Study of Unsutured Versus Sutured Closure of Rectal Defects After Rectal Lesion Excisions Using Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01465945|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : November 7, 2011
Last Update Posted : July 22, 2014
Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) is a minimally invasive technique used to remove rectal tumours. After the tumour has been removed from the rectum, the surgeon has a choice to close the defect or leave the defect open and naturally close. Currently, both options are accepted as standard care.
Leaving the defect open to close naturally has some possible advantages, including shortened operation time and similar rates of postoperative complications. However, there is some concern that not surgically closing the defect may lead to more postoperative pain and delay in recovery.
The study will be a double blind randomized controlled trial and determine whether patients who have rectal wall defect sutured closed have less post-operative pain compared to patients whose defect is left open.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Post-operative Pain Complications||Procedure: Defect Unsutured Procedure: Defect Sutured||Not Applicable|
Background Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) is an advanced minimally invasive endoluminal technique used to remove rectal tumours. In the open transanal excision era, there is evidence that outcomes in unsutured rectal defects are similar to those in patients whose defect is closed. However, the evidence for this approach is minimal and technical differences in TEM (e.g. rectal insufflation) may mean that leaving defects unsutured is not a safe approach. Further, there is anecdotal evidence that unsutured defects lead to more postoperative pain and delay recovery.
Objective The purpose of this study is to determine if postoperative pain (primary) and early postoperative complications (secondary) are worse in patients undergoing TEM and do not have the defect closed when compare to similar patients who have endoluminal suture closure of the defect.
Methods This is a multicentre, double blind randomized controlled trial of suture closure versus no closure in patients treated by TEM for rectal lesions. The study will include patients 18 years and older with rectal lesions within 12cm of the anal verge treated with TEM. The primary outcome is postoperative pain as measured by validated visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include analgesic use and early (<30 day) complications. Based on anticipated VAS scores, a sample size of 38 patients will be enrolled (power 0.80, α=0.05). Statistical analysis will be performed using student's T test for continuous data and Fischer's exact test for dichotomous variables.
Impact Currently, only 3 centres in Canada have experience with TEM: Vancouver, Winnipeg and Ottawa. This study represents the first trial of a Canadian TEM Collaborative and will determine if there is an advantage to suture closure of the rectal defect in TEM surgery. This is important, as suture technique is challenging and if there are important advantages to this approach, there would be a mandate to perfect suturing technique before employing the TEM approach to rectal tumours. Conversely, if there is an advantage to leaving the defect unsutured, this may reduce operative time and facilitate better use of OR time. Further, it will inform all TEM surgeons of the best approach to the rectal defect and optimize patient care. Finally, this study will serve as a starting point for further trials by the Canadian TEM Collaborative that will expand to include new sites and become a world leader in TEM clinical trials.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||50 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)|
|Official Title:||A Randomized Clinical Trial of Open Versus Suture Closure in Patients With Rectal Lesions Excised Using Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery|
|Study Start Date :||March 2012|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||October 2013|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||October 2013|
Rectal Defect Sutured
The subject will have his/her defect sutured after the rectal tumors have been removed.
Procedure: Defect Sutured
Defect is sutured after the rectal tumor has been removed by TEM.
Rectal Defect Unsutured
The defect will be left open and let naturally close after the rectal tumor has been removed by TEM.
Procedure: Defect Unsutured
The defect is not sutured after the rectal tumor is removed by TEM.
- Postoperative Pain [ Time Frame: 1day after surgery ]As an ancillary measure, all patients will be prescribed 30 tablets of either Tylenol#3 or Tramacet as as their primary postoperative analgesic.
- Complications [ Time Frame: within 30 days of surgery ]includes bleeding( defined as hemoglobin drop of 20g/L from preoperative and either transfusion, readmission to hospital, or surgical or endoscopic intervention), infection (peritonitis or pelvic pain and either fever >37.9 degC or WBC > 11 X 10^9 c/L), and readmission to hospital for any reason.
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01465945
|Canada, British Columbia|
|Saint Paul's Hospital|
|Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6Z 1Y6|
|Vancouver General Hospital|
|Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, V8Z 6R5|
|The Ottawa Hospital|
|Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6|
|Principal Investigator:||Carl J Brown, MD, MSc||Saint Paul's Hospital|