Wound ComplicationPROVACNCT02128997
PROphylactic Wound VACuum Therapy to Decrease Rates of Cesarean Section in the Obese Population
A study testing Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena) in people with Wound Complication, run by University of Pennsylvania at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study will assess whether a negative pressure wound vacuum therapy (NPWT) on closed incisions decreases the risk of wound complications among obese patients after cesarean section All patients having a cesarean section in labor or presenting to the triage unit and requiring a cesarean section will be eligible… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 60 years, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Wound Complication
- What is being tested?
- Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena)
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 136 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- May 2014to Aug 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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 to 60 years
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria BMI greater than or equal to 30 kg/m2 at less than or equal to 22 weeks of gestation Subject is laboring Subject is having an unplanned cesarean section Subject will have Pfannenstiel Skin Incision Subject has the ability to take a picture and email it to a secure account Subject receives prenatal care in the University of Pennsylvania health system and plans to follow up postpartum in the system Subject is greater than or equal to 18 years of age
Key exclusion criteria Subject cannot read or speak English Subject is not 18 years of age Subject does not have ability to send a picture by email Subject has preexisting diabetes mellitus (Type 1 or Type 2) , is using chronic steroids or immune-suppressants, OR being actively treated for a malignancy Subject is undergoing a scheduled cesarean section Subject is allergic to silver
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104
About this study
Official title: Prophylactic Wound VACuum Therapy to Decrease Rates of Cesarean Section in the Obese Population
This study will assess whether a negative pressure wound vacuum therapy (NPWT) on closed incisions decreases the risk of wound complications among obese patients after cesarean section
All patients having a cesarean section in labor or presenting to the triage unit and requiring a cesarean section will be eligible
Main study intervention: this involves the use of a negative pressure wound vacuum therapy on a closed incision.
Read the detailed description
Objectives To evaluate whether there is a decrease in wound complications among obese patients who are treated with closed incision NPWT versus standard post cesarean section wound care protocol.
Primary outcome variable(s) The primary outcome variable is wound complications defined as any readmission for a wound issue within four weeks of discharge, infection, or wound breakdown.
Secondary outcome will look at patient quality of life among those with NPWT versus usual care arm.
A survey addressing pain, breast feeding questions and ability to perform activity of daily living will be administered during the inpatient stay and at the postpartum visit.
Background Obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI) 30kg/m2, continues to be a growing epidemic in the United States. According to National Center for Health Statistics Data1, almost one third of adults and 17% of youth were obese in 2009-2010. Furthermore, non-Hispanic Blacks have the age-adjusted rates of obesity (49.5%). In a study by Chu et al analyzing data from 26 states in the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) database, 20% of women who delivered were obese and in certain ethnic and insurance subgroups, the rates were as high as 33%. In 2008, according to reports by the Pennsylvania State statistics, the rates of obesity in the city of Philadelphia were as high as 64%. Multiple studies have demonstrated the increased risks for diabetes, hypertension and adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) during pregnancy in the obese population. In addition, obesity is a well established independent risk factor for the development of a wound complication or infection after a cesarean delivery, with rates ranging from 10-15% . Certain measures such as antibiotic prophylaxis and closure of the subcutaneous space are techniques that have demonstrated a decreased incidence of wound disruption. Currently no randomized controlled trials have looked at the effects of surgical approach or choice of abdominal incision in the obese or extremely obese woman undergoing cesarean delivery. However, the few retrospective studies that have addressed this issue have demonstrated mixed results. Given the paucity of randomized controlled trials evaluating the prevention of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery, a recent review by Tipton emphasized the necessity for such trials to evaluate methods with which to improve postoperative wound care and healing in this high risk cohort. In the past decade, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has become accepted in the treatment of expediting healing of open wounds 15-18. NPWT is a method in which a vacuum device is placed on the wound in order to remove excess interstitial fluid, increase tissue vascularity, decrease bacterial colonization, and place mechanical stress on adjacent wound edges which aids in wound contractility and closure. Therefore, the positive effects of NPWT on open wounds have been well studied and established. Recent studies have been performed to assess a potential effect of NPWT on closed incisions non-obstetric fields. A recent study by Grauhan et al compared the effects of NPWT over closed sternotomy incisions in obese patients compared to conventional sterile wound dressing and noted a significant reduction in the rates of wound infection in those treated with NPWT.
