AzTrials
AzTrials

Cutaneous AbscessPhase 1/2NCT03171714

Derma-Stent Novel Abscess Packing Device

A Phase 1/2 study testing Derma-Stent in people with Cutaneous Abscess, run by Aaron Brody, MD, MPH 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 The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.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

In this research study, a device called the Derma-Stent will be tested. The sponsor of the study, Mar-Med Company, will supply the device. This device is used to drain a cutaneous abscess, which is a skin infection that results in buildup of pus under the skin. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 90 years
Conditions the study is for
Cutaneous Abscess
What is being tested?
Derma-Stent
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
60 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
27 Mar 2017to 15 Dec 2017
Phase
Phase 1/2
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 to 90 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • ED patient > 18, < 90.
  • Abscess total dimensions (z+y+z) by ultrasound greater or equal to 5 cm.
  • Consent to participate in research protocol.
  • Assessment by attending physician that the abscess will require packing.

Who cannot join

  • Patients requiring admission for skin and soft tissue infection.
  • Abscess drainage requiring procedural sedation.
  • Abscesses requiring incision and drainage in the operating room.
  • Inability to comprehend consent and follow up instructions.
  • Prisoners.
  • Pregnant women.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Wayne State University

    Detroit, Michigan, 48201

    Aaron Brody, MD, MPH, 313-577-1216, abrody@med.wayne.edu

    Recruiting

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Derma-Stent Novel Abscess Packing Device (Pilot Study)

In this research study, a device called the Derma-Stent will be tested. The sponsor of the study, Mar-Med Company, will supply the device. This device is used to drain a cutaneous abscess, which is a skin infection that results in buildup of pus under the skin. Currently, the normal treatment for this abscess is to cut and drain and the wound, and later pack the wound with gauze. Packing is done to prevent the pus to accumulate again. But regular gauze is difficult for patient to remove themselves, so another visit to the doctor is usually necessary. The Derma-Stent device will be tested to see how easily patients can remove this by themselves and if it is less painful and more effective than normal gauze packing.

Read the detailed description

Background:

Cutaneous abscess is an infectious condition that affects millions of people each year, and the incidence is on the rise. Between 1993 and 2005, the annual number of emergency department (ED) visits for skin and soft tissue infections increased from 1.2 to 3.4 million, and this largely attributed to a rise in the prevalence of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) in the community.

The standard treatment for cutaneous abscess is incision and drainage at bedside in the ED. Following this procedure, many clinicians insert a strip of gauze, known as packing, to maintain the open surgical incision, enhance drainage, and prevent re-accumulation of the abscess. If the abscess is packed, patients typically have to return in 2-3 days for a repeat visit to have the packing removed. The present standard of care, gauze packing, is difficult for patients to remove alone, as the packing itself becomes impregnated with pus and blood. Additionally, the packing procedure can be painful, despite the use of local anesthetics.

A newer approach advocates for the use of a silicon string, known as a PDS loop for purposes of packing and drainage. While this approach can reduce pain, and is equally effective in terms of healing time, and treatment failure, the PDS, or Vessiloop is not readily available in emergency departments and outpatient clinics, as it is a specialized sterile surgical device used in vascular procedures. Furthermore, this procedure does not facilitate irrigation of the abscess cavity, since a much smaller incision is made. Finally, the PDS loop requires a surgical knot which may come loose.

Objective:

To investigate the use of a novel silicon packing device, the Derma-Stent™. The novel device will facilitate self removal by patients, as it has a narrower profile, and, as a nonabsorbent material, will not become saturated with bodily fluids. Although it will not absorb body fluids, it is believed that the Derma-stent will achieve the objective of wound healing by maintaining the opening of the surgical incision.

Hypothesis:

The acceptability of self removal will be significantly higher for the novel device.

Study Protocol:

ED Visit

  1. Abscess measured by ultrasound. Study will be performed by a trained research assistant, and will be verified by a physician certified to interpret soft tissue sonographic images.
  2. Abscess photographed, with measurement tape, to allow for objective measurement of skin induration and erythema.
  3. Abscess will be incised and drained, utilizing standard of care technique, with local anesthetic
  4. Packing performed according to randomization group.
  5. Sterile dressing applied.
  6. Subject completes assessment form - pain scale.
  7. Practitioner fills out assessment form - ease of use.

Follow up visit 1 - 3-5 days

  1. Removal of packing. Subjects will be asked to remove packing on their own under supervision of the physician. Physician will remove the packing if they not able to.
  2. Measurement of abscess diameter and volume, utilizing measuring tape, photograph, and point of care ultrasound.
  3. Practitioner and subject assessment form as above, but adding ease of procedure, and likelihood that subject would have removed packing at home.

Follow up visit 2 - 24-32 days

  1. Assessment of residual erythema and fluid collection by measurement, photograph, and US
  2. Practitioner and subject assessment including global satisfaction, and satisfaction with cosmetic result.

