Ignite Creation Date:
2024-10-26 @ 3:38 PM
Last Modification Date:
2024-10-26 @ 3:38 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT06558695
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
None
First Post:
2024-08-12
Brief Title:
Stability Comparison of TIVA and Sevoflurane in Prone Spinal SurgeryTIVATotal Intravenous Anesthesia
Sponsor:
None
Organization:
None
Study Overview
Official Title:
Comparison of TIVA and Sevoflurane Affirming Hemodynamic Respiratory and Neuromonitoring Stability in Prone Position Spinal Surgeries
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2024-08
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
No
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
TIVA
Brief Summary:
Key Points
1 Objective
o To compare the effects of Total Intravenous Anesthesia TIVA and sevoflurane anesthesia on respiratory mechanics hemodynamic parameters and neuromonitoring during prone position spinal surgeries
2 Methodology
A randomized controlled trial involving 52 patients scheduled for lumbar spine surgery randomly assigned to either TIVA or sevoflurane groups
Respiratory and hemodynamic parameters were measured at various time points
3 Results
No significant differences were found between the TIVA and sevoflurane groups in terms of respiratory mechanics or hemodynamic stability
Both anesthesia techniques maintained stable intraoperative conditions
4 Clinical Implications
Anesthesiologists can flexibly choose between TIVA and sevoflurane based on patient-specific factors and surgical requirements
TIVA may be preferred in surgeries with high neurological risk due to its compatibility with neuromonitoring
5 Future Research
Studies with broader patient populations and long-term outcomes are needed to further refine anesthesia management strategies
Research on the environmental impact and cost-effectiveness of anesthesia techniques is also important
1 Objective
o To compare the effects of Total Intravenous Anesthesia TIVA and sevoflurane anesthesia on respiratory mechanics hemodynamic parameters and neuromonitoring during prone position spinal surgeries
2 Methodology
A randomized controlled trial involving 52 patients scheduled for lumbar spine surgery randomly assigned to either TIVA or sevoflurane groups
Respiratory and hemodynamic parameters were measured at various time points
3 Results
No significant differences were found between the TIVA and sevoflurane groups in terms of respiratory mechanics or hemodynamic stability
Both anesthesia techniques maintained stable intraoperative conditions
4 Clinical Implications
Anesthesiologists can flexibly choose between TIVA and sevoflurane based on patient-specific factors and surgical requirements
TIVA may be preferred in surgeries with high neurological risk due to its compatibility with neuromonitoring
5 Future Research
Studies with broader patient populations and long-term outcomes are needed to further refine anesthesia management strategies
Research on the environmental impact and cost-effectiveness of anesthesia techniques is also important
Detailed Description:
This study aims to evaluate the impact of total intravenous anesthesia TIVA versus sevoflurane anesthesia on respiratory mechanics and hemodynamic parameters during spinal surgery performed in the prone position Anesthesia management for spinal surgeries in the prone position is particularly challenging due to significant physiological changes Identifying the effects of different anesthesia techniques is essential to enhance patient outcomes and ensure intraoperative stability This randomized controlled trial involved 52 patients scheduled for lumbar spine surgery under general anesthesia Participants were randomly allocated to either the TIVA group n26 or the sevoflurane group n26 Measurements of respiratory mechanics including peak airway pressure Ppeak mean airway pressure Pmean positive end-expiratory pressure PEEP end-tidal CO2 ETCO2 tidal volume VT respiratory rate RR and minute ventilation MV were taken at various intervals Hemodynamic parameters such as systolic and diastolic blood pressures and heart rate were continuously monitored
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?:
None