Another study by Vargo assessed the effects of NPWT on closed incisions in patients undergoing abdominal therapy compared to a historical control also noted a decreased wound infection rate and no evidence of skin necrosis. In contrast, a recent study by Masden et al. looked at rates of infection and dehiscence in patients with multiple comorbidities status post predominantly lower extremity wounds and did not appreciate a difference between the NPWT group and dry dressing group24. Therefore, the need for further studies assessing the benefits of NPWT on various anatomical sites has been clearly established.
- Conditions
- Wound Complication
- Being tested
- Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena)
- Keywords
- obesity, cesarean section, wound complication
- Medical subject headings
- Obesity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena)Device
wound vacuum to be placed on a closed incision
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Closed Incision Wound vacuum (Prevena) | Experimental | Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena) Receives: Device: Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena) |
| Routine Wound Care | No intervention | This arm includes patients having a cesarean section with routine wound care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Participants With Wound Complications
The primary outcome variable was a composite of wound morbidity at 4 weeks postpartum including SSI and/or wound opening
Measured: Four weeks after cesarean section
Secondary outcomes (3)
Pain Scores
On postoperative day 2, all patients were administered a pain scale: Rank sharp pain (0-10), 10 being worst possible sharp pain.
Measured: Postpartum day 2
Tingling Pain Scores
On postoperative day 2, all patients were administered a pain scale: Rank tingling pain (0-10), 10 being worst possible tingling pain
Measured: Postpartum day 2
Postpartum Length of Stay
Measured: Until hospital discharge and then for 4 weeks follow up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 May 2014 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2014
- Primary completionJun 2016
- Study completionAug 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Wound ComplicationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of PennsylvaniaThe 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 136 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Pennsylvania
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Kinetic Concepts, Inc.
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Celeste Durnwald, MD, Principal investigator, University of Pennsylvania
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02128997
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 819579
- Acronym
- PROVAC
- Status last verified
- Sep 2017
- First submitted
- 29 Apr 2014
- Last updated
- 13 Oct 2017
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Ruhstaller K, Downes KL, Chandrasekaran S, Srinivas S, Durnwald C. Prophylactic Wound Vacuum Therapy after Cesarean Section to Prevent Wound Complications in the Obese Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial (the ProVac Study). Am J Perinatol. 2017 Sep;34(11):1125-1130. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1604161. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
PubMed 28704847
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Oct 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Prophylactic Wound VACuum Therapy to Decrease Rates of Cesarean Section in the Obese Population
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02128997
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PROVAC / 819579
- Conditions
- Wound Complication
- Keywords
- obesity, cesarean section, wound complication
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 136 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of PennsylvaniaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Kinetic Concepts, Inc.
- Study start
- May 2014 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 May 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 13 Oct 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will assess whether a negative pressure wound vacuum therapy (NPWT) on closed incisions decreases the risk of wound complications among obese patients after cesarean section
All patients having a cesarean section in labor or presenting to the triage unit and requiring a cesarean section will be eligible
Main study intervention: this involves the use of a negative pressure wound vacuum therapy on a closed incision.
Detailed description
Objectives To evaluate whether there is a decrease in wound complications among obese patients who are treated with closed incision NPWT versus standard post cesarean section wound care protocol.
Primary outcome variable(s) The primary outcome variable is wound complications defined as any readmission for a wound issue within four weeks of discharge, infection, or wound breakdown.
Secondary outcome will look at patient quality of life among those with NPWT versus usual care arm.
A survey addressing pain, breast feeding questions and ability to perform activity of daily living will be administered during the inpatient stay and at the postpartum visit.