Adverse Effects:

If physician is impressed that the wound is not appropriately at either f/u visit, antibiotics may be prescribed, and repacking may be performed, utilizing gauze packing strip. Use of antibiotics for abscess is controversial and most physicians prescribe these on a case by case basis. Antibiotics will be prescribed at the discretion of the physician and not related to the study protocol.

Population:

Convenience sample of adult patients presenting with uncomplicated cutaneous abscess amenable to bedside drainage to either DRH or SGH ED.

Sample size calculation:

As this is a hypothesis generating study, and the effect size is unknown, formal sample size calculation was not performed. 60 patients was chosen as the sample size.

Being tested
Derma-Stent, Usual care, cotton gauze packing
Keywords
Drainage Catheter

What participants receive

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

  • Derma-StentDevice

    The novel device will facilitate self removal by patients, as it has a narrower profile, and, as a nonabsorbent material, will not become saturated with bodily fluids. Although it will not absorb body fluids

  • Usual care, cotton gauze packingDevice

    Standard gauze packing used to pack a drained abscess.

Study groups in NCT03171714
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Derma-StentExperimentalThe novel silicon packing device made of a nonabsorbent material to pack a drained abscess for healing.
Receives: Device: Derma-Stent
Usual Care, cotton gauze packingActive comparatorStandard of care to pack a drained abscess for healing.
Receives: Device: Usual care, cotton gauze packing

What is being measured

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

  1. Likelihood of self removal

    Likelihood of self removal, as measured on a 1-10 Likert scale.

    Measured: 3-5 days

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Clinical Failure Rate

    Defined by presence of: fever, increase in maximal diameter of erythema, worsening of wound swelling and tenderness.

    Measured: 32 days after baseline

  2. Recurrence Rate of Abscess

    Recurrence rate of abscess at initial (3-5 day) and one month follow up.

    Measured: 3-5 day and one month follow-up

  3. Cosmetic Result

    Cosmetic result at both f/u visits, as measured subjectively by participants, utilizing a 1-10 Likert scale.

    Measured: 3-5 day and one month

  4. Pain during procedure and packing removal

    Pain during procedure and packing removal, measured by a 1-10 visual acuity scale.

    Measured: baseline and 3-5 day

Timeline

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

  1. First posted31 May 2017
  2. Study start27 Mar 2017
  3. Primary completion30 Nov 2017 (estimated)
  4. Study completion15 Dec 2017 (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 1/2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
Phase 1 - Pilot Trial: As this device has never been used on humans, the investigators will first deploy a pilot, uncontrolled trial of 10 subjects to assess for safety, and further refine outcome measures. The same protocol will be followed as the controlled trial, except the randomization. Phase 2 - Controlled Trial: 25 patients in each arm: 1. Novel silicon packing device 2. Usual Care, cotton gauze packing
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
60 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03171714
Sponsor's protocol ID
091016M1F
Status last verified
Jun 2017
First submitted
26 May 2017
Last updated
8 Jun 2017
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Pallin DJ, Egan DJ, Pelletier AJ, Espinola JA, Hooper DC, Camargo CA Jr. Increased US emergency department visits for skin and soft tissue infections, and changes in antibiotic choices, during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Emerg Med. 2008 Mar;51(3):291-8. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.12.004. Epub 2008 Jan 28.

    PubMed 18222564
  • Qualls ML, Mooney MM, Camargo CA Jr, Zucconi T, Hooper DC, Pallin DJ. Emergency department visit rates for abscess versus other skin infections during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, 1997-2007. Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jul;55(1):103-5. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis342. Epub 2012 Mar 28.

    PubMed 22460965
  • Singer AJ, Talan DA. Management of skin abscesses in the era of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 13;370(11):1039-47. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1212788. No abstract available.

    PubMed 24620867
  • Tsoraides SS, Pearl RH, Stanfill AB, Wallace LJ, Vegunta RK. Incision and loop drainage: a minimally invasive technique for subcutaneous abscess management in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Mar;45(3):606-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.06.013.

    PubMed 20223328
  • Ladd AP, Levy MS, Quilty J. Minimally invasive technique in treatment of complex, subcutaneous abscesses in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Jul;45(7):1562-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.03.025.

    PubMed 20638546
  • Gaszynski R, Punch G, Verschuer K. Loop and drain technique for subcutaneous abscess: a safe minimally invasive procedure in an adult population. ANZ J Surg. 2018 Jan;88(1-2):87-90. doi: 10.1111/ans.13709. Epub 2016 Sep 12.

    PubMed 27621209

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 1/2 study testing Derma-Stent in people with Cutaneous Abscess, run by Aaron Brody, MD, MPH 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 4 inclusion and 6 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 8 Jun 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.

What does this combined phase mean?

Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

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 Patrick Medado (313-745-4621, pbmedado@med.wayne.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Likelihood of self removal (time frame: 3-5 days). 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 NCT03171714, which also lists 6 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 8 Jun 2017.

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