Ovarian CancerRIGoROCSNCT03519165
Restrictive or Individualized Goal-Directed Fluid Replacement Strategy in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery
A study testing EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0) in people with Ovarian Cancer, run by Tata Medical Center at 1 site in India.
Trial summary
This is a single center prospective randomized controlled study comparing the postoperative outcome after cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer patient after using restrictive or individualized goal-directed fluid replacement strategy (GDT). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Ovarian Cancer
- What is being tested?
- EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0)
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 145 participants
- Where
- 1 siteIndia
- Study dates
- Jun 2016to Sep 2019
- 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 to 65 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer-
- PDS: primary (chemo-naïve patients including completion staging/ primary debulking and secondary cytoreduction)
- IDS: interval debulking surgery (after chemotherapy)
- American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA-PS) score of 1 - 3
- Age more than 18 years and less than 65 years
- Surgery of duration more than 240 minutes
- Presumed blood loss more than 500 ml
- Elective surgery
Who cannot join
- Patient refusal
- Inability to give consent
- Laparoscopic surgery, Emergency surgery, patients undergoing HIPEC
- Age younger than 18 years \& more than 65 yrs, BMI > 40
- Patients with LVEF < 30%, Arrhythmia, Acute MI (within 30 days)
- COPD with FEV1 < 50%
Show all 12Show fewer
- Coagulopathy (platelet <50000/μL, aPTT > x2 control, INR >1.5)
- Significant liver dysfunction (liver enzymes >x3 times normal)
- Significant renal dysfunction (creatinine >x2 times normal)
- Psychiatric disorders
- Sepsis or SIRS
- Hypersensitivity to Gelofusine
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Restrictive or Individualized Goal-Directed Fluid Replacement Strategy in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery- A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
This is a single center prospective randomized controlled study comparing the postoperative outcome after cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer patient after using restrictive or individualized goal-directed fluid replacement strategy (GDT). Aim of this study will be to test the hypothesis that intra-operative SVV-guided fluid optimization during ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery:
- reduces the postoperative length of hospital stay,
- cost-effective,
- GDT will be more beneficial in cases of PDS compared to IDS or cytoreductive procedures of shorter duration.
- GDT improves intraoperative tissue perfusion/ oxygenation and improves immediate postoperative morbidity.
Read more
Intra-operatively fluid of choice in both groups will be lactate-free crystalloid at 1.0 ml/kg/h for maintenance and gelofusine for fluid bolus of 3ml/kg over 5 minutes. In group C intraoperative fluid therapy will include maintenance fluid and replacement of the surgical loss. Aim will be to maintain MAP > 65 mmHg, CVP 8-12 cm H2O and urine output > 0.5 ml/kg/h. In group G intraoperative fluid therapy will be targeted to SVV <13%, SVI > 35ml/m2/ beat, SVRI more than equal to 1900 dynes-sec/cm-5/m2 in addition to clinical parameters like MAP, CVP and urine output.
Primary outcome will be length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes will be cost of surgical treatment episode (admission till fit to discharge), postoperative morbidity survey (POMS) and 30 day morbidity and mortality.
Read the detailed description
Aims \& objectives:
The purpose of the study is to test the hypothesis that intra-operative SVV-guided fluid optimization during ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery -
- Reduces the postoperative length of hospital stay.
- GDT is more cost-effective.
- GDT will be more beneficial in cases of PDS compared to IDS.
- GDT reduces postoperative morbidity.
