Completed Brain & Nervous System Public Health & Healthcare

TOPIC 2: A Randomised Controlled Trial to investigate the effectiveness of ThOracic Epidural and Paravertebral Blockade In reducing Chronic Post- Thoracotomy Pain: 2

In plain English

AI plain-English summary

Around 1 in 3 patients who undergo open chest surgery will still be in pain six months later. This trial tests whether a newer, less invasive pain-blocking technique can cut that rate by a third. Chronic post-thoracotomy pain is a known and debilitating consequence of the 3,400 open-chest operations performed each year in the UK’s major thoracic centres. The standard treatment—thoracic epidural blockade—involves threading a catheter into the spine. The alternative, paravertebral blockade, targets nerves closer to the ribs, potentially with fewer side effects. A pilot study suggested it might work better, but the evidence was not strong enough to change practice. If the trial confirms that paravertebral blockade reduces chronic pain from 30% to 20%, it would give surgeons a straightforward, evidence-based reason to switch techniques. For patients, that means less long-term pain, less reliance on analgesics, and possibly shorter stays in intensive care. The trial also includes a full economic analysis, so the NHS can weigh the upfront cost of the procedure against savings from reduced follow-up care and productivity loss. The results would directly inform national guidelines for peri-operative pain management in thoracic surgery.

View original technical description
Design: Multi-centre randomised trial with internal pilot & economic evaluation. Setting: At least twenty large adult UK thoracic centres with a track record of successful recruitment to clinical trials and typical patient case mix. Target population: Consenting adults undergoing elective open thoracotomy. Inclusion criteria: Aged over 18 years; ASA physical status I-IV. Exclusion Criteria: Contraindication to TEB/PVB; infection near proposed puncture site; coagulation/thoracic spine disorders; chest wall resection; emergency surgery; previous thoracotomy. Health technologies being assessed: Two existing peri-operative analgesic techniques: i) PVB: multiple injections followed by placement of catheter; ii) TEB: usual practice. Measurement of outcomes: Our outcomes set is based on the IMMPACT recommendations for core outcomes in chronic pain. Primary outcome: Incidence of Chronic Post-Thoracotomy Pain (CPTP) at 6 months post-randomisation. Participants will be asked to indicate their ‘worst chest pain over the last week at the site of their thoracotomy operation’ on a visual analogue scale (0-100). Incidence will be taken to be a score greater or equal to 40 indicating at least a moderate level of pain. Secondary outcomes: Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) interference score, Short Form McGill Pain Scale (SF-MPQ-2) Generic health related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. Analgesic use, pain post-surgery and discharge, mortality, complications, days in Intensive Care Unit/High Dependence Unit (ICU/HDU) and patient satisfaction. Resource use and costs: Data on use of health care resources and relevant costs will be collected as part of the trial. These will include the cost of the procedures, post-operative and post-discharge resource use, private costs and productivity loss. Sample size: Assuming a 30% incidence of CPTP in the TEB group (similar to our TOPIC-pilot results and systematic review 2), 392 patients in each group will give 90% power (p=0.05) to detect a 10% absolute reduction (i.e. down to 20%) in the PVB group. Assuming a 10% rate of death and a further 15% loss to follow-up at 6 months we will recruit 1026 participants. Project timetables including recruitment rate: Our data suggest 3400 operations take place in the 20 identified centres per year. The total trial duration is 54 months; 6 months set-up, 30 months recruitment (assuming the majority of centres will recruit around 3 patients every 2 months), 12 months follow-up and 6 months for analysis. Expertise in team: We have an outstanding track record in conducting large multi-centre RCTs. FG, NIHR Senior Investigator, MW, NIHR Clinician Scientist, BS & NM, thoracic consultant anaesthetists, are experienced clinician trialists in anaesthesia and pain in the roles of Chief Investigator; BN is an experienced thoracic consultant surgeon and trialist. JY, NIHR Post-Doctoral Fellow, has expertise in teaching and training; AG is a pain expert with an international reputation in pain research; LM, senior statistician and experienced methodologist; LJ is a health economist who is a co-applicant on two large HTA-funded trials; TM and AK provide expertise in clinical trials delivery. MJ has expertise in QuiteT Research Intervention model; AW provides PPI voice and CS leads trainee network. The trial will be co-ordinated and supported by the BCTU HJ with 17 years clinical trials experience.

Related Research

Grants with similar aims, by meaning.

A randomised controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of thoracic epidural and paravertebral blockade in reducing chronic post-thoracotomy pain – TOPIC pilot study
A randomised controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of pectoralis-intercostal-rectus sheath plane block in reducing chronic post-sternotomy pain after cardiac surgery: to study feasibility for a substantive trial nerve blOck in caRdIac surGery chronic paIN (ORIGIN-feasibility trial)
Pain Relief After Instrumented Spinal surgEry trial (PRAISE Trial)
Nerve Block for Chronic Pain After Knee Replacement Surgery (the BaCPAKS trial): A multi-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of adding an adductor canal block to standard perioperative approaches in primary elective knee joint replacement
Erector Spinae Plane blocks for the Early Analgesia of Rib fractures in trauma: a feasibility randomised controlled trial with embedded qualitative assessment (ESPEAR trial).

Original classification

Research

Plain English summaries and category classifications on this site are generated by AI and may not perfectly reflect the original research.