Independent directory Public ClinicalTrials.gov records United States
ClinicalTrials.gov record
Terminated Not applicable Interventional Results available

Prospective Trial: Pain Management After Pectus Excavatum Repair, Epidural Versus PCA

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01863498

Public ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01863498. Field values are reproduced from the official study page; the official ClinicalTrials.gov record remains the source of truth for eligibility, enrollment, and contact information.

ClinicalTrials.gov public records Last synced Sep 6, 2026, 3:46 AM EDT

Data is sourced from official ClinicalTrials.gov public API records. Always review the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for the latest information.

Official title

Prospective Randomized Trial: Pain Management After Pectus Excavatum Repair, Epidural Versus PCA

Brief summary

Reproduced verbatim from the official ClinicalTrials.gov record. Not medical advice.

Pectus excavatum, the most common chest wall deformity, occurs in roughly one in 1000 children. Operative repair of the anterior thoracic concavity has transitioned to the minimally invasive approach with substernal bar placement through small axillary incisions (Nuss procedure and multiple modifications). These procedures were quickly incorporated by high volume centers around the world including our own. The operation is certainly quicker and associated with less blood loss than the open operation, but as opposed to most minimally invasive versions of an operation, patients do not leave the hospital sooner after bar placement and experience more post-operative pain. Pain during the post-operative hospital stay is the dominant management issue after bar placement. The sparse literature on the topic has suggested that a thoracic epidural is the most effective means for attenuating the pain during the first few post-operative days. Therefore, most centers approach all patients undergoing a pectus deformity repair with an attempt at epidural placement under the assumption that this provides the most effective strategy for pain control. However, the investigators conducted a retrospective evaluation to examine the validity of this assumption and to investigate whether there is a role for a prospective study to determine the optimum post-operative pain management of these patients. The results demonstrate there was a decreased length of stay in the patients not treated with an epidural (PCA), despite no disadvantage in pain control. Further, 30% in whom an epidural was attempted, catheter placement failed. This data certainly challenges the assumption that an epidural is the optimum management for these patients, and convincingly answers the question as to whether there is a role for a prospective randomized trial.

Study identification

NCT ID
NCT01863498
Recruitment status
Terminated
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Not applicable
Enrollment
65 participants

Conditions and interventions

Interventions

Other

Eligibility (public fields only)

Age range
12 Years to 17 Years
Sex
All
Healthy volunteers
Healthy volunteers not accepted

This page does not interpret eligibility. Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria are on the official ClinicalTrials.gov record.

Study timeline

Start date
Apr 30, 2013
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2017
Completion
Jul 31, 2019
Last update posted
Nov 2, 2020

2013 – 2019

United States locations

U.S. sites
1
U.S. states
1
U.S. cities
1
Facility City State ZIP Site status
Children's Mercy Hospital Kansas City Missouri 64108

Site contact phone numbers, emails, and investigator names are intentionally not displayed here. Open the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for site contact information.

About this trial record page

What this page shows
Public field values for ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01863498, including study identification, conditions, interventions, eligibility (age, sex, healthy volunteer), timeline, and U.S. site list.
What this page does not do
No medical advice, eligibility judgments, treatment recommendations, study quality scoring, or AI-generated medical summaries. No site contact phone numbers, emails, or investigator names.
Where the data comes from
Sourced from the official ClinicalTrials.gov public API. The official record is the source of truth.
Last refresh
Last update posted Nov 2, 2020 · Synced Sep 6, 2026

Related: full search, browse by condition, browse by drug or therapy, browse by sponsor, browse by U.S. city.

Open the official record

The complete protocol, eligibility criteria, and contact information for NCT01863498 live on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View official ClinicalTrials.gov record →