Justification for study:
Cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer is usually associated with significant fluid shift attributable to suboptimal nutritional status, prolonged preoperative starvation, intraoperative blood and fluid loss, pharmacological vasodilation by neuraxial (epidural) and systemic anaesthetic drugs, intraoperative evaporative loss and the vasodilation due to systemic inflammatory response to surgery (SIRS), which was comparatively more in case of ovarian surgery. This results in hypotension and altered hemodynamics in the intra-operative and immediate
post-operative settings and the need for rigorous hemodynamic monitoring in the perioperative period. Among 3 different strategies, liberal or conservative one is associated with risk of overhydration, whereas restrictive therapy can cause hypoperfusion and related complications. A goal-directed fluid therapy has been shown to optimise intravascular volume in major abdominal surgery, which is the key determinant of cardiac output and oxygen delivery to tissues. This strategy results in use of more advanced hemodynamic monitors and increased costs thereof, and possibly, more total fluid requirements. A restrictive fluid strategy targeting physiological parameters alone, utilizes less costly modalities of monitoring and less overall fluid infused. But total healthcare cost associated with reduced rate of complications and thereby less hospital stay can neutralize that extra-cost of advanced monitoring (approximately Rs 8,000 per patient for consumables) and become more cost effective. The current standard of care in Tata Medical Center (TMC) has been a fluid therapy guided by clinical parameters. Although there is strong evidence supporting goal-directed approach to perioperative fluid therapy in case of major abdominal surgery, which has also been incorporated in enhanced recovery protocol and adopted worldwide, there is no such evidence for gynaec-oncological surgery, especially in ovarian cancer. So, investigators would like to conduct the proposed study to find-out the optimal fluid management strategy for ovarian cytoreductive surgery. As previously mentioned, investigators' data might indicate that the standard approach may lead to tissue hypoperfusion and approximately 2-3 liters of deficit which needs replacement under monitoring in order to avoid fluid overload.
Arguably, all patients of major cytoreductive surgery should require goal directed therapy and therefore randomization can potentially harm a subset of patients who would then receive restricted therapy instead of goal directed therapy. However, the standard regimen which is currently used in our setting is restrictive and SVV is also being increasingly used routinely only at the clinician's discretion including in ovarian cancer cases. Therefore no harm is anticipated from this intervention in either group. The only implication is of cost and resources; goal directed therapy has resource implications- both in terms of availability of machine and additional cost to the patient due to the consumables. A non-randomized prospective observational study would be feasible but will not be able to select which patients would benefit maximum from GDT due to selection bias. Therefore, a randomized study may help to identify a select group of patients who might benefit the maximum and therefore SVV directed fluid administration could be further stratified to be cost-effective due to reduction of postoperative length of hospital stay and morbidity.
From personal communication investigators know that, 3 trials of perioperative fluid therapy are ongoing now in India. Out of those 3 trials, 2 are in abdominal surgery and one is in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) surgery. Other cancer centers expressed interest to undertake similar trial in ovarian cytoreductive surgery. Therefore investigators may collaborate with other centers in future for a larger study based on the results; however, at present a single institutional study will be conducted to minimize bias associated with heterogeneity in surgical practice on cytoreduction.
Benefit:
This study will help investigators to guide fluid therapy in the perioperative period in ovarian cancer patients undergoing cytoreductive surgeries. This study should also help to find a strategy to prevent both fluid overload as well as under filling to avoid hypo perfusion and organ damage in this vulnerable group of patients. This strategy can even be adopted in other patient populations undergoing colorectal, hepatobiliary, thoraco-abdominal and HIPEC surgeries. These data will also inform whether a stratified approach can be adopted to selectively use SVV monitoring according to the predicted surgical complexity, type of cytoreduction and duration of surgery to optimize resources and improve cost-effectiveness.
Risks This study will utilize an existing technology, which is already in use. Therefore SOPs will be followed including reporting of adverse events, monitoring, documentation and safety reporting. The intervention is fluid bolus guided by advanced haemodynamic parameters (EV1000 monitor). Therefore risks are theoretical only. Risks related to the invasive procedures are same in both arms, which include pneumothorax, haemothorax, haemo-pneumothorax, bleeding, catheter-related infection and peripheral ischemia.
Methodology:
Site of Study OT complex and Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anaesthesiology \& Critical Care, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata
Study Structure Design:
Prospective randomized controlled trial - Patients and assessors will be blinded.
