Efficacy of a Disposable Negative Wound Pressure Device in Reducing the Incidence of Wound Infection After HPB Surgery
|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: NCT03700086|
Recruitment Status : Recruiting
First Posted : October 9, 2018
Last Update Posted : October 9, 2018
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Surgical Site Infection||Device: Disposable negative wound pressure device (PICO) Device: OPsite post-op visible standard sterile dressing||Not Applicable|
The use of specific protocols for antisepsis, sterilization and infections' prophylaxis is widely diffused, but, however, surgical site infection rate is still high. Wound infection is often considered as a minor morbidity if compared with other complications, but it is able to considerably increase the length of hospital stay, health care and assistance related costs affecting patients' quality of life. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has published specific guidelines for surgical site infection (SSI) prevention that includes hairs removal, intravenous antibiotics on the basis of the type of procedure planned for that patient, skin antisepsis, surgical team antisepsis, sterility, blood glucose levels control, body temperature control and optimal perfusion of all tissues. At the end of the surgical procedure, surgical incision is covered with a sterile dressing that usually is changed after 24/48 hours. HPB procedures like pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), total pancreatectomy (TP) and palliative procedures like gastric by-pass and hepaticojejunostomy GEA/HJ) are considered as clean-contaminated procedures at high complexity with a high incidence of SSI, especially dealing with patients at high surgical risk. Since from the introduction of negative wound pressure therapy in 1997, these devices have been used only for the treatment of acute and chronic wounds with loss of tissue, but recently have also been proposed in the setting of SSI prevention. Negative wound pressure systems have higher costs, the use in the outpatients setting may be complex consequently the use in the setting of SSI prevention could not result cost-effective.
The rationale for the use of negative pressure therapy in the prevention of SSI relies in the complete clearance of dead-space under the incision, fluids and blood removal with consequent reduction of fluids infections, edema reduction, blood flow improvement and tissue oxygenation. Similar results can be obtained through a less expensive, disposable, canisterless, negative pressure wound therapy device (Pico®, Smith&Nephew). This system is cheaper, is portable, and can produce a continue vacuum with a nominal pressure of -80mmHg being able to achieve a rapid discharge at home with less frequent medications, improved comfort and aesthetic result.
The following study is designed to assess the effect of a disposable, canisterless, negative pressure wound therapy device in the reduction of SSI in high risk patients if compared with a sterile standard dressing after major HPB surgery.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||100 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Intervention Model Description:||1:1 randomized controlled trial|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||Efficacy of a Disposable Negative Wound Pressure Device in Reducing the Incidence of Wound Infection After HPB Surgery: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial|
|Actual Study Start Date :||September 30, 2018|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||May 10, 2019|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||June 10, 2019|
Experimental: Negative wound pressure device (PICO)
The disposable negative wound pressure device (PICO) will be used to cover the midline incision. The dressing is changed on POD3 and removed on POD7. Data are collected on POD3, POD7 and POD30.
Device: Disposable negative wound pressure device (PICO)
Application of a disposable negative wound pressure device for surgical site infection prevention.
Active Comparator: Standard sterile dressing
The OPsite post-op visible standard sterile dressing will be used to cover the midline incision. Dressing is changed q48h. Data are collected on POD3, POD7 and POD30.
Device: OPsite post-op visible standard sterile dressing
Application of a standard sterile wound dressing.
- Surgical Site Infection [ Time Frame: 30 days from index surgery ]Superficial + deep surgical site infection as defined by CDC
- Rate of discontinuation of negative wound pressure therapy [ Time Frame: 7 days from index surgery ]Discontinuation of therapy due to patient choice
- Incidence of seromas [ Time Frame: 30 days from index surgery ]As defined by CDC
- Incidence of hematomas [ Time Frame: 30 days from index surgery ]As defined by CDC
- Incidence of major morbidities [ Time Frame: 30 days from index surgery ]Incidence of pancreatic fistula, hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, Clavien -Dindo morbidity
- Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale Score [ Time Frame: 30 days after index surgery ]The Stony Brook Evaluation Scale evaluate the aesthetic result of an incision. Score ranges from 0 (worst aesthetic result) to 5 (best aesthetic result)
- Costs [ Time Frame: 30 days after index surgery ]calculated on the basis of the daily cost per device multiplied by the days of hospital stay
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): NCT03700086
|Contact: Luca Landoni, MDemail@example.com|
|Contact: Claudio Bassi, MDfirstname.lastname@example.org|
|Ospedale Policlinico GB Rossi||Recruiting|
|Verona, Italy, 37134|
|Contact: Luca Landoni, MD 0458124553 ext 0039 email@example.com|
|Principal Investigator: Claudio Bassi, MD|
|Principal Investigator: Luca Landoni, MD|
|Principal Investigator:||Luca Landoni, MD||AOVR Veneto|