Preventing Propofol Injection Pain: Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Propofol Versus Fospropofol

Phase 4

Completed

• Conditions: Complication of Injection; Pain
• Interventions: Drug: Propofol/Lidocaine; Drug: Fospropofol

• Registration Number: NCT01401049
• Lead Sponsor: NYU Langone Health

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence and intensity of possible pain on injection as well as patient satisfaction caused by propofol (a lipid based medication); Lusedra (a water based medication); and the drug combination of propofol with lidocaine (a local anesthetic commonly used with propofol injection).

Detailed Description

Propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol) is one of the most common induction and sedative agents used today. Properties that make this agent popular include rapid onset and quick recovery. However, as its use became more widespread, side effects such as pain on injection have attracted more attention. The incidence of pain on propofol injection is as high as 70 - 90%. Numerous studies report that more than 50% of patients recall the unpleasant burning sensation during injection.

Many techniques to minimize pain on injection associated with propofol have been described; pre-administration of different medications including lidocaine, ketamine, thiopental, metoclopramide, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and remifentanil have been reported with mixed success. Some have even tried to use lidocaine with a tourniquet. Others have reported the use of distraction techniques including counting numbers aloud.

Recently, a solvent mixture of medium chain triglyceride and long chain triglyceride has been tested for prevention of pain on propofol injection. Lusedra (fospropofol disodium), the water-soluble prodrug of propofol, does not cause pain on injection as it is water based medication. Demonstrating the benefit of fospropofol over propofol in patient satisfaction will improve acceptance by anesthesia providers.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2010-08
• Study First Submitted: 2011-06-17
• Study First Submitted QC: 2011-07-22
• Study First Posted: 2011-07-25
• Primary Completion: 2012-07
• Study Completion: 2013-01
• Results First Submitted: 2014-12-22
• Results First Submitted QC: 2014-12-22
• Results First Posted: 2015-01-26
• Status Verified: 2017-12
• Last Update Submitted: 2017-12-04
• Last Update Posted: 2017-12-29

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 116

Inclusion Criteria

• American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I, II or III.
• Age 18 - 65.
• Both male and female.
• No significant laboratory abnormalities.

Exclusion Criteria

• Chronic pain patients or patients receiving benzodiazepines or opioids / other analgesics for control of acute pain will be excluded.
• Patients with known allergies to any of the study drugs, or to soybean oil or egg lecithin are excluded.
• Women with a positive pregnancy test reported from pre-surgical testing or their physician's office or who are breast feeding at the time of surgery.
• No emergency patients will be recruited for this study.

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Propofol/Lidocaine	Propofol/Lidocaine	The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence and intensity of possible pain on injection as well as patient satisfaction caused by propofol (a lipid based medication); Lusedra (a water based medication); and the drug combination of propofol with lidocaine (a local anesthetic commonly used with propofol injection).
Fospropofol	Fospropofol	To compare the incidence and intensity of pain on injection that is caused by propofol (lipid emulsion) versus the test drug fospropofol. A third arm will also be included using a current standard (propofol plus lidocaine) as a methodological control.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Compare Incidence and Intensity of Pain on Injection That is Caused by Propofol (Lipid Emulsion) Versus the Test Drug Fospropofol.	2 hours	We hypothesize that we can reject the null hypothesis that results from all 3 arms are from the same sample, and then show (in pair wise tests) that fospropofol is superior to propofol, and not-inferior to propofol plus lidocaine.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
To Compare Patient Satisfaction With Sedation Including the Recall of Pain.	2 hours after the end of the procedure.	We hypothesize that we can reject the null hypothesis that results from all 3 arms are from the same sample, and then show (in pair wise tests) that fospropofol is superior to propofol, and not-inferior to propofol plus lidocaine.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

NYU Langone Medical Center; 🇺🇸 New York, New York, United States