Population: All ovarian cancer patients undergoing major debulking surgery at TMC Kolkata (except- completion staging).
Sample size:
The study design was based on a retrospective audit at TMC that found the current median postoperative length of stay to be 10 days after cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer. To detect a reduction of 2 post-operative days with median postoperative length of stay to be 10 days in the restrictive group and 8 days in the goal directed group with a SD=3 days for 80% power at a significance level of 0.05, 37 patients are needed in each group (Total=74). As there is a difference in the median postoperative length of stay between the PDS and IDS group as mentioned earlier, at least 20 patients in each of the IDS and PDS groups would be needed for both the goal directed and restrictive group.
So the study would continue till each of the four combinations: Goal Directed (IDS), Goal Directed (PDS), Control (IDS) and Control (PDS) have at least 20 patients. To account for possible 10% attrition rate/ loss to follow up, 44 patients would be required in each group
Method of Randomization:
In addition to having higher median LOS in hospital, patients undergoing PDS are more likely to have ascites, major peritoneal stripping, higher surgical complexities and intraoperative fluid loss. Therefore, pre-randomization stratification will be done for type of surgery. Patients would be enrolled separately into PDS and IDS groups. Then for each group, patients would be randomized to get the standard or the goal directed therapy mentioned in the sealed envelopes based on computer generated random numbers.
After randomization and inclusion into a study arm, patients will be excluded in an event of the following: the procedure is abandoned/ open and close, duration of procedure is less than 4 hours, and any critical incident during operation (i.e. major blood loss/ medical condition/ shock) requiring intense fluid resuscitation. Following factors will be analyzed for univariate and multivariate analysis: ASA status, duration of surgery in minutes, surgical complexity score, intraoperative fluid loss, total vs. partial peritonectomy, comorbidities (Possum-P), massive blood loss and transfusion. Analysis will be on a per protocol basis as well as intention to treat.
Blinding:
- As the envelope would be opened after induction of GA, the patient will be blinded to the group she is allocated to.
- Post operative data will be collected by the ICU Consultant/ medical officer and Gynaec-oncosurgery team, who would not be part of the study and unaware about the allocation will follow up patients and decide on fitness to discharge. Outcome will also be verified according to predefined criteria by other clinicians from Gynaec-oncosurgery team, who are not aware about the allocated study group.
Statistical Analysis:
All statistical analyses and all summary tables and listings will be prepared using SASÒ release 8.3 or higher (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). Standard descriptive summaries will include the N, mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for continuous variables, and the number and percent for categorical variables. All statistical test of comparison will be based on 5% level of significance.
- Conditions
- Ovarian Cancer
- Being tested
- EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0)
- Keywords
- Ovarian cancer, goal-directed fluid therapy, SVV
- Medical subject headings
- Ovarian Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0)Device
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control group (Group C) | No intervention | Conventional Fluid therapy guided by clinical parameter Intraoperative fluid therapy will include maintenance fluid and replacement of the surgical loss. Aim to maintain MAP > 65 mmHg, CVP 8-12 cm H2O and urine output > 0.5 ml/kg/h. |
| Goal directed group (Group G) | Active comparator | Intervention: Machine guided fluid therapy using EV1000 (FloTrac System 4.0 Edward Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA)
Intraoperative fluid therapy will be targeted to SVV <13%, SVI > 35ml/m2/ beat, SVRI more than equal to 1900 dynes-sec/cm-5/m2 using EV1000 floTrac monitor in addition to clinical parameters like MAP, CVP and urine output Receives: Device: EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Postoperative length of Stay (LOS) in hospital in days
From day of surgery to the day of fit to discharge
Measured: through study completion, an average of 2 years
Secondary outcomes (3)
Cost of treatment
cost of treatment includes direct medical cost and out of pocket expenditure
Measured: through study completion, an average of 2 years
Post operative morbidity survey (POMS survey)
