Phase 4
Completed N=100
Loss of Resistance, w/wo Stimulation, For Epidural Placement
Anesthesia
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03087604 ↗
Enrolled (actual)
100
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Nov 2018
Primary outcomePrimary: Success Rate of Placement of a Thoracic Epidural — 41; 45 Participants
◆ Published Evidence
Emerging
9citations · ~2 / year
A randomized comparison of loss of resistance versus loss of resistance plus electrical stimulation: effect on success of thoracic epidural placement.
Summary
The purpose of this randomized, observer-blinded, investigative trial is to determine if the use of electrical stimulation, compared to the traditional loss of resistance technique alone, improves the success rate of epidural catheter placement at an academic teaching institution.
Linked Publications
-
A randomized comparison of loss of resistance versus loss of resistance plus electrical stimulation: effect on success of thoracic epidural placement.
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Success Rate of Placement of a Thoracic Epidural |
41; 45 | — |
| SECONDARY Time Required to Place the Epidural Catheter |
33.9; 24.0 | — |
| SECONDARY Number of Thoracic Spine Levels Attempted |
— | — |
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- Adults undergoing intra-thoracic or intra-abdominal procedures that normally would receive thoracic epidurals for post-operative analgesia will be eligible.
Exclusion Criteria
- Subjects with contraindications to regional anesthesia:
- history of allergy to amide local anesthetics
- presence of a progressive neurological deficit
- patients that are on anticoagulant medications that prohibit placement of an epidural
- Systemic infection
- Infection at the site of placement
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03087604) and the linked publication. Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication. Informational only — not medical advice.