Cesarean Delivery ProceduresNCT00470288
Randomized Controlled Trial of Bladder Flap vs.None
A study testing bladder flap during cesarean section in people with Cesarean Delivery Procedures, run by Mountain Area Health Organization Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Objective: To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none. Hypotheses: Operative time will be reduced with the elimination of a bladder flap during cesarean delivery and intra-operative and post-operative morbidity will not be significantly different. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Cesarean Delivery Procedures
- What is being tested?
- bladder flap during cesarean section
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 123 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2005to Jun 2007
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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 Any age
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Cesarean delivery at >=35 weeks gestation;
- Able to provide informed consent
Who cannot join
- Vaginal delivery;
- Delivery < 35 weeks gestation;
- STAT surgery;
- Unable to provide consent;
- Medical complication/condition incompatable with random asiignment
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Mission Hospitals
Asheville, North Carolina, 28801
About this study
Objective: To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none. Hypotheses: Operative time will be reduced with the elimination of a bladder flap during cesarean delivery and intra-operative and post-operative morbidity will not be significantly different.
Patients >= 35 wks gestation undergoing cesarean delivery will be randomized to bladder flap vs. none. Primary outcome is operative time (start to delivery); secondary outcomes include: injuries, EBL, intra-operative and post-operative complications,pain medication, hospital stay duration.
Read the detailed description
- Title A Randomized Controlled Trial of Bladder Flap vs. None in Cesarean Section
- Background (This section should be used to provide a rationale for the conduct of the study. Refer to existent or preliminary studies as necessary) The standard of care in performing cesarean delivery is to perform a bladder flap in the procedures.1 The creation of a bladder flap essentially allows a surgeon to create a space between the uterus and the bladder so that he/she has better access to the lower portion of the uterus where a low transverse incision can be made. This procedure involves making a superficial incision into the peritoneum, or the cell lining of the abdominal cavity, and the moving the bladder down and away from the lower portion of the uterus. A retractor or a bladder blade is then inserted into this space to hold the bladder away from the uterus (see Appendix A).2 Use of the bladder flap in cesarean delivery dates back to 1878 in the pre-antibiotic era,3 and theoretically, the bladder flap allows better access to the low portion of the uterus while decreasing risk of bladder injury and infection. However, several recent but small studies suggest the inclusion of the bladder flap confers no advantage and may actually contribute to greater morbidity postoperatively. 4-5 Additionally, the incidence of bladder injuries is 0.3%, and most injuries resulted during the formation of the bladder flap.6 The evidence from these studies are limited by the inclusion of other modifications in surgical procedures and a lack of replication of results, respectively. Thus there is insufficient evidence to either support or reject the inclusion of bladder flaps in cesarean deliveries (Evidence grade C).7-8
- Specific Objectives (Enumerate the objectives and nature of the measured end-points. Justify the use of surrogate clinical end-points as necessary)
- To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none.
- Study design (Explicate the nature of the study - observational vs experimental. Differentiate between cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional and randomized clinical trials. For the latter, provide sufficient supporting justification for the experimental arm. If it is a placebo-controlled trial, please state whether clinical equipoise exists between the placebo and experimental arm.) Randomized controlled trial.
Endpoints:
Total operating time (continuous) and Time of delivery to end of surgery (continuous) Estimated blood loss (continuous) Post operative fever (categorical) Bladder injury (categorical) Pre- and post-operative pain medication (continuous) and Analog pain scale (continuous)
- Subject Selection (Include an enumeration of inclusion and exclusion criteria)
MAHEC patients presenting for delivery at Mission Hospitals requiring a cesarean section
Inclusion Exclusion Cesarean section All vaginal deliveries
≥ 35 weeks gestation < 35 weeks gestation Able to provide consent for medical treatment Urgent cesarean section Unable to provide consent for medical treatment Medical complications prohibitive of bladder flap Medical complications prohibitive of no bladder flap
- Statistical methods, data analysis and interpretation (Include the factors considered in determining an appropriate sample size) Sample size of 100 per group based on an estimated mean difference of 5 minutes on total operating time (study arm 45±12.5 vs. bladder flap arm 50±12.5; Power=080; alpha=0.05; two-tailed).4
Per protocol analysis utilizing analysis of variance or for continuous variables and chi square analysis of categorical variables.
- Study Procedures (Describe the chronological flow of the study, using schematic diagrams as necessary. Distinguish clearly between treatment-related [medically-indicated] and research-related procedures the subject will undergo)
All OB patients presenting at L\&D for delivery will be approached for informed consent. consenting patients for whom a cesarean delivery is medically indicated will be randomized to bladder flap vs. none. Patients unable to consent for medical treatment or not wishing to consent for the project will be excluded. Consenting patients for whom a cesarean is medically indicated will be randomly assigned to bladder flap vs. by previously allocation of subject number. Patients will undergo assigned procedure unless excluded at the discretion of the surgeons who determine the alternate procedure is medically indicated. Patients undergoing the assigned procedure will have all data extracted from hospital medical records and entered into SPSS for a per-protocol analysis.
- Conditions
- Cesarean Delivery Procedures
- Being tested
- bladder flap during cesarean section
- Keywords
- cesarean delivery, bladder flaps
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
bladder flap during cesarean sectionProcedure or surgery
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
operative time: start of surgery to delivery of infant
Measured: immediate: during cesarean surgery
Secondary outcomes (8)
estimated blood loss
Measured: immediate
bladder injuries
Measured: immediate
other intra-operative complications
Measured: immediate
intra-operative transfusions
Measured: immediate
post-operative complications
Measured: post-op hospitalization
medication use: antibiotics and narcotics
Measured: post-op hospitalization
duration of post-op hospitalization
Measured: post-op hospitalization
readmisison post discharge
Measured: 6 weeks post-op
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 May 2007 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2005
- Study completionJun 2007 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cesarean Delivery ProceduresStudies 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Enrolment
- 123 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Mountain Area Health Organization Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Eric C Helms, MD, Principal investigator, MAHEC OB/GYNShelley L Galvin, MA, Study director, MAHEC OB/GYN
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00470288
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 05-10-477
- Status last verified
- Apr 2007
- First submitted
- 4 May 2007
- Last updated
- 7 May 2007
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Hohlagschwandtner M, Ruecklinger E, Husslein P, Joura EA. Is the formation of a bladder flap at cesarean necessary? A randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;98(6):1089-92. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01570-8.
PubMed 11755558Wood RM, Simon H, Oz AU. Pelosi-type vs. traditional cesarean delivery. A prospective comparison. J Reprod Med. 1999 Sep;44(9):788-95.
PubMed 10509303Eisenkop SM, Richman R, Platt LD, Paul RH. Urinary tract injury during cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol. 1982 Nov;60(5):591-6.
PubMed 7145252
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 May 2007. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Randomized Controlled Trial of Bladder Flap vs.None
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00470288
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 05-10-477
- Conditions
- Cesarean Delivery Procedures
- Keywords
- cesarean delivery, bladder flaps
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 123 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Mountain Area Health Organization CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Oct 2005
- Study completion
- Jun 2007 (estimated)
- First posted
- 7 May 2007 (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.
Objective: To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none. Hypotheses: Operative time will be reduced with the elimination of a bladder flap during cesarean delivery and intra-operative and post-operative morbidity will not be significantly different.
Patients >= 35 wks gestation undergoing cesarean delivery will be randomized to bladder flap vs. none. Primary outcome is operative time (start to delivery); secondary outcomes include: injuries, EBL, intra-operative and post-operative complications,pain medication, hospital stay duration.
Detailed description
- Title A Randomized Controlled Trial of Bladder Flap vs. None in Cesarean Section
- Background (This section should be used to provide a rationale for the conduct of the study. Refer to existent or preliminary studies as necessary) The standard of care in performing cesarean delivery is to perform a bladder flap in the procedures.1 The creation of a bladder flap essentially allows a surgeon to create a space between the uterus and the bladder so that he/she has better access to the lower portion of the uterus where a low transverse incision can be made. This procedure involves making a superficial incision into the peritoneum, or the cell lining of the abdominal cavity, and the moving the bladder down and away from the lower portion of the uterus. A retractor or a bladder blade is then inserted into this space to hold the bladder away from the uterus (see Appendix A).2 Use of the bladder flap in cesarean delivery dates back to 1878 in the pre-antibiotic era,3 and theoretically, the bladder flap allows better access to the low portion of the uterus while decreasing risk of bladder injury and infection. However, several recent but small studies suggest the inclusion of the bladder flap confers no advantage and may actually contribute to greater morbidity postoperatively. 4-5 Additionally, the incidence of bladder injuries is 0.3%, and most injuries resulted during the formation of the bladder flap.6 The evidence from these studies are limited by the inclusion of other modifications in surgical procedures and a lack of replication of results, respectively. Thus there is insufficient evidence to either support or reject the inclusion of bladder flaps in cesarean deliveries (Evidence grade C).7-8
- Specific Objectives (Enumerate the objectives and nature of the measured end-points. Justify the use of surrogate clinical end-points as necessary)
- To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none.
- Study design (Explicate the nature of the study - observational vs experimental. Differentiate between cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional and randomized clinical trials. For the latter, provide sufficient supporting justification for the experimental arm. If it is a placebo-controlled trial, please state whether clinical equipoise exists between the placebo and experimental arm.) Randomized controlled trial.