The postoperative morbidity survey (POMS) is a nine-domain (Pulmonary, infection, renal, GIT, CVS, Neurological, haematological, wound and pain) system that prospectively identifies short-term morbidity after surgery. For each of the nine domains morbidity is recorded on the presence or absence of preset criteria.(PubMed ID: 10439777)
Measured: on 1,3,5 and 7th postoperative day and through study completion, an average of 2 years
30 day morbidity and mortality
No. of patients in each group with grade 3 to 5 postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification) and description of complication
Measured: through study completion, an average of 2 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 May 2018
- Study startJun 2016
- Primary completionJun 2019
- Study completionSep 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Ovarian CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Flotrac System 4.0 Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 145 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Tata Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Jyotsna Goswami, MD, Principal investigator, Tata Medical CenterAsima Mukhopadhyay, MD, PHD, Principal investigator, Tata Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03519165
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EC/TMC/56/15
- Acronym
- RIGoROCS
- Status last verified
- Jan 2020
- First submitted
- 22 Mar 2016
- Last updated
- 31 Jan 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
McKenny M, Conroy P, Wong A, Farren M, Gleeson N, Walsh C, O'Malley C, Dowd N. A randomised prospective trial of intra-operative oesophageal Doppler-guided fluid administration in major gynaecological surgery. Anaesthesia. 2013 Dec;68(12):1224-31. doi: 10.1111/anae.12355. Epub 2013 Sep 30.
PubMed 24116747Chattopadhyay S, Mittal S, Christian S, Terblanche AL, Patel A, Biliatis I, Kucukmetin A, Naik R, Galaal K. The role of intraoperative fluid optimization using the esophageal Doppler in advanced gynecological cancer: early postoperative recovery and fitness for discharge. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013 Jan;23(1):199-207. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182752372.
PubMed 23154265Bennett-Guerrero E, Welsby I, Dunn TJ, Young LR, Wahl TA, Diers TL, Phillips-Bute BG, Newman MF, Mythen MG. The use of a postoperative morbidity survey to evaluate patients with prolonged hospitalization after routine, moderate-risk, elective surgery. Anesth Analg. 1999 Aug;89(2):514-9. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199908000-00050.
PubMed 10439777
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 Jan 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Restrictive or Individualized Goal-Directed Fluid Replacement Strategy in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery- A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03519165
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RIGoROCS / EC/TMC/56/15
- Conditions
- Ovarian Cancer
- Keywords
- Ovarian cancer, goal-directed fluid therapy, SVV
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 145 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Tata Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 May 2018 (actual)
- 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.
This is a single center prospective randomized controlled study comparing the postoperative outcome after cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer patient after using restrictive or individualized goal-directed fluid replacement strategy (GDT). Aim of this study will be to test the hypothesis that intra-operative SVV-guided fluid optimization during ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery:
- reduces the postoperative length of hospital stay,
- cost-effective,
- GDT will be more beneficial in cases of PDS compared to IDS or cytoreductive procedures of shorter duration.
- GDT improves intraoperative tissue perfusion/ oxygenation and improves immediate postoperative morbidity.
Intra-operatively fluid of choice in both groups will be lactate-free crystalloid at 1.0 ml/kg/h for maintenance and gelofusine for fluid bolus of 3ml/kg over 5 minutes. In group C intraoperative fluid therapy will include maintenance fluid and replacement of the surgical loss. Aim will be to maintain MAP > 65 mmHg, CVP 8-12 cm H2O and urine output > 0.5 ml/kg/h. In group G intraoperative fluid therapy will be targeted to SVV <13%, SVI > 35ml/m2/ beat, SVRI more than equal to 1900 dynes-sec/cm-5/m2 in addition to clinical parameters like MAP, CVP and urine output.
Primary outcome will be length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes will be cost of surgical treatment episode (admission till fit to discharge), postoperative morbidity survey (POMS) and 30 day morbidity and mortality.
