MedPath

A Dual Channel Supraglottic Airway Device (LMA Gastro) for Oxygenation in Patients Undergoing ERCP

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Gallbladder Carcinoma
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma
Bile Duct Carcinoma
Interventions
Procedure: Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Registration Number
NCT04740164
Lead Sponsor
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
Brief Summary

This clinical trial compares the effect of LMA Gastro, a dual channel supraglottic airway (SGA) device, to oxygenation with standard nasal cannula for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). An ERCP is a combination of imaging scans and endoscopy that helps doctors diagnose and treat conditions of the pancreas and bile ducts that requires general anesthesia or procedural sedation. Anesthesiologists often use SGAs or nasal cannulas to help patients breathe while they are asleep during procedures. An SGA consists of an airway tube that connects to a mask, which is inserted through the mouth and placed at the back of the throat to keep the airway open while patients are under anesthesia or sedation. The nasal cannula is a device that fits in a patient's nostrils and delivers oxygen through a small, flexible tube while they are under anesthesia or sedation. The goal of this trial is to compare the effects of the LMA Gastro to nasal cannula when used to deliver oxygen to patients while they are asleep during their ERCP procedure.

Detailed Description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE:

I. To compare the incidence of desaturation (oxygen saturation \[SpO2\] \< 90%) between patients undergoing ERCP with LMA Gastro versus (vs) standard nasal cannula.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:

I. To evaluate the incidence of additional airway maneuvers (jaw thrust/chin lift/placement of oral airway or/nasal trumpet/intubation).

II. To evaluate the incidence of withdrawal of duodenoscope from the airway to facilitate airway support.

III. To evaluate the incidence of adverse events. IV. To evaluate times related to anesthesia and procedure (defined as "anesthesia start to anesthesia end" and "procedure start to procedure end" respectively).

V. To evaluate time from procedure end to anesthesia end. VI. To describe hemodynamics within the two groups (recorded blood pressures, heart rates, oxygen saturations, and end tidal carbon dioxide \[CO2\]).

VII. To evaluate anesthesiologist placing the device (training video viewed, number of practice attempts, years of experience).

OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms.

ARM I: Patients undergo ERCP with LMA Gastro.

ARM II: Patients undergo ERCP with standard nasal cannula.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
66
Inclusion Criteria
  • Adult patients (>= 18 years old) undergoing ERCP
Read More
Exclusion Criteria
  • Patients with propofol allergy
  • Patients at increased aspiration risk
  • Patients with abnormal head/neck pathology preventing LMA Gastro placement
  • Patients with surgical or radiation treatment to the head/neck making LMA Gastro placement difficult
  • Patient with known difficult airway requiring advanced intubation equipment (with the exception of the video-laryngoscope) in the past
  • Esophagectomy patients
  • Patients already intubated upon arrival to endoscopy suite
  • Patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)
  • Patients with body mass index (BMI) >= 35 kg/m^2
  • Patients with hypoxemia (SpO2 < 94% on room air or on home oxygen)
  • American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) Physical Status IV-V
Read More

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Arm I (ERCP with LMA Gastro)Endoscopic Retrograde CholangiopancreatographyPatients undergo ERCP with LMA Gastro.
Arm II (ERCP with standard nasal cannula)Endoscopic Retrograde CholangiopancreatographyPatients undergo ERCP with standard nasal cannula.
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Number of Participants That Had Desaturation Episodes of SpO2 <90%The time between Anesthesia Start time and Anesthesia End time, 1.5 hrs in average

The desaturation (SpO2 \< 90%) between patients undergoing ERCP with LMA® Gastro™ vs standard nasal cannula

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Incidence of Withdrawal of Duodenoscope From Airway to Facilitate Airway SupportThe time between Anesthesia Start time and Anesthesia End time

Patients in which Duodenoscope was withdrawn to facilitate airway support

Incidence of Adverse EventsFrom PACU arrival to PACU discharge, 3 hours in average

Number of adverse events reported by the participants and/or reported by care providers during Surgery and in PACU, 3 hrs in average

To Evaluate Times Related to Anesthesia and ProcedureFrom anesthesia start to anesthesia end" and "procedure start to procedure end, up to 165 minutes

Defined as "anesthesia start to anesthesia end" and "procedure start to procedure end" respectively

To Evaluate Time From Procedure End to Anesthesia EndFrom procedure end and anesthesia end, up to 60 minutes

The time elapsed between procedure end and anesthesia end

To Describe Heart Rates Within the Two GroupsFrom "anesthesia start" to "anesthesia end", on average 5 hours

Heart rates were measured prior treatment administration and at the end of the procedure.

To Describe Oxygen Saturations Within the Two GroupsFrom "anesthesia start" to "anesthesia end", on average 5 hours

Oxygen saturations were measured prior treatment administration and at the end of the procedure.

Incidence of Additional Airway ManeuversThe time between Anesthesia Start time and Anesthesia End time, 1.5 hrs in average

Number of Participants that required additional manuevers to secure airway during their surgery

To Describe Blood Pressure and End Tidal Carbon Dioxide [CO2] Within the Two GroupsFrom "anesthesia start" to "anesthesia end", on average 5 hours

Blood pressure and end tidal carbon dioxide \[CO2\] were measured prior treatment administration and at the end of the procedure.

To Evaluate Anesthesiologist Placing the DeviceAt the end of procedure, between 5 - 10 minutes

Number of attempts means how many times the anesthesiologist tried to secure airway.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

M D Anderson Cancer Center

🇺🇸

Houston, Texas, United States

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath