Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of a closed-loop (automated) fluid administration system to deliver fluids using feedback from standard operating room hemodynamic monitors. In standard anesthesia care the rate of IV fluid administration to the patient is determined by the anesthesiologist caring for the patient. In this study protocol, the rate of fluid administration will be determined instead by the closed-loop (automated) control system under the supervision of the anesthesiologist. The system will independently decide when to give fluid and at what rate; the supervising anesthesiologist will monitor the system to ensure appropriate volumes are being delivered and to intervene if necessary.
In our protocol we will test the hypothesis that closed-loop fluid administration can maintain higher cardiac stroke volume (shown to improve patient outcomes after surgery) than anesthesiologist management. We have shown this to be the case in multiple simulation studies and in-vivo animal studies, but not yet experimentally in a clinical setting. Investigators will recruit their patients from the surgical record that that require cardiac output monitoring undergoing surgery and require mechanical ventilation and consent to participate in the study will be included in the study. They will receive standard patient care in that in no way will their anesthetic or surgical procedure will be altered as part of the study, with the exception of fluid administration. Fluids are usually given to a patient based on the physician's discretion. As part of the study patients will receive fluid management via a closed loop (automated) system that will use an infusion pump (Q-Core) and a controller (a computer run index and algorithm developed by Sironis) to make frequent, regular and accurate adjustments to the amount of fluid the patient receives using feedback from standard operating room monitors at UCI). Data from this study will be retrospectively compared to subjects case matched to evaluate differences in cardiac output, total fluid given, and patient outcomes.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Closed Loop | Experimental | Study patients will receive a baseline crystalloid infusion of 3 cc/kg/hr and all additional fluid management will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will determine rate, amount, and timing of fluid administration. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Closed Loop | Device | Fluid management in the closed loop group will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will use an infusion pump (Q-Core) and a controller (a computer run index and algorithm developed by Sironis) to make frequent, regular and accurate adjustments to the amount of fluid the patient receives using feedback from standard operating room monitors. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Fluid Status During Surgery | The primary outcome between groups is preload independence, defined as % case time where Stroke Volume Variation (SVV) is ≤12%. | Duration of Surgery, up to 8 hours |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Maxime Cannesson, MD, PhD | University of California, Irvine | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of California, Irvine Medical Center | Orange | California | 92858 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21965362 | Background | Rinehart J, Liu N, Alexander B, Cannesson M. Review article: closed-loop systems in anesthesia: is there a potential for closed-loop fluid management and hemodynamic optimization? Anesth Analg. 2012 Jan;114(1):130-43. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e318230e9e0. Epub 2011 Sep 29. | |
| 2209031 | Background | Bednarski P, Siclari F, Voigt A, Demertzis S, Lau G. Use of a computerized closed-loop sodium nitroprusside titration system for antihypertensive treatment after open heart surgery. Crit Care Med. 1990 Oct;18(10):1061-5. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199010000-00002. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Related info | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Closed Loop | Study patients will receive a baseline crystalloid infusion of 3 cc/kg/hr and all additional fluid management will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will determine rate, amount, and timing of fluid administration. Closed Loop: Fluid management in the closed loop group will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will use an infusion pump (Q-Core) and a controller (a computer run index and algorithm developed by Sironis) to make frequent, regular and accurate adjustments to the amount of fluid the patient receives using feedback from standard operating room monitors. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Closed Loop | Study patients will receive a baseline crystalloid infusion of 3 cc/kg/hr and all additional fluid management will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will determine rate, amount, and timing of fluid administration. Closed Loop: Fluid management in the closed loop group will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will use an infusion pump (Q-Core) and a controller (a computer run index and algorithm developed by Sironis) to make frequent, regular and accurate adjustments to the amount of fluid the patient receives using feedback from standard operating room monitors. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical | Count of Participants |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Fluid Status During Surgery | The primary outcome between groups is preload independence, defined as % case time where Stroke Volume Variation (SVV) is ≤12%. | Closed Loop Study population at Stroke Volume Variation (SVV) ≤12% | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percentage of case time | Duration of Surgery, up to 8 hours |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Closed Loop | Study patients will receive a baseline crystalloid infusion of 3 cc/kg/hr and all additional fluid management will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will determine rate, amount, and timing of fluid administration. Closed Loop: Fluid management in the closed loop group will be performed via a closed loop (automated) system that will use an infusion pump (Q-Core) and a controller (a computer run index and algorithm developed by Sironis) to make frequent, regular and accurate adjustments to the amount of fluid the patient receives using feedback from standard operating room monitors. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maxime Cannesson, PhD | University of California, Irvine Health | 714- 456-5059 | mcanness@uci.edu |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D011183 | Postoperative Complications |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| 2723513 | Background | Colvin JR, Kenny GN. Development and evaluation of a dual-pump microcomputer-based closed-loop arterial pressure control system. Int J Clin Monit Comput. 1989 Jan;6(1):31-5. doi: 10.1007/BF01723370. |
| 2138701 | Background | Blankenship HB, Wallace FD, Pacifico AD. Clinical application of closed-loop postoperative autotransfusion. Med Prog Technol. 1990 May;16(1-2):89-93. |
| 7287047 | Background | Bowman RJ, Westenskow DR. A microcomputer-based fluid infusion system for the resuscitation of burn patients. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1981 Jun;28(6):475-9. doi: 10.1109/TBME.1981.324822. No abstract available. |
| 12768123 | Background | Chaisson NF, Kirschner RA, Deyo DJ, Lopez JA, Prough DS, Kramer GC. Near-infrared spectroscopy-guided closed-loop resuscitation of hemorrhage. J Trauma. 2003 May;54(5 Suppl):S183-92. doi: 10.1097/01.TA.0000064508.11512.28. |
| 3607171 | Background | DeBey RK, Westenskow DR, Jordan WS, McJames SW. A urine based control system for fluid infusion. Biomed Sci Instrum. 1987;23:195-8. No abstract available. |
| 22112587 | Background | Rinehart J, Alexander B, Le Manach Y, Hofer C, Tavernier B, Kain ZN, Cannesson M. Evaluation of a novel closed-loop fluid-administration system based on dynamic predictors of fluid responsiveness: an in silico simulation study. Crit Care. 2011;15(6):R278. doi: 10.1186/cc10562. Epub 2011 Nov 23. |
| 23835454 | Background | Rinehart J, Lee C, Cannesson M, Dumont G. Closed-loop fluid resuscitation: robustness against weight and cardiac contractility variations. Anesth Analg. 2013 Nov;117(5):1110-8. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182930050. |
| 23835453 | Background | Rinehart J, Lee C, Canales C, Kong A, Kain Z, Cannesson M. Closed-loop fluid administration compared to anesthesiologist management for hemodynamic optimization and resuscitation during surgery: an in vivo study. Anesth Analg. 2013 Nov;117(5):1119-29. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182937d61. |
| 16356219 | Background | Pearse R, Dawson D, Fawcett J, Rhodes A, Grounds RM, Bennett ED. Early goal-directed therapy after major surgery reduces complications and duration of hospital stay. A randomised, controlled trial [ISRCTN38797445]. Crit Care. 2005;9(6):R687-93. doi: 10.1186/cc3887. Epub 2005 Nov 8. |
| 20705785 | Background | Forget P, Lois F, de Kock M. Goal-directed fluid management based on the pulse oximeter-derived pleth variability index reduces lactate levels and improves fluid management. Anesth Analg. 2010 Oct;111(4):910-4. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181eb624f. Epub 2010 Aug 12. |
| 22795172 | Background | Rinehart J, Chung E, Canales C, Cannesson M. Intraoperative stroke volume optimization using stroke volume, arterial pressure, and heart rate: closed-loop (learning intravenous resuscitator) versus anesthesiologists. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2012 Oct;26(5):933-9. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2012.05.015. Epub 2012 Jul 12. |
| 25888403 | Derived | Rinehart J, Lilot M, Lee C, Joosten A, Huynh T, Canales C, Imagawa D, Demirjian A, Cannesson M. Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case-control study with propensity matching. Crit Care. 2015 Mar 19;19(1):94. doi: 10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7. |
| 25690834 | Derived | Joosten A, Huynh T, Suehiro K, Canales C, Cannesson M, Rinehart J. Goal-Directed fluid therapy with closed-loop assistance during moderate risk surgery using noninvasive cardiac output monitoring: A pilot study. Br J Anaesth. 2015 Jun;114(6):886-92. doi: 10.1093/bja/aev002. Epub 2015 Feb 17. |
| Participants |
|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Specific Surgical procedure | Number | participants |
|
| ASA Physical Status patient classification | ASA II A patient with mild systemic disease Mild diseases only without substantive functional limitations. ASA III A patient with severe systemic disease Substantive functional limitations; One or more moderate to severe diseases. ASA IV A patient with severe systemic disease that is a constant threat to life Examples include (but not limited to): recent ( < 3 months) MI, CVA, TIA, or CAD/stents, ongoing cardiac ischemia or severe valve dysfunction, severe reduction of ejection fraction, sepsis, DIC, ARD or ESRD not undergoing regularly scheduled dialysis | Number | participants |
|
| Stroke Volume Index | Mean | Standard Deviation | ml per meter-squared |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 35 |
| 0 |
| 35 |
Not provided
Not provided