Negative study results will indicate that GA using desflurane has a non-inferior effect on MER during STN-DBS compared with CS. The results of this clinical trial will be presented at national or international conferences and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05550714.

Comparing propofol anaesthesia guided by Bispectral Index monitoring and frontal EEG wave analysis with standard monitoring in laparoscopic surgery: protocol for the 'EEG in General Anaesthesia - More Than Only a Bispectral Index' Trial, a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The use of Bispectral Index (BIS) monitors for assessing depth of sedation has led to a reduction in both the incidence of awareness and anaesthetic consumption in total intravenous anaesthesia. However, these monitors are vulnerable to artefacts. In addition to the processed number, the raw frontal electroencephalogram (EEG) can be displayed as a curve on the same monitor. Anaesthesia practitioners can learn to interpret the EEG in a short tutorial and may be quicker and more accurate thanBIS in assessing anaesthesia depth by recognising EEG patterns. We hypothesise that quality of recovery (QoR) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery is better, if propofol is titrated by anaesthesia practitioners able to interpret the EEG.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre, double-blind (patients and outcome assessors) randomised controlled trial taking place in four Swiss hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing laparoscopic procedures with general anaesthesia using propofol and anaesthesia practitioners with more than 2 years experience will be eligible. The primary study outcome is the difference in QoR 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes are propofol consumption, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postoperative delirium.QoR and propofol consumption are compared between both groups using a two-sample t-test. Fisher's exact test is used to compare the incidences of PONV and delirium. A total of 200 anaesthesia practitioners (and 200 patients) are required to have an 80% chance of detecting the minimum relevant difference for the QoR-15 as significant at the 5% level assuming a SD of 20.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained from all responsible ethics committees (lead committee: Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz, 16 January 2021). The findings of the trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at international conferences, and may lead to a change in titrating propofol in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov:NCT04105660.

Safety of intravenous tranexamic acid in patients undergoing supratentorial meningiomas resection: protocol for a randomised, parallel-group, placebo control, non-inferiority trial

INTRODUCTION

Growing evidence recommends antifibrinolytic agent tranexamic acid (TXA) to reduce blood loss and transfusions rate in various surgical settings. However, postoperative seizure, as one of the major adverse effects of TXA infusion, has been a concern that restricts its utility in neurosurgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a randomised, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Patients with supratentorial meningiomas and deemed suitable for surgical resection will be recruited in the trial. Patients will be randomised to receive either a single administration of 20 mg/kg TXA or a placebo of the same volume with a 1:1 allocation ratio after anaesthesia induction. The primary endpoint is the cumulative incidence of early postoperative seizures within 7 days after craniotomy. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of non-seizure complications, changes of haemoglobin level from baseline, intraoperative blood loss, erythrocyte transfusion volume, Karnofsky Performance Status, all-cause mortality, and length of stay, and total hospitalisation cost.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrial.gov and approved by the Chinese Ethics Committee of Registering Clinical Trials (ChiECRCT20200224). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national or international conferences relevant to subject fields.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04595786.

Effect of tranexamic acid on the prognosis of patients with traumatic brain injury undergoing craniotomy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Abnormal coagulation function aggravates the prognosis of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). It was reported that the antifibrinolytic drug tranexamic acid (TXA) could reduce intracranial haemorrhage and mortality in non-operative patients with TBI. However, there is a lack of evaluation of TXA in patients with TBI undergoing craniotomy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centre randomised controlled, double-blind, parallel study aiming to investigate the effectiveness and safety of TXA in patients with TBI during the perioperative period. Blood loss and transfusion, neurological function, adverse events, mortality and serum immune-inflammatory cytokines will be collected and analysed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by the Medical Ethics Committee of Beijing Tian Tan Hospital, Capital Medical University (reference number KY 2020-136-03). The results of this study will be disseminated through presentations at scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100041911.