Background Obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI) 30kg/m2, continues to be a growing epidemic in the United States. According to National Center for Health Statistics Data1, almost one third of adults and 17% of youth were obese in 2009-2010. Furthermore, non-Hispanic Blacks have the age-adjusted rates of obesity (49.5%). In a study by Chu et al analyzing data from 26 states in the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) database, 20% of women who delivered were obese and in certain ethnic and insurance subgroups, the rates were as high as 33%. In 2008, according to reports by the Pennsylvania State statistics, the rates of obesity in the city of Philadelphia were as high as 64%. Multiple studies have demonstrated the increased risks for diabetes, hypertension and adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) during pregnancy in the obese population. In addition, obesity is a well established independent risk factor for the development of a wound complication or infection after a cesarean delivery, with rates ranging from 10-15% . Certain measures such as antibiotic prophylaxis and closure of the subcutaneous space are techniques that have demonstrated a decreased incidence of wound disruption. Currently no randomized controlled trials have looked at the effects of surgical approach or choice of abdominal incision in the obese or extremely obese woman undergoing cesarean delivery. However, the few retrospective studies that have addressed this issue have demonstrated mixed results. Given the paucity of randomized controlled trials evaluating the prevention of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery, a recent review by Tipton emphasized the necessity for such trials to evaluate methods with which to improve postoperative wound care and healing in this high risk cohort. In the past decade, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has become accepted in the treatment of expediting healing of open wounds 15-18. NPWT is a method in which a vacuum device is placed on the wound in order to remove excess interstitial fluid, increase tissue vascularity, decrease bacterial colonization, and place mechanical stress on adjacent wound edges which aids in wound contractility and closure. Therefore, the positive effects of NPWT on open wounds have been well studied and established. Recent studies have been performed to assess a potential effect of NPWT on closed incisions non-obstetric fields. A recent study by Grauhan et al compared the effects of NPWT over closed sternotomy incisions in obese patients compared to conventional sterile wound dressing and noted a significant reduction in the rates of wound infection in those treated with NPWT.
Another study by Vargo assessed the effects of NPWT on closed incisions in patients undergoing abdominal therapy compared to a historical control also noted a decreased wound infection rate and no evidence of skin necrosis. In contrast, a recent study by Masden et al. looked at rates of infection and dehiscence in patients with multiple comorbidities status post predominantly lower extremity wounds and did not appreciate a difference between the NPWT group and dry dressing group24. Therefore, the need for further studies assessing the benefits of NPWT on various anatomical sites has been clearly established.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Closed Incision Wound vacuum (Prevena) | Experimental | Device: Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena)Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena) |
| Routine Wound Care | No intervention | –This arm includes patients having a cesarean section with routine wound care |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 60 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena)wound vacuum to be placed on a closed incision | Device | Closed Incision Wound vacuum (Prevena) |
Primary outcome
Number of Participants With Wound Complications
Time frame: Four weeks after cesarean section
The primary outcome variable was a composite of wound morbidity at 4 weeks postpartum including SSI and/or wound opening
3 secondary outcomes
Pain Scores
Time frame: Postpartum day 2
Tingling Pain Scores
Time frame: Postpartum day 2
Postpartum Length of Stay
Time frame: Until hospital discharge and then for 4 weeks follow up
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Oct 2017.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 28704847Ruhstaller K, Downes KL, Chandrasekaran S, Srinivas S, Durnwald C. Prophylactic Wound Vacuum Therapy after Cesarean Section to Prevent Wound Complications in the Obese Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial (the ProVac Study). Am J Perinatol. 2017 Sep;34(11):1125-1130. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1604161. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
Related trials for Wound Complication
RecruitingPhase 2
Psilocybin-Assisted Psychotherapy in Cancer Patients With Adjustment Disorder
Adjustment Disorder, Adjustment Disorder With Anxious Mood
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Effect of Filter Lifespan in CRRT on New Infections in Critically Ill Patients With AKI
Acute Kidney Injury
Not yet recruiting
Povidone-Iodine and Ozonated Distilled Water Irrigation in the Management of Maxillofacial Space Infections
Infection, Surgical Site
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
ProNephro NGAL Test for Early Detection of Acute Kidney Injury in Adult ICU Patients (ALPACA)
Acute Kidney Injury
RecruitingPhase 2
Radiotherapy in Combination With Checkpoint Inhibition for Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ( mRCC), OligoProgressive Metastatic Disease
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.
Celeste Durnwald, MD principal investigator
University of Pennsylvania
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Closed incision wound vacuum (Prevena) in people with Wound Complication, run by University of Pennsylvania 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?
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 13 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 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?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 13 Oct 2017). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Number of Participants With Wound Complications (time frame: Four weeks after cesarean section). 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 NCT02128997, 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 13 Oct 2017.