Aswan University Hospital
Asyut, Asyut Governorate, 81528, Egypt
NCT Number: NCT07678216
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the effects of propofol, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine on intracranial pressure control and clinical outcomes in adults with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury undergoing urgent neurosurgical intervention.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
* Which sedative agent provides better control of intracranial pressure, assessed by optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD), during the first 24 hours after neurosurgical intervention? * How do the three sedative agents compare in achieving target sedation depth, maintaining hemodynamic stability, and improving short-term clinical outcomes such as ICU mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU length of stay?
Participants will be randomly assigned to receive propofol, midazolam, or dexmedetomidine for 24 hours of continuous sedation. Clinical, hemodynamic, and neurological outcomes will be assessed and compared among the three study groups.
Trial opening soon.
Get Notified18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Asyut, Asyut Governorate, 81528, Egypt
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of mortality and long-term disability worldwide. Prevention of secondary brain injury through optimal control of intracranial pressure (ICP) is a key component of intensive care management in patients with moderate-to-severe TBI. Sedative agents are routinely used to facilitate mechanical ventilation, reduce cerebral metabolic demand, and improve ICP control. However, uncertainty remains regarding the optimal sedative agent for this patient population.
Propofol, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine are among the most commonly used sedatives in neurocritical care. Each agent has distinct pharmacological characteristics that may influence intracranial pressure, hemodynamic stability, neurological assessment, and clinical outcomes. Despite widespread use, direct comparative evidence between these agents remains limited.
This prospective randomized clinical trial aims to compare the effects of propofol, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine on intracranial pressure control and clinical outcomes in adult patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury undergoing urgent neurosurgical intervention. Intracranial pressure will be assessed noninvasively using serial optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) measurements obtained by ocular ultrasonography during the first 24 hours of continuous sedation.
Participants will be randomly assigned to receive one of the three sedative regimens according to a standardized protocol targeting a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score of -3 to -4. Standard neurocritical care management and analgesia protocols will be applied to all study groups.
The study will evaluate the comparative effects of the three sedative agents on intracranial pressure control, sedation quality, hemodynamic stability, adverse events, secondary brain injury, and short-term clinical outcomes. The findings are expected to provide evidence to guide sedative selection in patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury, particularly in settings where invasive intracranial pressure monitoring is not routinely available.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Continuous intravenous propofol infusion initiated at 1 mg/kg/h and titrated within a range of 1-4 mg/kg/h to maintain a target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score of -3 to -4 during the 24-hour study intervention period.
Continuous intravenous midazolam infusion initiated at 0.03 mg/kg/h and titrated within a range of 0.02-0.1 mg/kg/h to maintain a target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score of -3 to -4 during the 24-hour study intervention period. An initial bolus dose of 0.05 mg/kg may be administered if rapid sedation is required.
Continuous intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion initiated at 0.4 μg/kg/h and titrated within a range of 0.2-0.7 μg/kg/h to maintain a target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score of -3 to -4 during the 24-hour study intervention period. No loading dose will be administered.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours after initiation of sedation
Intracranial pressure control will be evaluated using serial optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) measurements obtained by ocular ultrasonography. The primary outcome will be the mean ONSD over the 24-hour intervention period, analyzed as a continuous measure of intracranial pressure control.
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of sedation
Percentage of assessment time during which patients maintained the target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score of -3 to -4. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale ranges from +4 (combative) to -5 (unarousable). Higher scores indicate greater agitation, whereas lower scores indicate deeper sedation. The target sedation level for this study is RASS -3 to -4.
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of sedation
Mean Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score during the 24-hour intervention period. The RASS ranges from +4 (combative) to -5 (unarousable), with target sedation defined as -3 to -4.
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of sedation
Proportion of patients requiring rescue sedation due to failure to achieve target sedation despite maximum protocol dose.
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of sedation
Time from initiation of study sedative infusion until achievement of target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score (-3 to -4).The RASS ranges from +4 (combative) to -5 (unarousable)
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of study sedation
Incidence of hypotension, defined as mean arterial pressure (MAP) <65 mmHg or cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) <60 mmHg.
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of study sedation.
Vasopressor requirements assessed by the proportion of patients requiring vasopressor support.
Time frame: 24 hours after initiation of study sedation.
Percentage of participants who develop bradycardia, defined as a sustained heart rate <50 beats per minute (bpm).
Time frame: Baseline and 24 hours after initiation of study sedation.
Secondary brain injury will be assessed by the presence of new or progressive findings on brain computed tomography (CT) compared with baseline imaging, including new intracranial hemorrhage, progression of cerebral edema (defined as >25% increase in midline shift or worsening basal cistern effacement), new cerebral infarction, or transtentorial or uncal herniation. Brain CT scans will be reviewed by a blinded neuroradiologist.
Time frame: From initiation of mechanical ventilation until successful extubation, assessed for up to 30 days.
Duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, measured as the number of days from initiation of mechanical ventilation until successful liberation from ventilatory support.
Time frame: From discontinuation of study sedation until achievement of a Glasgow Coma Scale motor score of ≥5, assessed for up to 30 days.
Time from discontinuation of study sedation to achievement of a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) motor score of ≥5. The Glasgow Coma Scale motor component ranges from 1 (no motor response) to 6 (obeys commands), with higher scores indicating better neurological function.
Time frame: From ICU admission until ICU discharge, assessed for up to 30 days.
Death from any cause during the ICU stay following urgent neurosurgical intervention for traumatic brain injury.
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Aswan University
Other
Effect of Propofol, Midazolam, and Dexmedetomidine on Intracranial Pressure and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Undergoing Urgent Neurosurgical Intervention
Acronym: ICP-TBI
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.