Use of inhalational anaesthetic agents in paediatric and adult patients for status asthmaticus, status epilepticus and difficult sedation scenarios: a protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled volatile anaesthetics have a long tradition of use as hypnotic agents in operating rooms and are gaining traction as sedatives in intensive care units (ICUs). However, uptake is impeded by low familiarity with volatiles, unique equipment and education needs. Inhaled anaesthetics are often reserved in ICUs as therapies for refractory and life threatening status asthmaticus, status epilepticus, high and difficult sedation need scenarios given they possess unique pharmacological properties to manage these medical conditions while providing sedation to acutely ill patients. The objective of this systematic review is to collate evidence regarding the efficacy, safety and feasibility of volatile anaesthetics in adult and paediatric ICU patients for these three emergency conditions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a systematic review of the primary studies in adult and paediatric ICU patients with status asthmaticus, status epilepticus and high/difficult sedation needs. We will include observational and interventional studies published from 1970 to 2021 in English or French investigating patients who have received a volatile inhalational agent for the above indications. We will evaluate the efficacy, safety, feasibility and implementation barriers for the volatile anaesthetics for each of three specified indications. Included studies will not be limited by necessity of a comparator arm. We will also evaluate clinical characteristics, patient demographics and provider attitudes towards volatile anaesthetic administration in defined critical care scenarios. Data will be extracted and analysed across these domains. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Science Citation Index as well as the Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Register will be queried with our search strategy.Descriptive and statistical analysis will be employed where appropriate. Data extraction and quality assessment will be performed in duplicate using a standardised tool. A narrative approach and statistical analyses will be used to describe patient characteristics, volatile efficacy, safety concerns, technical administration, attitudes towards administration and other implementation barriers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics board approval will be necessary for this systematic review. This research is independently funded. Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentation.

PROSPERO NUMBER

CRD42021233083.

Perioperative intravenous lignocaine infusion for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing surgery of the spine: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Intravenous lignocaine is an amide local anaesthetic known for its analgesic, antihyperalgesic and anti-inflammatory properties. Administration of intravenous lignocaine has been shown to enhance perioperative recovery parameters. This is the protocol for a systematic review which intends to summarise the evidence base for perioperative intravenous lignocaine administration in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Our primary outcomes include: postoperative pain scores at rest and movement at predefined early, intermediate and late time points and adverse events. Other outcomes of interest include perioperative opioid consumption, composite morbidity, surgical complications and hospital length of stay. We will include randomised controlled trials, which compared intravenous lignocaine infusion vs standard treatment for perioperative analgesia. We will search electronic databases from inception to present; MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). Two team members will independently screen all citations, full-text articles and abstract data. The individual study risk of bias will be appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We will obtain a risk ratio or mean difference (MD) from the intervention and control group event rates based on the nature of data. We will correct for the variable measurement tools by using the standardised MD (SMD). We will use a random-effects model to synthesise data. We will conduct five subgroup analysis: major versus minor surgery, emergency versus elective surgery, patients with chronic pain conditions versus patients without, duration of lignocaine infusion and adult versus paediatric. Confidence in cumulative evidence for will be classified according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. We will construct summary of findings tables supported detailed evidence profile tables for predefined outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD420201963314.

Choice of ANaesthesia for EndoVAScular treatment of acute ischaemic stroke at posterior circulation (CANVAS II): protocol for an exploratory randomised controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Observational and interventional studies indicate that the type of anaesthesia may be associated with the postprocedural neurological function in patients with anterior circulation acute ischaemic stroke undergoing endovascular treatment. Patients with acute posterior circulation ischaemic stroke may experience different physiological changes and result in severe neurological outcome. However, the effect of the type of anaesthesia on postprocedure neurological function remained unclear in this population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an exploratory randomised controlled trial that will be carried out at Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University. Patients with acute posterior circulation ischaemic stroke and deemed suitable for emergency endovascular recanalisation will be recruited in this trial. Eighty-four patients will be randomised to receive either general anaesthesia or conscious sedation with 1:1 allocation ratio. The primary endpoint is the 90-day modified Rankin Scale.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been reviewed by and approved by Ethics Committee of Beijing Tiantan Hospital of Capital Medical University (KY2017-074-02). If the results are positive, the study will indicate whether the type of anaesthesia affects neurological outcome after endovascular treatment of posterior stroke. The findings of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national or international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03317535.

