AzTrials
AzTrials

Liver DamagePhase 3HEMOPATCHNCT02769754

Effectiveness of the Use of the New Hemostatic Patch Hemopatch ® in Patients Undergoing Surgical Liver Resection

A Phase 3 study testing Hemopatch in people with Liver Damage and Surgery, run by Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria La Fe at 1 site in Spain.

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 The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.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

This prospective randomized study aims to determine the influence of the use of local hemostatic on the incidence of local complications derived from the edge of transection: biliary fistula or bleeding, after scheduled hepatic resection. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Liver Damage, Surgery
What is being tested?
Hemopatch
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
250 participants
Where
1 siteSpain
Study dates
May 2016to May 2019
Phase
Phase 3
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Scheduled major or minor liver resection surgery by laparotomy approach.
  • Age>18
  • They have given their written consent voluntarily after having offered the possibility of their participation in the study.

Who cannot join

  • Pregnancy and lactation
  • Patients with urgent surgery
  • Concomitant surgery of another organ
  • Gallbladder or biliary-enteric anastomosis associated.
  • ALPPS surgery (stands for Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy).
  • Patients with liver transplantation history.
Show all 9Show fewer
  • Patients with previous liver trauma.
  • Patients with congenital haematological disease involving clotting factors alteration.
  • Patients with known hypersensitivity to bovine proteins and brilliant blue colorante (FD\&C Nº1).

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Spain1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe

    Valencia, 46026

    Rafael López-Andújar, 0034961245858, rlopezandujar@telefonica.net

    Recruiting

Other trials in Spain

About this study

Official title: Phase III, Randomized, Unblinded, Controlled Clinical Trial for Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Use of the New Hemostatic Patch Hemopatch ® in Patients Undergoing Surgical Liver Resection

This prospective randomized study aims to determine the influence of the use of local hemostatic on the incidence of local complications derived from the edge of transection: biliary fistula or bleeding, after scheduled hepatic resection.

Read the detailed description

Achieving adequate hemostasis is a fundamental prerequisite to successfully perform any surgical procedure, but particularly in cases of visceral abdominal surgery, where a slight bleeding, apparently insignificant, can end in significant bleeding (Haas et al Clinic and Applied thombosis 2006).

Control of intraoperative bleeding is initially performed using traditional techniques such as compression, ligatures, clips, Electrocautery, or clamps. The traditional surgical techniques often fail to prevent bleeding, despite performing a careful and meticulous hemostasis.

The morbidity after elective liver surgery has been reduced in hepatobiliary surgery centers mainly after standardizing anatomical liver resections. These techniques decrease necrosis, bleeding, and the incidence of biliary fistulas (Kraus et al J Am Coll Surg 2005).

Bleeding and biliary fistula are the main determinants of postoperative liver morbidity, with an incidence around 4.2-10% and 4-17% respectively (Yamashita et al Ann Surg 2001; Jin et al World J Gastroenterology 2013).

This complication is difficult to handle especially in patients with cirrhosis or liver cancer, because of reduced platelet and blood coagulation activity (Figueras et al Ann Surg 2007).

Moreover, it is particularly difficult to determine the individual risk of rebleeding or biliary fistula during the intraoperative time.

Many adjuvant surgical hemostatic procedures have been tested in the liver: such as oxidized cellulose, absorbable sponges, fibrillar collagen, and fibrin sealants.

There is an extensive published literature reporting the use of adhesives, Sealants, and topical hemostatics in surgery. There is little doubt that the hemostatic effects of these devices produce a beneficial impact on blood loss. However, there is a wide variation in the literature results. Most of the initial clinical data were obtained in cardiovascular surgery. The only trial that has provided the most significant data in hemostatic efficacy was published by Rousou et al in J Thorac Cardiol South 1999. In this randomized multicenter study, 333 patients that underwent emergency cardiac reoperations were randomized to receive either conventional treatment with fibrinogen or other hemostatic. The 92% of the patients assigned to receive fibrin sealant had a complete hemostasis at 5 minutes, compared with the 12% of those treated with other topical hemostatic.