Detailed description
Aims \& objectives:
The purpose of the study is to test the hypothesis that intra-operative SVV-guided fluid optimization during ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery -
- Reduces the postoperative length of hospital stay.
- GDT is more cost-effective.
- GDT will be more beneficial in cases of PDS compared to IDS.
- GDT reduces postoperative morbidity.
Justification for study:
Cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer is usually associated with significant fluid shift attributable to suboptimal nutritional status, prolonged preoperative starvation, intraoperative blood and fluid loss, pharmacological vasodilation by neuraxial (epidural) and systemic anaesthetic drugs, intraoperative evaporative loss and the vasodilation due to systemic inflammatory response to surgery (SIRS), which was comparatively more in case of ovarian surgery. This results in hypotension and altered hemodynamics in the intra-operative and immediate
post-operative settings and the need for rigorous hemodynamic monitoring in the perioperative period. Among 3 different strategies, liberal or conservative one is associated with risk of overhydration, whereas restrictive therapy can cause hypoperfusion and related complications. A goal-directed fluid therapy has been shown to optimise intravascular volume in major abdominal surgery, which is the key determinant of cardiac output and oxygen delivery to tissues. This strategy results in use of more advanced hemodynamic monitors and increased costs thereof, and possibly, more total fluid requirements. A restrictive fluid strategy targeting physiological parameters alone, utilizes less costly modalities of monitoring and less overall fluid infused. But total healthcare cost associated with reduced rate of complications and thereby less hospital stay can neutralize that extra-cost of advanced monitoring (approximately Rs 8,000 per patient for consumables) and become more cost effective. The current standard of care in Tata Medical Center (TMC) has been a fluid therapy guided by clinical parameters. Although there is strong evidence supporting goal-directed approach to perioperative fluid therapy in case of major abdominal surgery, which has also been incorporated in enhanced recovery protocol and adopted worldwide, there is no such evidence for gynaec-oncological surgery, especially in ovarian cancer. So, investigators would like to conduct the proposed study to find-out the optimal fluid management strategy for ovarian cytoreductive surgery. As previously mentioned, investigators' data might indicate that the standard approach may lead to tissue hypoperfusion and approximately 2-3 liters of deficit which needs replacement under monitoring in order to avoid fluid overload.
Arguably, all patients of major cytoreductive surgery should require goal directed therapy and therefore randomization can potentially harm a subset of patients who would then receive restricted therapy instead of goal directed therapy. However, the standard regimen which is currently used in our setting is restrictive and SVV is also being increasingly used routinely only at the clinician's discretion including in ovarian cancer cases. Therefore no harm is anticipated from this intervention in either group. The only implication is of cost and resources; goal directed therapy has resource implications- both in terms of availability of machine and additional cost to the patient due to the consumables. A non-randomized prospective observational study would be feasible but will not be able to select which patients would benefit maximum from GDT due to selection bias. Therefore, a randomized study may help to identify a select group of patients who might benefit the maximum and therefore SVV directed fluid administration could be further stratified to be cost-effective due to reduction of postoperative length of hospital stay and morbidity.
From personal communication investigators know that, 3 trials of perioperative fluid therapy are ongoing now in India. Out of those 3 trials, 2 are in abdominal surgery and one is in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) surgery. Other cancer centers expressed interest to undertake similar trial in ovarian cytoreductive surgery. Therefore investigators may collaborate with other centers in future for a larger study based on the results; however, at present a single institutional study will be conducted to minimize bias associated with heterogeneity in surgical practice on cytoreduction.
Benefit:
This study will help investigators to guide fluid therapy in the perioperative period in ovarian cancer patients undergoing cytoreductive surgeries. This study should also help to find a strategy to prevent both fluid overload as well as under filling to avoid hypo perfusion and organ damage in this vulnerable group of patients. This strategy can even be adopted in other patient populations undergoing colorectal, hepatobiliary, thoraco-abdominal and HIPEC surgeries. These data will also inform whether a stratified approach can be adopted to selectively use SVV monitoring according to the predicted surgical complexity, type of cytoreduction and duration of surgery to optimize resources and improve cost-effectiveness.