Sedation versus general anaesthesia in endovascular therapy for anterior circulation acute ischaemic stroke: the multicentre randomised controlled AMETIS trial study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular thrombectomy is the standard of care for anterior circulation acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) secondary to emergent large vessel occlusion in patients who qualify. General anaesthesia (GA) or conscious sedation (CS) is usually required to ensure patient comfort and avoid agitation and movement during thrombectomy. However, the question of whether the use of GA or CS might influence functional outcome remains debated. Indeed, conflicting results exist between observational studies with better outcomes associated with CS and small monocentric randomised controlled trials favouring GA. Therefore, we aim to evaluate the effect of CS versus GA on functional outcome and periprocedural complications in endovascular mechanical thrombectomy for anterior circulation AIS.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Anesthesia Management in Endovascular Therapy for Ischemic Stroke (AMETIS) trial is an investigator initiated, multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled, two-arm trial. AMETIS trial will randomise 270 patients with anterior circulation AIS in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (≤15 or >15) and association of intravenous thrombolysis or not to receive either CS or GA. The primary outcome is a composite of functional independence at 3 months and absence of perioperative complication occurring by day 7 after endovascular therapy for anterior circulation AIS. Functional independence is defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 by day 90. Perioperative complications are defined as intervention-associated arterial perforation or dissection, pneumonia or myocardial infarction or cardiogenic acute pulmonary oedema or malignant stroke evolution occurring by day 7.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The AMETIS trial was approved by an independent ethics committee. Study began in august 2017. Results will be published in an international peer-reviewed medical journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03229148.

GASS Trial study protocol: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised clinical trial comparing general anaesthesia and sedation during intra-arterial treatment for stroke

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of acute stroke has drastically changed in the last 10 years. Endovascular therapy is now the standard of care for patients with a stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. The impact of the type of anaesthesia (general anaesthesia or conscious sedation) during endovascular therapy on the outcome of the patients is still a matter of debate. Previous studies are mostly retrospective and/or focused on the early postprocedure outcome and/or without blood pressure goals and/or single-centre small size studies. We therefore designed a multicentre study hypothesising that conscious sedation is associated with a better functional outcome 3 months after endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke compared with general anaesthesia.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

The General Anesthesia vs Sedation for Stroke (GASS) Trial is a randomised, parallel, single-blind, multicentre study of 350 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive either a general anaesthesia or a conscious sedation. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin score assessed 3 months after the treatment. Data will be analysed on the intention-to-treat principle.

ETHICS/DISSEMINATION

The GASS Trial has been approved by an independent ethics committee for all study centres. Participant recruitment begins in September 2016. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02822144.

Does magnesium sulfate have a role in the management of severe traumatic brain injury in civilian and military populations? A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant cause of combat morbidity. Currently, the medical management of TBI is limited to supportive critical care. Magnesium sulfate has been studied as a potentially beneficial therapeutic agent.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken, examining the role of magnesium in the management of severe TBI in adults. The primary outcome of the study was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes of Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) and GCS. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, WHO Trial Registry and the Cochrane Library database were systematically searched, with data included until 1 February 2017. Inclusion criteria were: human study; aged >13 years; randomised controlled trial; severe TBI. Exclusion criteria were: data collected prior to 1 January 2002; magnesium commenced >24 hours postinjury; magnesium therapy for <24 hours. Statistical analysis was conducted using Stata (V.13.1).

RESULTS

The pooled results of six studies found all-cause mortality not to be significantly different in the treatment group (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.33; P=0.46) with an I² value of >70%. With regard to the secondary outcomes, no significant difference in GOS scores between treatment and control was demonstrated. GCS showed a significant improvement in the treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis found a lack of evidence for magnesium pharmacotherapy in severe TBI, although the data were noted to be conflicting and significantly heterogeneous. Further study is recommended to ascertain whether a therapeutic window exists for magnesium in severe TBI.

Early low-energy versus high-energy enteral nutrition support in patients with traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Early enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with shorter hospital stay and lower infection and mortality rates in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. However, high-energy support always causes clinical complications, such as diarrhoea and aspiration pneumonia, and the true benefit of high-energy support in these patients has not been investigated. The appropriate amount of energy support still needs further investigation. Therefore, we are performing a randomised controlled trial to investigate whether early low-energy EN can decrease mortality and feeding-related complications and improve neurological outcomes as compared with high-energy EN in traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage (TICH) patients.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

This is a randomised, single-blind clinical trial performed in one teaching hospital. 220 TICH patients will be randomly allocated to one of two groups in a 1:1 ratio: an intervention group, and a control group. The intervention group will receive early low-energy EN (10 kcal/kg/day) and the control group will receive high-energy EN (25 kcal/kg/day) for 7 days. All these patients will be followed up for 90 days. The primary outcome is all-cause 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes include the modified Rankin score, Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Outcomes will be assessed at admission, 7, 30 and 90 days after onset of this trial. The safety of EN strategies will be assessed every day during hospitalisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and has been approved by the ethics committee of Dongyang People's Hospital. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed medical journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR-INR-17011384; Pre-results.