Surgical Wound InfectionNCT01836237
The Use of Wound Protector in Whipple's Procedure With Intrabiliary Stent
A study testing Alexis - a wound protector in people with Surgical Wound Infection and Pancreatic Neoplasms, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
Background: There are no published studies regarding the use of wound protectors in the context of surgical site infection (SSI) rates among patients receiving a pancreatoduodenectomy (Whipple) with preoperatively placed intrabiliary stents. In high volume experiences, the SSI rate is 40-50% within this cohort. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Surgical Wound Infection, Pancreatic Neoplasms
- What is being tested?
- Alexis - a wound protector
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 107 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Feb 2013to Oct 2016
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult patients, 18 years or older, undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy with intrabiliary stents in place at Foothills Medical centre, Calgary, Alberta.
Who cannot join
- Patients will be excluded if they have had long-term steroid use or are unable to give informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Use of Wound Protectors to Prevent Surgical Site Infection for Whipples (Pancreatoduodenectomy) With Intrabiliary Stents: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Background: There are no published studies regarding the use of wound protectors in the context of surgical site infection (SSI) rates among patients receiving a pancreatoduodenectomy (Whipple) with preoperatively placed intrabiliary stents. In high volume experiences, the SSI rate is 40-50% within this cohort. In Calgary, preoperative biliary stent placement for bile duct decompression represents the norm given typical surgical wait times. In addition to having higher associated lengths of hospital stay, ICU admissions, hospital re-admissions, and overall mortality, patients with SSI are also delayed, and often omitted, in their progression to critical oncologic adjuvant chemotherapy. As a result, SSI remain crucial and devastating complications for pancreas surgeons and their patients alike.
Methods: The investigators will complete a randomized controlled trial evaluating the rate of SSI in adult patients who undergo a pancreatoduodenectomy following biliary stent placement when wound protectors are employed versus no wound protector use. This trial will employ block randomization. All four University of Calgary Heapato-Pancreatico-Biliary (HPB) surgeons will participate with a planned inclusion of all patients scheduled to undergo a pancreatoduodenectomy.
Read more
Analysis: The investigators will use an intention to treat approach to the analysis. Categorical baseline data will be analyzed using the Fisher exact probability test. Non-categorical baseline data will be analyzed using the Student t test. SSI rates will be determined using the Fisher exact probability test.
Hypothesis: Wound protectors will reduce the SSI rate in patients undergoing a pancreatoduodenectomy with preoperatively placed intrabiliary stents.
Potential Impact: Given the tremendous oncologic, economic, and psychological impact of SSI following pancreatoduodenectomy, the epidemic incidence of this complication must be reduced. The additional crippling effect of refusing (Medicare) payment for any patient who receives a SSI in the United States has launched all techniques and analyses that can potentially reduce this complication into the National health care agenda. In Canada, health care utilization and economics are always a relevant and ever expanding area of importance. It is crucial that the investigators reduce complications such as SSI, regardless of individual payer sources.
Read the detailed description
Introduction
The Department of Surgery at the University of Calgary has a long and proud tradition of research surrounding surgical site infections (SSI). More specifically, former surgeon and Department Chair Dr. Peter Cruse prospectively studied 23,649 surgical wounds following operative intervention. This massive study remains unmatched in size by a single institution publication. Dr. Cruse and Ms. Rosemary Foord demonstrated a decrease in SSI rates with the pre-surgical use of hexachlorophene wash and by not shaving the surgical site1. They observed an increase in SSI rates with advanced age, use of drains, prolonged hospital stay before the operation, and longer operative times. Dr. Cruse is directly responsible for confirming the validity of the wound classification system currently in use throughout the world (clean, clean-contaminated, contaminated, and dirty). We propose to carry on the tradition of this line of investigation, reinforcing Calgary as a world leader in SSI research.
SSI are a frequent and costly source of post-operative morbidity. They are the most common complication following gastrointestinal and biliary tract surgery, occurring in 5-30% of patients. SSI are associated with a two-fold increased risk of in-hospital mortality, a 50% increase in intensive care admission, a 6-day mean increase in hospital stay, and a five-fold increased rate of readmission. SSI also have additional and highly negative consequences in the treatment of oncology patients. More specifically, medical oncologists wait until all operative wounds are entirely healed prior to beginning adjuvant chemotherapy. This delay is both oncologically concerning, as well as psychologically destructive to highly stressed patients with poor associated survivals. Furthermore, with a significant SSI, this delay often leads to a total omission of adjuvant therapies as a whole. The estimated increased cost per SSI ranges from $1,300 to $5,000 in the United States. In Canada, a 1998 study estimated $3,937 per infection, resulting from increased hospital stay, as well as emergency department and clinic visits. The implications of these costs have now become paramount given that both U.S. Medicare and Medicaid currently deny any reimbursement for patients who obtain an SSI while admitted to hospital. In addition, patients who develop SSI experience psychosocial distress, loss of income, and loss of productivity. Prevention of SSI is therefore a vitally important goal in delivering quality care to patients. The SSI rate is 40-50% in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy with intrabiliary stents, the population of interest for this study.
Wound protectors are devices designed to protect the abdominal wound tissue edges from contamination and trauma during laparotomy. A major reason for their conception and use is a theoretical reduction in risk of SSI. Various devices with similar intent have been described since the 1960s, falling into two main design categories: (1) Those with an internal and external ring connected by impervious plastic, and (2) Those with a single, internal ring connected to a drape which extends outward, over the wound edges and onto the abdomen where they are affixed with adhesive or clips.A recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted by a team led by the Principal Investigator to evaluate whether impervious plastic wound protectors reduce the risk of surgical site infection following gastrointestinal and biliary surgery. Six studies representing 1,008 patients were included. Wound protectors were associated with a 45% decrease in SSI (p = 0.04). The Alexis Wound Protector, a ring based model, had evidence of superiority to other products and has been selected for this study based on this finding.
Methods
Recruitment: Contact information for study candidates will be obtained by the project's research fellow from the offices of the participating (4) surgeons. Patients will be contacted prior to their surgery by the research fellow and will be provided information regarding the study. Patients who consent to participate will be randomized.
Randomization process: This study is a simple, two-arm randomized clinical trial (RCT) with block randomization. Allocation will be concealed before the patient enters study. Patients will be randomized by the Research fellow following consent. Allocation will be provided to surgeon in a sealed envelope to be opened immediately before surgery. Patients and the data analyst will be blind to allocation; the surgeons cannot be blinded. Charts will be blinded for data abstraction.
Data collection: Information will be collected by chart review from the operative report and patient records by the research fellow in the Department of Surgery.
Data elements to be collected include:
Date of birth, Sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, Surgeon, Site (if more than one facility), Fellow/resident/clerk present (y/n), Surgical procedure, Antibiotic prophylaxis received (y/n) and time given, Information about repeat antibiotic prophylaxis (for longer surgeries), Antibiotic type/combination, Type of wound protector and manufacturer, Prep type (ETOH based, chlorhexidine based, iodine based), Hair removal, Medications given, Packing, Drains, Wound classification, Wound closure technique \& dressing type, Length of surgery, Surgical suite infection control factors (e.g. UV, OR ventilation) if these differ, Transfusions,
Patient records:
Current use of corticosteroids/immune suppressant, Preoperative chemotherapy, Smoking history, Co-morbidities (diabetes, hypertension, etc.), Body Mass Index (BMI).
The presence of an SSI will be determined according to guidelines developed by the Centers for Disease Control. More specifically, SSI is defined as being the presence of at least one of the following:
- Purulent drainage, with or without laboratory conformation, from the superficial incision.
- Organisms isolated from an aseptically obtained culture of fluid from the superficial incision.
- At least one of the following signs or symptoms of infection: pain or tenderness, localized swelling, redness and superficial incision is deliberately opened by surgeon, unless incision is culture-negative.
- Diagnosis of superficial incisional SSI by the surgeon or attending physician.
Analysis
We will use an intention to treat approach to the analysis to avoid the effects of crossover and dropout. To achieve a power (superiority trial) of 90%, and alpha of 0.05 with a 5% crossover and a 40% expected SSI rate in control versus 10% in wound protector groups, the total sample size is 78 (i.e. 39 in each arm).
Resources
This project will capitalize on an existing research team who can work collaboratively with the Principal Investigator and research assistant to carry out the project effectively and efficiently. The current research team includes a clinical research fellow with experience recruiting research participants from this patient population and a project manager who can assist with ethics applications, manuscript writing and reporting. Additionally, the Principal Investigator will benefit from mentorship by an experienced investigator who can provide guidance not only on methodology, interpretation of data and publication strategies, but also on the day-to-day logistics of running a research project.
- Conditions
- Surgical Wound Infection, Pancreatic Neoplasms
- Being tested
- Alexis - a wound protector
- Keywords
- Surgical site infection rate, Wound protector use, Whipple
- Medical subject headings
- Surgical Wound Infection, Pancreatic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Alexis - a wound protectorDevice
Alexis is a double ring, self-retaining circumferential device that is designed to protect incision site during surgical manipulation.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Alexis group | Experimental | In experimental group patients, the surgeon will use Alexis - a wound protector during surgery. Receives: Device: Alexis - a wound protector |
| Control group | No intervention | In no intervention group patients, the surgeon will not use any wound protector during surgery. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Rate
SSI will be evaluated on a daily basis by residents, the research/clinical fellow and/or Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Team by visual inspection of each wound.
Measured: 1 month
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Apr 2013 (estimated)
- Study startFeb 2013
- Primary completionJun 2016
- Study completionOct 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (16)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Surgical Wound InfectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of CalgaryThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Calgary
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. Chad G. Ball, University of Calgary
- Investigators
- Chad G. Ball, MD, Principal investigator, University of Calgary
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01836237
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- E - 24807
- Status last verified
- Oct 2017
- First submitted
- 16 Apr 2013
- Last updated
- 26 Oct 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Cruse PJ, Foord R. A five-year prospective study of 23,649 surgical wounds. Arch Surg. 1973 Aug;107(2):206-10. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1973.01350200078018. No abstract available.
PubMed 4719566Murray BW, Huerta S, Dineen S, Anthony T. Surgical site infection in colorectal surgery: a review of the nonpharmacologic tools of prevention. J Am Coll Surg. 2010 Dec;211(6):812-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.07.025. Epub 2010 Oct 25. No abstract available.
PubMed 20980173Horiuchi T, Tanishima H, Tamagawa K, Matsuura I, Nakai H, Shouno Y, Tsubakihara H, Inoue M, Tabuse K. Randomized, controlled investigation of the anti-infective properties of the Alexis retractor/protector of incision sites. J Trauma. 2007 Jan;62(1):212-5. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000196704.78785.ae.
PubMed 17215757Kirkland KB, Briggs JP, Trivette SL, Wilkinson WE, Sexton DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999 Nov;20(11):725-30. doi: 10.1086/501572.
PubMed 10580621Dimick JB, Chen SL, Taheri PA, Henderson WG, Khuri SF, Campbell DA Jr. Hospital costs associated with surgical complications: a report from the private-sector National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2004 Oct;199(4):531-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2004.05.276.
PubMed 15454134Zhan C, Miller MR. Excess length of stay, charges, and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization. JAMA. 2003 Oct 8;290(14):1868-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.14.1868.
PubMed 14532315Zoutman D, McDonald S, Vethanayagan D. Total and attributable costs of surgical-wound infections at a Canadian tertiary-care center. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1998 Apr;19(4):254-9. doi: 10.1086/647804.
PubMed 9605274Reid K, Pockney P, Draganic B, Smith SR. Barrier wound protection decreases surgical site infection in open elective colorectal surgery: a randomized clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010 Oct;53(10):1374-80. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181ed3f7e.
PubMed 20847618Paquette IM, Swenson BR, Kwaan MR, Mellgren AF, Madoff RD. Thirty-day outcomes in patients treated with en bloc colectomy and pancreatectomy for locally advanced carcinoma of the colon. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Mar;16(3):581-6. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1691-7. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
PubMed 21956432Kimura F, Shimizu H, Yoshidome H, Ohtsuka M, Kato A, Yoshitomi H, Nozawa S, Furukawa K, Mitsuhashi N, Sawada S, Takeuchi D, Ambiru S, Miyazaki M. Increased plasma levels of IL-6 and IL-8 are associated with surgical site infection after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas. 2006 Mar;32(2):178-85. doi: 10.1097/01.mpa.0000202959.63977.5c.
PubMed 16552338Lee P, Waxman K, Taylor B et al. Use of wound-protection system and postoperative wound-infection rates in open appendectomy. Arch Surg 2009; 144:872-875.
Edwards JP, Ho AL, Tee MC, Dixon E, Ball CG. Wound protectors reduce surgical site infection: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2012 Jul;256(1):53-9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182570372.
PubMed 22584694Sookhai S, Redmond HP, Deasy JM. Impervious wound-edge protector to reduce postoperative wound infection: a randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. 1999 May 8;353(9164):1585. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)00950-2. No abstract available.
PubMed 10334259Gamble SS, Hopton DS. Plastic ring wound drapes in elective colorectal surgery. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1984 Jul;29(4):232-3. No abstract available.
PubMed 6384492Katthagen BD, Zamani P, Jung W. [Effect of surgical draping on bacterial contamination in the surgical field]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1992 May-Jun;130(3):230-5. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1040144. German.
PubMed 1642040
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Oct 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Use of Wound Protectors to Prevent Surgical Site Infection for Whipples (Pancreatoduodenectomy) With Intrabiliary Stents: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01836237
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- E - 24807
- Conditions
- Surgical Wound Infection, Pancreatic Neoplasms
- Keywords
- Surgical site infection rate, Wound protector use, Whipple
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of CalgaryUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Feb 2013 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 19 Apr 2013 (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.
Background: There are no published studies regarding the use of wound protectors in the context of surgical site infection (SSI) rates among patients receiving a pancreatoduodenectomy (Whipple) with preoperatively placed intrabiliary stents. In high volume experiences, the SSI rate is 40-50% within this cohort. In Calgary, preoperative biliary stent placement for bile duct decompression represents the norm given typical surgical wait times. In addition to having higher associated lengths of hospital stay, ICU admissions, hospital re-admissions, and overall mortality, patients with SSI are also delayed, and often omitted, in their progression to critical oncologic adjuvant chemotherapy. As a result, SSI remain crucial and devastating complications for pancreas surgeons and their patients alike.
Methods: The investigators will complete a randomized controlled trial evaluating the rate of SSI in adult patients who undergo a pancreatoduodenectomy following biliary stent placement when wound protectors are employed versus no wound protector use. This trial will employ block randomization. All four University of Calgary Heapato-Pancreatico-Biliary (HPB) surgeons will participate with a planned inclusion of all patients scheduled to undergo a pancreatoduodenectomy.
Analysis: The investigators will use an intention to treat approach to the analysis. Categorical baseline data will be analyzed using the Fisher exact probability test. Non-categorical baseline data will be analyzed using the Student t test. SSI rates will be determined using the Fisher exact probability test.
Hypothesis: Wound protectors will reduce the SSI rate in patients undergoing a pancreatoduodenectomy with preoperatively placed intrabiliary stents.
Potential Impact: Given the tremendous oncologic, economic, and psychological impact of SSI following pancreatoduodenectomy, the epidemic incidence of this complication must be reduced. The additional crippling effect of refusing (Medicare) payment for any patient who receives a SSI in the United States has launched all techniques and analyses that can potentially reduce this complication into the National health care agenda. In Canada, health care utilization and economics are always a relevant and ever expanding area of importance. It is crucial that the investigators reduce complications such as SSI, regardless of individual payer sources.
Detailed description
Introduction
The Department of Surgery at the University of Calgary has a long and proud tradition of research surrounding surgical site infections (SSI). More specifically, former surgeon and Department Chair Dr. Peter Cruse prospectively studied 23,649 surgical wounds following operative intervention. This massive study remains unmatched in size by a single institution publication. Dr. Cruse and Ms. Rosemary Foord demonstrated a decrease in SSI rates with the pre-surgical use of hexachlorophene wash and by not shaving the surgical site1. They observed an increase in SSI rates with advanced age, use of drains, prolonged hospital stay before the operation, and longer operative times. Dr. Cruse is directly responsible for confirming the validity of the wound classification system currently in use throughout the world (clean, clean-contaminated, contaminated, and dirty). We propose to carry on the tradition of this line of investigation, reinforcing Calgary as a world leader in SSI research.
SSI are a frequent and costly source of post-operative morbidity. They are the most common complication following gastrointestinal and biliary tract surgery, occurring in 5-30% of patients. SSI are associated with a two-fold increased risk of in-hospital mortality, a 50% increase in intensive care admission, a 6-day mean increase in hospital stay, and a five-fold increased rate of readmission. SSI also have additional and highly negative consequences in the treatment of oncology patients. More specifically, medical oncologists wait until all operative wounds are entirely healed prior to beginning adjuvant chemotherapy. This delay is both oncologically concerning, as well as psychologically destructive to highly stressed patients with poor associated survivals. Furthermore, with a significant SSI, this delay often leads to a total omission of adjuvant therapies as a whole. The estimated increased cost per SSI ranges from $1,300 to $5,000 in the United States. In Canada, a 1998 study estimated $3,937 per infection, resulting from increased hospital stay, as well as emergency department and clinic visits. The implications of these costs have now become paramount given that both U.S. Medicare and Medicaid currently deny any reimbursement for patients who obtain an SSI while admitted to hospital. In addition, patients who develop SSI experience psychosocial distress, loss of income, and loss of productivity. Prevention of SSI is therefore a vitally important goal in delivering quality care to patients. The SSI rate is 40-50% in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy with intrabiliary stents, the population of interest for this study.
Wound protectors are devices designed to protect the abdominal wound tissue edges from contamination and trauma during laparotomy. A major reason for their conception and use is a theoretical reduction in risk of SSI. Various devices with similar intent have been described since the 1960s, falling into two main design categories: (1) Those with an internal and external ring connected by impervious plastic, and (2) Those with a single, internal ring connected to a drape which extends outward, over the wound edges and onto the abdomen where they are affixed with adhesive or clips.A recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted by a team led by the Principal Investigator to evaluate whether impervious plastic wound protectors reduce the risk of surgical site infection following gastrointestinal and biliary surgery. Six studies representing 1,008 patients were included. Wound protectors were associated with a 45% decrease in SSI (p = 0.04). The Alexis Wound Protector, a ring based model, had evidence of superiority to other products and has been selected for this study based on this finding.
Methods
Recruitment: Contact information for study candidates will be obtained by the project's research fellow from the offices of the participating (4) surgeons. Patients will be contacted prior to their surgery by the research fellow and will be provided information regarding the study. Patients who consent to participate will be randomized.
Randomization process: This study is a simple, two-arm randomized clinical trial (RCT) with block randomization. Allocation will be concealed before the patient enters study. Patients will be randomized by the Research fellow following consent. Allocation will be provided to surgeon in a sealed envelope to be opened immediately before surgery. Patients and the data analyst will be blind to allocation; the surgeons cannot be blinded. Charts will be blinded for data abstraction.
Data collection: Information will be collected by chart review from the operative report and patient records by the research fellow in the Department of Surgery.
Data elements to be collected include:
Date of birth, Sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, Surgeon, Site (if more than one facility), Fellow/resident/clerk present (y/n), Surgical procedure, Antibiotic prophylaxis received (y/n) and time given, Information about repeat antibiotic prophylaxis (for longer surgeries), Antibiotic type/combination, Type of wound protector and manufacturer, Prep type (ETOH based, chlorhexidine based, iodine based), Hair removal, Medications given, Packing, Drains, Wound classification, Wound closure technique \& dressing type, Length of surgery, Surgical suite infection control factors (e.g. UV, OR ventilation) if these differ, Transfusions,
Patient records:
Current use of corticosteroids/immune suppressant, Preoperative chemotherapy, Smoking history, Co-morbidities (diabetes, hypertension, etc.), Body Mass Index (BMI).
The presence of an SSI will be determined according to guidelines developed by the Centers for Disease Control. More specifically, SSI is defined as being the presence of at least one of the following:
- Purulent drainage, with or without laboratory conformation, from the superficial incision.
- Organisms isolated from an aseptically obtained culture of fluid from the superficial incision.
- At least one of the following signs or symptoms of infection: pain or tenderness, localized swelling, redness and superficial incision is deliberately opened by surgeon, unless incision is culture-negative.
- Diagnosis of superficial incisional SSI by the surgeon or attending physician.
Analysis
We will use an intention to treat approach to the analysis to avoid the effects of crossover and dropout. To achieve a power (superiority trial) of 90%, and alpha of 0.05 with a 5% crossover and a 40% expected SSI rate in control versus 10% in wound protector groups, the total sample size is 78 (i.e. 39 in each arm).
Resources
This project will capitalize on an existing research team who can work collaboratively with the Principal Investigator and research assistant to carry out the project effectively and efficiently. The current research team includes a clinical research fellow with experience recruiting research participants from this patient population and a project manager who can assist with ethics applications, manuscript writing and reporting. Additionally, the Principal Investigator will benefit from mentorship by an experienced investigator who can provide guidance not only on methodology, interpretation of data and publication strategies, but also on the day-to-day logistics of running a research project.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Alexis group | Experimental | Device: Alexis - a wound protectorIn experimental group patients, the surgeon will use Alexis - a wound protector during surgery. |
| Control group | No intervention | –In no intervention group patients, the surgeon will not use any wound protector during surgery. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Adult patients, 18 years or older, undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy with intrabiliary stents in place at Foothills Medical centre, Calgary, Alberta.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients will be excluded if they have had long-term steroid use or are unable to give informed consent.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Alexis - a wound protectorAlexis is a double ring, self-retaining circumferential device that is designed to protect incision site during surgical manipulation. | Device | Alexis group |
Primary outcome
Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Rate
Time frame: 1 month
SSI will be evaluated on a daily basis by residents, the research/clinical fellow and/or Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Team by visual inspection of each wound.
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 26 Oct 2017.
- Background: PubMed 4719566Cruse PJ, Foord R. A five-year prospective study of 23,649 surgical wounds. Arch Surg. 1973 Aug;107(2):206-10. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1973.01350200078018. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 20980173Murray BW, Huerta S, Dineen S, Anthony T. Surgical site infection in colorectal surgery: a review of the nonpharmacologic tools of prevention. J Am Coll Surg. 2010 Dec;211(6):812-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.07.025. Epub 2010 Oct 25. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 17215757Horiuchi T, Tanishima H, Tamagawa K, Matsuura I, Nakai H, Shouno Y, Tsubakihara H, Inoue M, Tabuse K. Randomized, controlled investigation of the anti-infective properties of the Alexis retractor/protector of incision sites. J Trauma. 2007 Jan;62(1):212-5. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000196704.78785.ae.
- Background: PubMed 10580621Kirkland KB, Briggs JP, Trivette SL, Wilkinson WE, Sexton DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999 Nov;20(11):725-30. doi: 10.1086/501572.
- Background: PubMed 15454134Dimick JB, Chen SL, Taheri PA, Henderson WG, Khuri SF, Campbell DA Jr. Hospital costs associated with surgical complications: a report from the private-sector National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2004 Oct;199(4):531-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2004.05.276.
- Background: PubMed 14532315Zhan C, Miller MR. Excess length of stay, charges, and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization. JAMA. 2003 Oct 8;290(14):1868-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.14.1868.
- Background: PubMed 9605274Zoutman D, McDonald S, Vethanayagan D. Total and attributable costs of surgical-wound infections at a Canadian tertiary-care center. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1998 Apr;19(4):254-9. doi: 10.1086/647804.
- Background: PubMed 20847618Reid K, Pockney P, Draganic B, Smith SR. Barrier wound protection decreases surgical site infection in open elective colorectal surgery: a randomized clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010 Oct;53(10):1374-80. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181ed3f7e.
- Background: PubMed 21956432Paquette IM, Swenson BR, Kwaan MR, Mellgren AF, Madoff RD. Thirty-day outcomes in patients treated with en bloc colectomy and pancreatectomy for locally advanced carcinoma of the colon. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Mar;16(3):581-6. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1691-7. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
- Background: PubMed 16552338Kimura F, Shimizu H, Yoshidome H, Ohtsuka M, Kato A, Yoshitomi H, Nozawa S, Furukawa K, Mitsuhashi N, Sawada S, Takeuchi D, Ambiru S, Miyazaki M. Increased plasma levels of IL-6 and IL-8 are associated with surgical site infection after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas. 2006 Mar;32(2):178-85. doi: 10.1097/01.mpa.0000202959.63977.5c.
- BackgroundLee P, Waxman K, Taylor B et al. Use of wound-protection system and postoperative wound-infection rates in open appendectomy. Arch Surg 2009; 144:872-875.
- Background: PubMed 22584694Edwards JP, Ho AL, Tee MC, Dixon E, Ball CG. Wound protectors reduce surgical site infection: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2012 Jul;256(1):53-9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182570372.
Related trials for Surgical Wound Infection
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
Recruiting
Safety and Efficacy of NTP in Thyroid Surgery: Pilot Study on Morbidity Prevention and Adjuvant Oncological Control
Thyroid Diseases, Wound Healing
RecruitingObservational study
Novosyn® CHD vs Polyglactin 910 Suture to Close Wounds After Emergency or Elective Laparotomy or Laparoscopic Surgery
Surgical Site Infection
Not yet recruiting
Safety Assessment of Placing a Single Dental Implant Without Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Simple Cases: A Pilot Study
Tooth Loss and Rehabillitation, Dental Implant Failure
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Efficacy of Integrating Next Generation Sequencing for Treatment of Surgical Site Infection After Fracture Fixation:
Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), Surgical Site Infection (SSI)
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.
Chad G. Ball, MD principal investigator
University of Calgary
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Alexis - a wound protector in people with Surgical Wound Infection and Pancreatic Neoplasms, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
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 1 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 26 Oct 2017. 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 Canada. 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?
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?
Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Rate (time frame: 1 month). 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 NCT01836237, which also lists 16 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 26 Oct 2017.