HerniaPhase 3NCT00032448
Does Tension-Free Herniorrhaphy or Laparoscopic Herniorrhaphy Achieve Equal or Better Recurrence Rates and Lower Costs While Achieving Equivalent Outcomes for Hernia Patients?
A Phase 3 study testing Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis in people with Hernia, run by US Department of Veterans Affairs at 14 sites in United States.
Trial summary
Inguinal hernia is one of the most common worldwide afflictions of men. The presence of an inguinal hernia is indication for its repair. Approximately 700,000 hernia repairs are performed in the U.S. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, men only
- Conditions the study is for
- Hernia
- What is being tested?
- Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 2,200 participants
- Where
- 14 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 1998to Jun 2004
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Men only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Men with inguinal hernia.
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
14 sites in 1 country.
14 sites in 1 country
United States14 sites
VA Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore
Baltimore, Maryland, 21201
VA Medical Center, Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama, 35233
VA Medical Center, Jamaica Plain Campus
Boston, Massachusetts, 02130
WJB Dorn Veterans Hospital, Columbia
Columbia, South Carolina, 29209
VA North Texas Health Care System, Dallas
Dallas, Texas, 75216
John D. Dingell VA Medical Center, Detroit
Detroit, Michigan, 48201
VA Medical Center, Durham
Durham, North Carolina, 27705
Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (152)
Houston, Texas, 77030
VA Medical Center, Memphis
Memphis, Tennessee, 38104
Central Arkansas VHS Eugene J. Towbin Healthcare Ctr, Little Rock
No. Little Rock, Arkansas, 72114-1706
VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City
Salt Lake City, Utah, 84148
VA Medical Center, San Francisco
San Francisco, California, 94121
James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa
Tampa, Florida, 33612
VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, West LA
West Los Angeles, California, 90073
About this study
Official title: CSP #456 - Tension Free Inguinal Hernia Repair: Comparison of Open and Laparoscopic Surgical Techniques
Inguinal hernia is one of the most common worldwide afflictions of men. The presence of an inguinal hernia is indication for its repair. Approximately 700,000 hernia repairs are performed in the U.S. each year, and this procedure accounts for 10% of all general surgery procedures in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) (10,000 inguinal herniorrhaphies performed per year). There are many different techniques currently in use for repairing inguinal hernias and with the advent of laparoscopy, yet another technique is being advocated. Laparoscopic repair has been reported in some studies to be superior to open repair because of less pain and earlier return to work. However, laparoscopic repair requires a general or regional anesthetic and expensive equipment and supplies to perform. There is also evidence that open tension-free mesh repair may have results similar to laparoscopic repair for these patient centered outcome measures. The general acceptance of this procedure, especially in the VHA, has not been uniform. Furthermore, no randomized trial of sufficient size and power to be conclusive has been done to set forth the operative "gold standard" for hernia repair.
Read the detailed description
Primary Hypothesis: Open tension-free herniorrhaphy when compared with laparoscopic herniorrhaphy will achieve equal or better recurrence rates and lower costs while achieving equivalent outcomes for patient-centered measures.
Secondary Hypotheses:
Intervention: Patients randomized to open repair will undergo a standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis (method of Lichtenstein). Patients randomized to laparoscopic herniorrhaphy will undergo a standardized preperitoneal repair with prosthesis, using either a transperitoneal or extraperitoneal approach. During the implementation period of the trial, a preliminary laboratory session will be conducted with all site PIs to standardize herniorrhaphy techniques, reach consensus on all aspects of perioperative patient management (including postoperative patient instructions, follow-up schedules, definitions of recurrence and complications), and to ensure that the site PI is thoroughly familiar with the protocol.
Each site will be visited by one of two expert surgeons (the Study Chair or a Co-PI surgeon) to observe the operative procedures and ensure that participating surgeons adhere to the protocol in all respects. The first visit will take place in the first 6 months of the study and then as needed thereafter, based on routine examination of operative records randomly selected from each site (5 open and 5 laparoscopic herniorrhaphies, and, if appropriate, viewing of videotapes of the laparoscopic procedures).
Primary Outcomes: Hernia recurrence rate.
Study Abstract:
Background: Inguinal hernia is one of the most common worldwide afflictions of men. The presence of an inguinal hernia is indication for its repair. Approximately 700,000 hernia repairs are performed in the U.S. each year, and this procedure accounts for 10% of all general surgery procedures in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) (10,000 inguinal herniorrhaphies performed per year). There are many different techniques currently in use for repairing inguinal hernias and with the advent of laparoscopy, yet another technique is being advocated. Laparoscopic repair has been reported in some studies to be superior to open repair because of less pain and earlier return to work. However, laparoscopic repair requires a general or regional anesthetic and expensive equipment and supplies to perform. There is also evidence that open tension-free mesh repair may have results similar to laparoscopic repair for these patient centered outcome measures. The general acceptance of this procedure, especially in the VHA, has not been uniform. Furthermore, no randomized trial of sufficient size and power to be conclusive has been done to set forth the operative gold standard for hernia repair.
Objectives: To determine whether open tension-free herniorrhaphy when compared with laparoscopic herniorrhaphy can achieve equal or better recurrence rates and lower costs while achieving equivalent outcomes for patient-centered measures.
Methods: This multi-center VA cooperative study is enrolling 2200 men with inguinal hernia and randomizing them to one of two operative techniques: open tension-free (Lichtenstein) repair, or laparoscopic preperitoneal repair. The primary outcome measure is recurrence at two years. Secondary outcome measures are complications, pain, time to return to normal activities, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, caregiver burden, and cost. The role of comorbidity in the outcome will also be determined. The sample size will permit at least 80% power to detect a difference of 3% in 2-year recurrence rates between the two surgical procedures. Fourteen VAMCs are randomizing the 2200 patients over a 3-year accrual period. The study will also have a 2-year follow-up period. All patients will be followed to the end of the study so that follow-up will range from 2-5 years (average 3.5 years).
On November 29, 2001, the Hines Cooperative Studies Human Rights Committee and the Data and Safety Monitoring Board met to review the data from CSP #456. Both committees determined that there were sufficient data to complete the trial without enrolling any additional patients and recommended that enrollment be stopped. There were no safety concerns. Approximately 2,165 patients of a targeted 2,200 had been enrolled at this point. All sites were notified of this within 24 hours of the action.
Main Manuscript:
- Conditions
- Hernia
- Being tested
- Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis
- Keywords
- Hernia, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy, tension-free herniorrhaphy
- Medical subject headings
- Hernia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesisProcedure or surgery
Compare the effect of two typs of operative treatment of inguinal hernia.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Other | Open and laparoscopic herniorrhaphy Receives: Procedure: Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
To assess recurrence rates, operative complications, pain, convalescent time, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, and health care utilization and costs.
Measured: Two years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Mar 2002 (estimated)
- Study startOct 1998
- Primary completionDec 2003
- Study completionJun 2004
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for HerniaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 2,200 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- US Department of Veterans Affairs
- Sponsor type
- US federal agency
- Collaborators
- American College of Surgeons
- Investigators
- Leigh A. Neumayer, Study chair, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00032448
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 456
- Status last verified
- Apr 2011
- First submitted
- 20 Mar 2002
- Last updated
- 14 Apr 2011
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, Reda D, Henderson W; Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program 456 Investigators. Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med. 2004 Apr 29;350(18):1819-27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040093. Epub 2004 Apr 25.
PubMed 15107485
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Apr 2011. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- CSP #456 - Tension Free Inguinal Hernia Repair: Comparison of Open and Laparoscopic Surgical Techniques
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00032448
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 456
- Conditions
- Hernia
- Keywords
- Hernia, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy, tension-free herniorrhaphy
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 2,200 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- US Department of Veterans AffairsUS federal agency
- Collaborators
- American College of Surgeons
- Study start
- Oct 1998
- Primary completion
- Dec 2003 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jun 2004 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Mar 2002 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Inguinal hernia is one of the most common worldwide afflictions of men. The presence of an inguinal hernia is indication for its repair. Approximately 700,000 hernia repairs are performed in the U.S. each year, and this procedure accounts for 10% of all general surgery procedures in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) (10,000 inguinal herniorrhaphies performed per year). There are many different techniques currently in use for repairing inguinal hernias and with the advent of laparoscopy, yet another technique is being advocated. Laparoscopic repair has been reported in some studies to be superior to open repair because of less pain and earlier return to work. However, laparoscopic repair requires a general or regional anesthetic and expensive equipment and supplies to perform. There is also evidence that open tension-free mesh repair may have results similar to laparoscopic repair for these patient centered outcome measures. The general acceptance of this procedure, especially in the VHA, has not been uniform. Furthermore, no randomized trial of sufficient size and power to be conclusive has been done to set forth the operative "gold standard" for hernia repair.
Detailed description
Primary Hypothesis: Open tension-free herniorrhaphy when compared with laparoscopic herniorrhaphy will achieve equal or better recurrence rates and lower costs while achieving equivalent outcomes for patient-centered measures.
Secondary Hypotheses:
Intervention: Patients randomized to open repair will undergo a standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis (method of Lichtenstein). Patients randomized to laparoscopic herniorrhaphy will undergo a standardized preperitoneal repair with prosthesis, using either a transperitoneal or extraperitoneal approach. During the implementation period of the trial, a preliminary laboratory session will be conducted with all site PIs to standardize herniorrhaphy techniques, reach consensus on all aspects of perioperative patient management (including postoperative patient instructions, follow-up schedules, definitions of recurrence and complications), and to ensure that the site PI is thoroughly familiar with the protocol.
Each site will be visited by one of two expert surgeons (the Study Chair or a Co-PI surgeon) to observe the operative procedures and ensure that participating surgeons adhere to the protocol in all respects. The first visit will take place in the first 6 months of the study and then as needed thereafter, based on routine examination of operative records randomly selected from each site (5 open and 5 laparoscopic herniorrhaphies, and, if appropriate, viewing of videotapes of the laparoscopic procedures).
Primary Outcomes: Hernia recurrence rate.
Study Abstract:
Background: Inguinal hernia is one of the most common worldwide afflictions of men. The presence of an inguinal hernia is indication for its repair. Approximately 700,000 hernia repairs are performed in the U.S. each year, and this procedure accounts for 10% of all general surgery procedures in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) (10,000 inguinal herniorrhaphies performed per year). There are many different techniques currently in use for repairing inguinal hernias and with the advent of laparoscopy, yet another technique is being advocated. Laparoscopic repair has been reported in some studies to be superior to open repair because of less pain and earlier return to work. However, laparoscopic repair requires a general or regional anesthetic and expensive equipment and supplies to perform. There is also evidence that open tension-free mesh repair may have results similar to laparoscopic repair for these patient centered outcome measures. The general acceptance of this procedure, especially in the VHA, has not been uniform. Furthermore, no randomized trial of sufficient size and power to be conclusive has been done to set forth the operative gold standard for hernia repair.
Objectives: To determine whether open tension-free herniorrhaphy when compared with laparoscopic herniorrhaphy can achieve equal or better recurrence rates and lower costs while achieving equivalent outcomes for patient-centered measures.
Methods: This multi-center VA cooperative study is enrolling 2200 men with inguinal hernia and randomizing them to one of two operative techniques: open tension-free (Lichtenstein) repair, or laparoscopic preperitoneal repair. The primary outcome measure is recurrence at two years. Secondary outcome measures are complications, pain, time to return to normal activities, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, caregiver burden, and cost. The role of comorbidity in the outcome will also be determined. The sample size will permit at least 80% power to detect a difference of 3% in 2-year recurrence rates between the two surgical procedures. Fourteen VAMCs are randomizing the 2200 patients over a 3-year accrual period. The study will also have a 2-year follow-up period. All patients will be followed to the end of the study so that follow-up will range from 2-5 years (average 3.5 years).
On November 29, 2001, the Hines Cooperative Studies Human Rights Committee and the Data and Safety Monitoring Board met to review the data from CSP #456. Both committees determined that there were sufficient data to complete the trial without enrolling any additional patients and recommended that enrollment be stopped. There were no safety concerns. Approximately 2,165 patients of a targeted 2,200 had been enrolled at this point. All sites were notified of this within 24 hours of the action.
Main Manuscript:
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Other | Procedure: Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesisOpen and laparoscopic herniorrhaphy |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Men with inguinal hernia.
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesisCompare the effect of two typs of operative treatment of inguinal hernia. | Procedure or surgery | 1 |
Primary outcome
To assess recurrence rates, operative complications, pain, convalescent time, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, and health care utilization and costs.
Time frame: Two years
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Apr 2011.
- Results publication: PubMed 15107485Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, Reda D, Henderson W; Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program 456 Investigators. Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med. 2004 Apr 29;350(18):1819-27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040093. Epub 2004 Apr 25.
Related trials for Hernia
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Pilot Study on the Effectiveness and Safety of OPTILENE® SILVER MESH ELASTIC in Prevention of Surgical Site Infection (SSI) and Incisional Hernia (IH)
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm, Morbid Obesity
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
North American Fetal Therapy Network Prospective Registry for Long-term Outcome Following Fetoscopic Endoluminal Tracheal Occlusion in Severe Left and Right Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia
Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia
Recruiting
Permanent Versus Slowly Dissolving Stitches for Non-Mesh (Shouldice) Groin Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia
Recruiting
Fetal Repair of Complex Gastroschisis: A Safety and Feasibility Trial
Gastroschisis
Recruiting
Duramesh Versus Minimally Invasive IPOM for High-Risk Umbilical Hernia Repairs
Umbilical Hernia, Ventral Hernia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Leigh A. Neumayer study chair
VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City
14 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Standardized tension-free herniorrhaphy with prosthesis in people with Hernia, run by US Department of Veterans Affairs at 14 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Apr 2011. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 14 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
To assess recurrence rates, operative complications, pain, convalescent time, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, and health care utilization and costs. (time frame: Two years). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00032448, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Apr 2011.