San Donato Hospital
Arezzo, 52100, Italy
NCT Number: NCT06736938
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the safety and efficacy of two pharmacological sedation regimens during bronchoscopy procedures in adult patients who require elective bronchoscopy.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
* Is propofol/pethidine analgesia administered by a pulmonologist as effective and safe as midazolam/pethidine in achieving adequate sedation during bronchoscopy, particularly in terms of desaturation rate? * Does the choice of sedative (midazolam vs. propofol) influence the occurrence of adverse events or need for escalated care?
Trial opening soon.
Get Notified18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 4
Arezzo, 52100, Italy
Bronchoscopic procedures are essential in the diagnosis and management of various respiratory diseases, but they can cause significant discomfort for patients.
Analgosedation plays a crucial role in improving patient comfort while ensuring optimal conditions for the safe performance of the procedure. However, sedation management protocols can vary greatly depending on the hospital center and the availability of an anesthetist.
Over the years, with the increasing number of bronchoscopic procedures, the growing complexity of patients-particularly those with pulmonary diseases presenting comorbidities and significant gas exchange alterations-and the limited availability of anesthetists in national hospital facilities, there has been a growing reliance on independently managed procedural sedation.
This independent management-without the need for an anesthesia specialist-has been facilitated by the use of relatively easy-to-manage drugs like midazolam, a benzodiazepine (BDZ) with a pharmacokinetic profile that makes it preferable to other similar compounds due to its rapid onset of action and the availability of an antagonist capable of reversing its effects.
However, it is important to acknowledge that the use of midazolam carries significant risks.
Propofol, compared to midazolam, is characterized by an even faster onset of action, but more importantly by higher clearance and redistribution, allowing for rapid recovery of consciousness even after prolonged infusions. Nevertheless, this drug is also associated with adverse effects, particularly on cardiac inotropic and chronotropic function as well as mean arterial pressure, thus requiring caution in its administration.
The use of propofol-as per the technical data sheet approved by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA)-is reserved for doctors specialized in anesthesia or those experienced in the care of intensive care patients. Pulmonologists, with their specific training in respiratory function management, possess crucial skills in administering deep sedation, such as that induced by propofol, as patient safety largely depends on proper airway management during the procedure.
The Complex Operative Unit of Pneumology and RICU (Respiratory Intensive Care Unit) at San Donato Hospital in Arezzo has extensive experience in the field of procedural analgesia.
This study is driven by the need to generate scientific evidence supporting effective and safe alternatives for analgosedation managed by pulmonologists during bronchoscopic procedures. The aim is to consolidate and expand upon preliminary studies in the literature, with the goal of ensuring optimal sedation even in the absence of anesthesia assistance.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Propofol 1% is infused intravenously, initially at a bolus dose of 0.5 mg/kg followed by a maintenance dose in a continuous infusion of 0.5-1.0 mg/kg/hour.
Midazolam is administered intravenously at an initial dose of 2 mg, as a bolus, followed by aliquots of 0.5 mg or 1 mg.
Pethidine (100 mg/2 ml) is administered intravenously at a dosage of 0.5 mg/kg.
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
The primary endpoint of this study is to evaluate and compare the desaturation index (SpO2 < 90% for at least 30 seconds) between the two drug regimens. The analysis will be conducted both across all procedures and stratified by type (interventional vs simple);
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
This involves comparing the rates of peri- and post-procedural complications between the two treatment arms.
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
This involves comparing the rates of peri- and post-procedural complications between the two treatment arms.
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
This involves comparing the rates of peri- and post-procedural complications between the two treatment arms.
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
Time spent in the recovery area (in minutes)
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
Patient recovery assessed by Aldrete score. It evaluates a patient's recovery after anesthesia based on five criteria: activity, respiration, circulation, consciousness, and oxygen saturation. Each criterion is scored from 0 to 2, resulting in a total score ranging from 0 (minimum) to 10 (maximum).
Investigators will consider patient recovery achieved with an Aldrete score ≥9.
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
i.e.: procedure with suitable sample (Yes or Not)
Time frame: Trough study completion, an average of 2 years
Total desaturation time is defined as the cumulative time a patient's oxygen saturation (SpO2) falls below a predefined threshold (SpO2<90%) during the procedure.
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Fondazione Andrea Cesalpino Arezzo ONLUS
Other
Efficacy and Safety of Balanced Analgosedation in Bronchoscopy With Propofol/Pethidine Versus Midazolam/Pethidine: a Single-centre Randomised Controlled Trial
Acronym: ABroProMida
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.