Endpoints:
Total operating time (continuous) and Time of delivery to end of surgery (continuous) Estimated blood loss (continuous) Post operative fever (categorical) Bladder injury (categorical) Pre- and post-operative pain medication (continuous) and Analog pain scale (continuous)
- Subject Selection (Include an enumeration of inclusion and exclusion criteria)
MAHEC patients presenting for delivery at Mission Hospitals requiring a cesarean section
Inclusion Exclusion Cesarean section All vaginal deliveries
≥ 35 weeks gestation < 35 weeks gestation Able to provide consent for medical treatment Urgent cesarean section Unable to provide consent for medical treatment Medical complications prohibitive of bladder flap Medical complications prohibitive of no bladder flap
- Statistical methods, data analysis and interpretation (Include the factors considered in determining an appropriate sample size) Sample size of 100 per group based on an estimated mean difference of 5 minutes on total operating time (study arm 45±12.5 vs. bladder flap arm 50±12.5; Power=080; alpha=0.05; two-tailed).4
Per protocol analysis utilizing analysis of variance or for continuous variables and chi square analysis of categorical variables.
- Study Procedures (Describe the chronological flow of the study, using schematic diagrams as necessary. Distinguish clearly between treatment-related [medically-indicated] and research-related procedures the subject will undergo)
All OB patients presenting at L\&D for delivery will be approached for informed consent. consenting patients for whom a cesarean delivery is medically indicated will be randomized to bladder flap vs. none. Patients unable to consent for medical treatment or not wishing to consent for the project will be excluded. Consenting patients for whom a cesarean is medically indicated will be randomly assigned to bladder flap vs. by previously allocation of subject number. Patients will undergo assigned procedure unless excluded at the discretion of the surgeons who determine the alternate procedure is medically indicated. Patients undergoing the assigned procedure will have all data extracted from hospital medical records and entered into SPSS for a per-protocol analysis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Cesarean delivery at >=35 weeks gestation;
- Able to provide informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Vaginal delivery;
- Delivery < 35 weeks gestation;
- STAT surgery;
- Unable to provide consent;
- Medical complication/condition incompatable with random asiignment
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 |
|---|---|---|
| bladder flap during cesarean section | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
operative time: start of surgery to delivery of infant
Time frame: immediate: during cesarean surgery
8 secondary outcomes
estimated blood loss
Time frame: immediate
bladder injuries
Time frame: immediate
other intra-operative complications
Time frame: immediate
intra-operative transfusions
Time frame: immediate
post-operative complications
Time frame: post-op hospitalization
medication use: antibiotics and narcotics
Time frame: post-op hospitalization
duration of post-op hospitalization
Time frame: post-op hospitalization
readmisison post discharge
Time frame: 6 weeks post-op
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 May 2007.
- Background: PubMed 11755558Hohlagschwandtner M, Ruecklinger E, Husslein P, Joura EA. Is the formation of a bladder flap at cesarean necessary? A randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;98(6):1089-92. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01570-8.
- Background: PubMed 10509303Wood RM, Simon H, Oz AU. Pelosi-type vs. traditional cesarean delivery. A prospective comparison. J Reprod Med. 1999 Sep;44(9):788-95.
- Background: PubMed 7145252Eisenkop SM, Richman R, Platt LD, Paul RH. Urinary tract injury during cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol. 1982 Nov;60(5):591-6.
Related trials for Cesarean Delivery Procedures
Recruiting
Lateral QL Block vs Intrathecal Morphine for Cesarean Section
Anesthesia, Postoperative Pain
RecruitingPhase 4
Adding Dexmedetomidine or Clonidine to Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery
Cesarean Delivery, Cesarean Delivery; Neuraxial Opioids
Recruiting
Reducing Chronic Pain Following Cesarean Delivery
Chronic Pain, Cesarean Section Complications
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
OB VEGA-Phenylephrine vs Norepinephrine Outcomes
Hypotension During Surgery, Cesarean Birth
Recruiting
Hyperangulated vs. Macintosh Style Blades for Intubation in Obstetric Patients
Obstetric, Cesarean Birth
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.
Eric C Helms, MD principal investigator
MAHEC OB/GYN
Shelley L Galvin, MA study director
MAHEC OB/GYN
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing bladder flap during cesarean section in people with Cesarean Delivery Procedures, run by Mountain Area Health Organization Center at 1 site 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 2 inclusion and 5 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 May 2007. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site 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.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Eric C Helms, MD (828-771-5501, Eric.helms@mahec.net), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
operative time: start of surgery to delivery of infant (time frame: immediate: during cesarean surgery). 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 NCT00470288, which also lists 3 linked publications.
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 7 May 2007.