In clinical practice is difficult to quantify the efficacy of the topical hemostatics on hemostasis. The overall effect of perioperative blood loss can only be inferred indirectly by volume drainage and the number of transfused concentrates (Kraus et al J Am Coll Surg 2005).

The volume of blood loss during liver surgery depends on many factors: systemic coagulation, underlying disease, surgery complexity, surgeon experience, central venous pressure, and local hemodynamics.

Moreover, bile leakages are much harder to identify, define, and particularly to quantify, when compared to bleeding. The biliary system is a low pressure system (less than venous pressure). Animal studies have shown that the use of collagen adhesives is effective for preventing biliary fistulas (Wise et al Am Surg 2002).

In a cohort study of 32 adult patients, in which a right hepatic lobe Split was held, it was compared the use of Tachosil ® versus fibrin glue. The transection area was treated with fibrin glue in 16 patients and with Tachosil ® in the other 16 ones. No differences were observed regarding the need of postoperative transfusion. Nevertheless, the group of patients treated with the fibrin patch showed a significantly lower incidence of bile leakage. Those findings were justified based on the assumption that the use of a fibrin patch, according to its base rich in fibrin, prevents bile leakage, occluding the biliary radicals at the transection (Toti et al Dig Liver Dis. 2010).

The first clinical trial comparing a hemostatic patch (Tachosil ®) versus the standard surgical hemostasis with Argon was published by Frilling et al in 2005 (Frilling et al Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2005). It was observed a reduction in the intraoperative time for hemostasis and less posterior drain in the Tachosil ® group (N = 121).

In 2007, Figueras et al (Figueras et al Ann Surg 2007) published the results of a randomized clinical trial comparing the fibrin glue administration (Tissucol ® + collagen sponge) versus control in 300 patients. The results showed no differences between groups in blood loss, transfusions, and incidence of biliary fistula, and therefore it was concluded that the cessation of the use of fibrin sealant would be a justified saving cost.

In the clinical trial recently published by Moench et al (Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014) they studied the intraoperative time of hemostasis evaluated at 3 minutes by a non-inferiority design. The collagen hemostatic agent Sangustop ® proved to be as effective as the fibrinogen and thrombin sponge Tachosil ® in times of intraoperative hemostasis (n = 128).

The different results observed among studies may be due to the diversity of the agents evaluated, the poor standardization of the application techniques, and especially by the clinical differences.

Hemopatch® is indicated as a hemostatic device in procedures when the surgical control of bleeding by pressure, ligation, or conventional methods is inefficient or impractical. It consists in a soft, thin, foldable, and flexible collagen patch derived from bovine skin, and NHS-PEG coated (pentaerythritol polyethylene glycol ether tetrasuccinimidil glutarate). The white face, which is applied on the tissue, is covered with a thin layer of NHS-PEG providing a firm adherence to it, thus sealing the bleeding surface and inducing hemostasis at the same time. Because of its flexible structure, the application of Hemopatch ® on the site to achieve hemostasis is easily controlled. The uncoated side is marked with blue squares of a biocompatible dye, to differentiate it from the coated side.

Being tested
Hemopatch, Control
Keywords
LIVER, RESECTION, SURGERY

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • HemopatchDevice

    Hemopatch will be apply once the standard surgical hemostasis is achieved.

  • ControlOther

    No additional treatment will be applied after performing the usual surgical hemostasis.

Study groups in NCT02769754
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
ControlPlacebo comparatorIn the control group (group A) no additional treatment will be applied after performing the usual surgical hemostasis.
Receives: Other: Control
HemopatchExperimentalHemopatch will be apply in the treatment group (group B), once the standard surgical hemostasis is achieved
Receives: Device: Hemopatch

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Bleeding

    Bleeding is defined as the fall of > 3 g/dl of hemoglobin in the postoperative as compared to the baseline value after the operation (the hemoglobin level immediately after surgery) and/or any postoperative transfusion of red blood cells packages because of hemoglobin drop and/or the need for reoperation to stop the bleeding (e.g., embolization or re- laparotomy).

