AzTrials
AzTrials

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.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

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.

Eric C Helms, MD contact

828-771-5501

Eric.helms@mahec.net

Shelley L Galvin, MA contact

828-771-5501

Shelley.Galvin@mahec.net

United States1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Mission Hospitals

    Asheville, North Carolina, 28801

    Recruiting

Other trials in United States

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
  1. Title A Randomized Controlled Trial of Bladder Flap vs. None in Cesarean Section
  2. 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
  3. Specific Objectives (Enumerate the objectives and nature of the measured end-points. Justify the use of surrogate clinical end-points as necessary)
  4. To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none.
  5. 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)

  1. 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

  1. 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.

  1. 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.

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.

  1. operative time: start of surgery to delivery of infant

    Measured: immediate: during cesarean surgery

Secondary outcomes (8)
  1. estimated blood loss

    Measured: immediate

  2. bladder injuries

    Measured: immediate

  3. other intra-operative complications

    Measured: immediate

  4. intra-operative transfusions

    Measured: immediate

  5. post-operative complications

    Measured: post-op hospitalization

  6. medication use: antibiotics and narcotics

    Measured: post-op hospitalization

  7. duration of post-op hospitalization

    Measured: post-op hospitalization

  8. 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.

  1. First posted7 May 2007 (estimated)
  2. Study startOct 2005
  3. Study completionJun 2007 (estimated)

Resources

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)
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 11755558
  • Wood RM, Simon H, Oz AU. Pelosi-type vs. traditional cesarean delivery. A prospective comparison. J Reprod Med. 1999 Sep;44(9):788-95.

    PubMed 10509303
  • Eisenkop SM, Richman R, Platt LD, Paul RH. Urinary tract injury during cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol. 1982 Nov;60(5):591-6.

    PubMed 7145252

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.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in