Risks This study will utilize an existing technology, which is already in use. Therefore SOPs will be followed including reporting of adverse events, monitoring, documentation and safety reporting. The intervention is fluid bolus guided by advanced haemodynamic parameters (EV1000 monitor). Therefore risks are theoretical only. Risks related to the invasive procedures are same in both arms, which include pneumothorax, haemothorax, haemo-pneumothorax, bleeding, catheter-related infection and peripheral ischemia.
Methodology:
Site of Study OT complex and Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anaesthesiology \& Critical Care, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata
Study Structure Design:
Prospective randomized controlled trial - Patients and assessors will be blinded.
Population: All ovarian cancer patients undergoing major debulking surgery at TMC Kolkata (except- completion staging).
Sample size:
The study design was based on a retrospective audit at TMC that found the current median postoperative length of stay to be 10 days after cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer. To detect a reduction of 2 post-operative days with median postoperative length of stay to be 10 days in the restrictive group and 8 days in the goal directed group with a SD=3 days for 80% power at a significance level of 0.05, 37 patients are needed in each group (Total=74). As there is a difference in the median postoperative length of stay between the PDS and IDS group as mentioned earlier, at least 20 patients in each of the IDS and PDS groups would be needed for both the goal directed and restrictive group.
So the study would continue till each of the four combinations: Goal Directed (IDS), Goal Directed (PDS), Control (IDS) and Control (PDS) have at least 20 patients. To account for possible 10% attrition rate/ loss to follow up, 44 patients would be required in each group
Method of Randomization:
In addition to having higher median LOS in hospital, patients undergoing PDS are more likely to have ascites, major peritoneal stripping, higher surgical complexities and intraoperative fluid loss. Therefore, pre-randomization stratification will be done for type of surgery. Patients would be enrolled separately into PDS and IDS groups. Then for each group, patients would be randomized to get the standard or the goal directed therapy mentioned in the sealed envelopes based on computer generated random numbers.
After randomization and inclusion into a study arm, patients will be excluded in an event of the following: the procedure is abandoned/ open and close, duration of procedure is less than 4 hours, and any critical incident during operation (i.e. major blood loss/ medical condition/ shock) requiring intense fluid resuscitation. Following factors will be analyzed for univariate and multivariate analysis: ASA status, duration of surgery in minutes, surgical complexity score, intraoperative fluid loss, total vs. partial peritonectomy, comorbidities (Possum-P), massive blood loss and transfusion. Analysis will be on a per protocol basis as well as intention to treat.
Blinding:
- As the envelope would be opened after induction of GA, the patient will be blinded to the group she is allocated to.
- Post operative data will be collected by the ICU Consultant/ medical officer and Gynaec-oncosurgery team, who would not be part of the study and unaware about the allocation will follow up patients and decide on fitness to discharge. Outcome will also be verified according to predefined criteria by other clinicians from Gynaec-oncosurgery team, who are not aware about the allocated study group.