    Measured: Day 0 to day 30 (+-10 days)

  2. Presence of Biliary Fistula

    Biliary fistula is defined as the presence of high bilirubin levels (Bilirubin> 3x in serum level measured at the same time) in the abdominal drainage, being included the need for interventional radiology due to biliary collection or a re-laparotomy due to biliary fistula (Brooke-Smith et al HPB 2015).

    Measured: Day 0 to day 30 (+-10 days)

Secondary outcomes (27)
  1. Age

    Measured: Preoperative

  2. Body Mass Index (BMI)

    Measured: Preoperative

  3. Gender

    Measured: Preoperative

  4. Medical history (heart disease, lung disease, cirrhosis)

    Measured: Preoperative

  5. Hypertension

    Measured: Preoperative

  6. Dyslipemia

    Measured: Preoperative

  7. Tobacco

    Measured: Preoperative

  8. Alcohol

    Measured: Preoperative

  9. Characteristics of liver disease

    Characteristics of liver disease: benign-malignant (source)

    Measured: Preoperative

  10. Type of surgery

    Type of surgery:Liver resection: major/minor.

    Measured: On surgery

  11. Type of surgery

    Type of surgery: Number of resected segments/type

    Measured: On surgery

  12. Type of surgery

    Type of surgery: Number-size of hemostatic patches used as well as their location

    Measured: On surgery

  13. Need of transfusion

    concentrates number

    Measured: Day 0 to day 30 (+-10 days)

  14. Need of transfusion

    blood / plasma / platelet d. intraoperative / postoperative e. blood / plasma / platelet f. concentrates number

    Measured: Day 0 to day 30 (+-10 days)

  15. Incidence of re-interventions

    Incidence of re-interventions (No / Yes / Number / match)

    Measured: 30 days after surgery

  16. Postoperative liver failure

    Measured: Day 5 after surgery

  17. Infection or wound dehiscence

    Measured: 30 days after surgery

  18. Interventional radiology procedures

    Number of interventional radiology procedures needed and findings

    Measured: 30 days after surgery

  19. Mortality

    Mortality p.o. (defined as the existence of the event within 30 days p.o.).

    Measured: 30 days after surgery

  20. Hospital stay (HS)

    Hospital stay (HS) defined as number of days from the preoperative admission to discharge.

    Measured: Up to 30 days after surgery

  21. Readmissions

    Readmissions (No / Yes / number of days of re-entry / Cause).

    Measured: From hospital discharge to 30 days after.

  22. Preoperative Chemotherapy Administration

    Up to 30 days after surgery

    Measured: Preoperative

  23. immunosuppressive therapy

    Measured: Preoperative

  24. Diuresis

    Measured: Up to 30 days after surgery

  25. Temperature

    Measured: Up to 30 days after surgery

  26. Blood preassure

    Measured: Up to 30 days after surgery

  27. Concomitant medication

    Measured: Up to 30 days after surgery

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted12 May 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study startMay 2016
  3. Primary completionFeb 2019 (estimated)
  4. Study completionMay 2019 (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 3
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Participant
Enrolment
250 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02769754
Sponsor's protocol ID
HEMOPATCH
Acronym
HEMOPATCH
Status last verified
May 2016
First submitted
6 May 2016
Last updated
15 Feb 2018
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Publications

  • Robledo AB, Montalva Oron EM, Seller AN, Ibanez JM, Sanz AH, Mizrahi DC, Orbis Castellanos FJ, Andujar RL. Clinical evidence on the use of Hemopatch(R) in reducing bleeding and biliary fistula after liver resection: Prospective randomized study in planned surgery. Cir Esp (Engl Ed). 2026 Feb;104(2):800270. doi: 10.1016/j.cireng.2025.800270. Epub 2025 Dec 17.

    PubMed 41418882

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 3 study testing Hemopatch in people with Liver Damage and Surgery, run by Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria La Fe at 1 site in Spain.

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 3 inclusion and 9 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 15 Feb 2018. 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 Spain. 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Elena García (0034961246611, investigacion_clinica@iislafe.es), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Bleeding (time frame: Day 0 to day 30 (+-10 days)). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT02769754, 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 15 Feb 2018.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in