CHU de Lille
Lille, France
NCT Number: NCT07434739
Esophageal cancer ranks as the seventh leading cause of cancer globally, with 604,100 new cases, and the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide.
When applicable, surgery is the gold standard treatment for resectable oesophageal-esophagogastric junction cancer. The surgical technique requires both an abdominal approach and a transthoracic approach to resect the esophagus, perform the anastomosis, and allow optimal lymph node removal.
Surgery Historically, esophagectomy was performed entirely through open surgery. This procedure was complex, associated with significant morbidity and mortality, as well as intense acute and chronic postoperative pain.
In this context, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is the gold standard in the management of acute postoperative pain. It allows for opioid sparing and reduces postoperative pulmonary complications.
In order to reduce postoperative pain, facilitate postoperative recovery and limit postoperative complications, particularly respiratory complications, the minimally invasive approach has been proposed for several surgical indications. This principle has led to the development of hybrid esophagectomy, i.e. an abdominal approach by laparoscopy and a thoracic approach by right thoracotomy. An abdominal laparoscopic approach during esophagectomy, even in combination with a right thoracotomy, would therefore limit postoperative complications compared to open surgery.
In parallel to the wider use of hybrid esophagectomy, some teams have demonstrated the feasibility of a totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE), first video-assisted, then robot-assisted.
The rise of minimally invasive surgery (both hybrid and totally minimally invasive) has led to a decrease in postoperative pain compared to open surgery.
Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols have been developed to improve postoperative recovery and management of acute postoperative pain. In this context, thoracic epidural analgesia TEA may prove counterproductive by inducing arterial hypotension requiring vasopressor drugs, acute urinary retention, and limiting mobilization. Moreover, thoracic epidural analgesia TEA failure occurs in 30% of cases. In minimally invasive surgery, it may be inadequate in half of the patients.
Paravertebral block (PVB) appears as a satisfactory alternative for postoperative analgesia management. In this sense, PVB is recommended for pain management in thoracoscopic lung.
Evidence of the effectiveness and interest of the paravertebral catheter is lacking regarding totally minimally invasive esophageal surgery as most studies demonstrating the benefit of Paravertebral block PVB in esophageal surgery were retrospective.
Trial opening soon.
Get Notified18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Lille, France
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Time frame: Postoperative day 3
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days
Time frame: wtithinat 3 and 6 months
Time frame: wtithinat 3 and 6 months
Time frame: wtithinat 3 and 6 months
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days and at 3 and 6 months
Time frame: wtithin 3 postoperative days and at 3 and 6 months
Time frame: within 3 postoperative days
Time frame: within 3 postoperative days
Time frame: within 3 postoperative days
Time frame: within 3 postoperative days
Time frame: within 3 postoperative days
Time frame: wtithin 6 months
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
University Hospital, Lille
Other
PAravertebral CaTheter Versus Epidural Analgesia in Totally Minimally Invasive Esophagectomies: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Acronym: PACEMIE
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.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07064655
Digestive System Diseases, Digestive System Neoplasms
View Trial DetailsNCT07312526
Digestive System Diseases, Digestive System Neoplasms
Shanghai, China
View Trial DetailsNCT00260559
Digestive System Diseases, Digestive System Neoplasms
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02530983
Abnormalities, Digestive System, Cancer of Esophagus
Rochester, Minnesota, United States
View Trial Details