Bile Aspiration vs Drain in Acute Cholecystitis
|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. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03012243|
Recruitment Status : Not yet recruiting
First Posted : January 6, 2017
Last Update Posted : February 28, 2019
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Cholecystitis, Acute||Procedure: Gallbladder aspiration Procedure: Cholecystostomy||Not Applicable|
Percutaneous cholecystostomy is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of cholecystitis. The cholecystostomy can be inserted transhepatically or transabdominally. The transhepatic route is preferred due to lower risk for bile leakage. The drainage decompresses the gallbladder and drains the bile. This decompression reduces the inflammatory process in the gallbladder. Percutaneous cholecystostomy is often applied in patients not fit for emergency surgery who are in need of intervention due to deterioration of their clinical status. However, even though cholecystostomy is widely practised, it is not fully evaluated.
Percutaneous cholecystostomy has a high success rate, a low procedure-related mortality but a 30 day mortality of 15%. Furthermore, recurrence rates within one year after a cholecystostomy are reported to range between 4 to 22%.
The time duration of the drainage differ between different studies and range from three to six weeks. Optimal timing for drainage has not been studied. Two weeks seem to be sufficient for a maturation of the tract for the transhepatic route and 3 weeks for the transabdominal route. It has been suggested that a prolonged drainage duration is associated with increased risk for recurrence of inflammation due to local irritation of the gallbladder mucosa by the drain.
Percutaneous cholecystostomy is often considered as a bridge to surgery. However, less than half of patients treated with PC are treated with cholecystectomy. This suggests that this treatment is often chosen in a group not fit for surgery and often turns out to be a definitive treatment.
Percutaneous gallbladder aspiration is a technique used for purposes similar to percutaneous cholecystostomy. This technique is an alternative that may be more convenient than percutaneous cholecystostomy. The aspiration is performed with a small gauge needle under ultrasound guidance without leaving a drain. The aspiration leads to a decompression of the gallbladder, which facilitates recovery. However, it has only been described in a few studies and need more evaluation.
One single aspiration may be sufficient to relief symptoms for the majority of patients, but if two aspirations are performed the success rate increases substantially. One randomized controlled trial has been presented where PC is compared to gallbladder aspiration. In this trial PC was superior to gallbladder aspiration in terms of effectiveness. In this trail, however, only one aspiration was performed. No major complications occurred in either group and minor complications were equal between the groups. In a retrospective study comparing aspiration with PC it was found that gallbladder aspiration is safer than PC and has a comparable clinical outcome.
It is believed that single decompressions are sufficient for reduction of the intraluminal pressure. Only a minority of patients have positive bile cultures which, indicates that infection is not a key mechanism in development of cholecystitis, which indicates that a continuous drainage may not be necessary. As lower rates of complications are reported for aspiration due to usage of smaller needle and no drain left that can dislocate and cause bile leakage which is feared complication of PC. It is suggested that PC can have a role as a salvage method when aspiration is not successful.
In order to compare percutaneous cholecystostomy and leaving a drain in situ with percutaneous gallbladder aspiration we plan to undertake a double-blind randomized controlled trial.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||40 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Participant, Care Provider)|
|Official Title:||Randomized Controlled Trial of Bile Aspiration vs Drain in Acute Cholecystitis|
|Estimated Study Start Date :||April 1, 2019|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||April 30, 2020|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||August 31, 2020|
Active Comparator: Cholecystostomy
Percutaneous cholecystostomy, leaving drain in situ
Ultrasound-guided insertion of drain in the gallbladder. The drain is left in the gallbladder until clinical assessment and laboratory analyses show that the acute cholecystitis has been successfully treated.
Other Name: Percutaneous intervention
Experimental: Gallbladder aspiration
Gallblader aspiration without drain
Procedure: Gallbladder aspiration
Percutaneous ultrasound-guided aspiration of bile from the gallbladder. This is performed without leaving a drain in the gallbladder. The aspiration is performed with the intention to relief the pressure in the gallbladder, without drain.
Other Name: Percutaneous intervention
- Morphine intake [ Time Frame: 24 hours ]Need of analgesia after intervention
- Pain [ Time Frame: 5 days ]Pain estimated on Visual Analogue Scale
- Nausea [ Time Frame: 5 days ]Nausea estimated with a Likert scale
- Re-intervention [ Time Frame: 5 days ]Repeated percutaneous aspiration of adjustment of drain
- Body temperature [ Time Frame: 5 days ]Temperature measured daily
- CRP [ Time Frame: 5 days ]Daily measures of C-reactive protein
- LPK [ Time Frame: 5 days ]Daily measures of Leukocyte particle Concentration
- Time to discharge [ Time Frame: 30 days ]Time from intervention to discharge from the hospital
- Complications [ Time Frame: 30 days ]Procedure-related complications
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): NCT03012243
|Contact: Agnieszka Popowicz, MD||+46 73 582 62 firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Contact: Gabriel Sandblom, Assoc Prof||+46 70 415 82 email@example.com|
|Karolinska University Hospital, Center for Digestive Diseases|
|Stockholm, Sweden, 14186|
|Principal Investigator:||Gabriel Sandblom, Assoc Prof||Karolinska Institutet|