Statistical Analysis:
All statistical analyses and all summary tables and listings will be prepared using SASÒ release 8.3 or higher (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). Standard descriptive summaries will include the N, mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for continuous variables, and the number and percent for categorical variables. All statistical test of comparison will be based on 5% level of significance.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Flotrac System 4.0 Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control group (Group C) | No intervention | –Conventional Fluid therapy guided by clinical parameter Intraoperative fluid therapy will include maintenance fluid and replacement of the surgical loss. Aim to maintain MAP > 65 mmHg, CVP 8-12 cm H2O and urine output > 0.5 ml/kg/h. |
| Goal directed group (Group G) | Active comparator | Device: EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0)Intervention: Machine guided fluid therapy using EV1000 (FloTrac System 4.0 Edward Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) Intraoperative fluid therapy will be targeted to SVV <13%, SVI > 35ml/m2/ beat, SVRI more than equal to 1900 dynes-sec/cm-5/m2 using EV1000 floTrac monitor in addition to clinical parameters like MAP, CVP and urine output |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer-
- American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA-PS) score of 1 - 3
- Age more than 18 years and less than 65 years
- Surgery of duration more than 240 minutes
- Presumed blood loss more than 500 ml
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- Patient refusal
- Inability to give consent
- Laparoscopic surgery, Emergency surgery, patients undergoing HIPEC
- Age younger than 18 years \& more than 65 yrs, BMI > 40
- Patients with LVEF < 30%, Arrhythmia, Acute MI (within 30 days)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0) | Device | Goal directed group (Group G) |
Primary outcome
Postoperative length of Stay (LOS) in hospital in days
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 2 years
From day of surgery to the day of fit to discharge
3 secondary outcomes
Cost of treatment
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 2 years
Post operative morbidity survey (POMS survey)
Time frame: on 1,3,5 and 7th postoperative day and through study completion, an average of 2 years
30 day morbidity and mortality
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 2 years
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 31 Jan 2020.
- Background: PubMed 24116747McKenny M, Conroy P, Wong A, Farren M, Gleeson N, Walsh C, O'Malley C, Dowd N. A randomised prospective trial of intra-operative oesophageal Doppler-guided fluid administration in major gynaecological surgery. Anaesthesia. 2013 Dec;68(12):1224-31. doi: 10.1111/anae.12355. Epub 2013 Sep 30.
- Background: PubMed 23154265Chattopadhyay S, Mittal S, Christian S, Terblanche AL, Patel A, Biliatis I, Kucukmetin A, Naik R, Galaal K. The role of intraoperative fluid optimization using the esophageal Doppler in advanced gynecological cancer: early postoperative recovery and fitness for discharge. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013 Jan;23(1):199-207. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182752372.
- Background: PubMed 10439777Bennett-Guerrero E, Welsby I, Dunn TJ, Young LR, Wahl TA, Diers TL, Phillips-Bute BG, Newman MF, Mythen MG. The use of a postoperative morbidity survey to evaluate patients with prolonged hospitalization after routine, moderate-risk, elective surgery. Anesth Analg. 1999 Aug;89(2):514-9. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199908000-00050.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Ovarian Cancer
Recruiting
Methylation Profiling in Self-Samples for Identification of (Epi)Genetic Biomarkers for Gynecological Cancers
Gynaecological Cancers, Ovarian Cancer
Recruiting
A Study to Compare Two Surgical Procedures in Individuals With BRCA1 Mutations to Assess Reduced Risk of Ovarian Cancer
Ovarian Carcinoma
RecruitingPhase 2
Investigation of Ubamatamab Combination Therapy in Adult Participants With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer
Ovarian Cancer, Fallopian Tube Cancer
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
Phase I/II Study of the Anti-Programmed Death Ligand-1 Durvalumab Antibody (MEDI4736) in Combination With Olaparib and/or Cediranib for Advanced Solid Tumors and Advanced or Recurrent Ovarian, Triple Negative Breast, Lung, Prostate and Colorectal Can...
Colorectal Neoplasms, Breast Neoplasms
Recruiting
The Vanguard Study: Testing a New Way to Screen for Cancer
Bladder Carcinoma, Breast Carcinoma
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.
Jyotsna Goswami, MD principal investigator
Tata Medical Center
Asima Mukhopadhyay, MD, PHD principal investigator
Tata Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing EV1000(FloTrac System 4.0) in people with Ovarian Cancer, run by Tata Medical Center at 1 site in India.
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 8 inclusion and 12 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 31 Jan 2020. 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 India. 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?
Postoperative length of Stay (LOS) in hospital in days (time frame: through study completion, an average of 2 years). 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 NCT03519165, 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 31 Jan 2020.