Breast CancerNCT03627442
Post-op Outcomes of Enhanced Energy Delivery Dissection for Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction
A study testing Mastectomy with PhotonBlade and Mastectomy with Bovie in people with Breast Cancer, run by Invuity, Inc..
Trial summary
Principal Investigator: Sheldon Feldman, MD Co-Principal Investigator: Mohamad Sebai, MD Department of Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center - Einstein College of Medicine Title Pilot Study: Post-operative outcomes of enhanced energy delivery dissection for mastectomy breast flap creation with immediate breast… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Mastectomy with PhotonBlade and Mastectomy with Bovie
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 15 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 15 Aug 2018to 15 Oct 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
- Patients with or without breast cancer whom are candidates for and choose bilateral mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction (tissue expander based breast reconstruction).
- Patients who had neoadjuvant chemotherapy are not excluded from participation
- Understand the study purpose, requirements, and risks.
- Be able and willing to give informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Inflammatory breast cancer
- Connective tissue disease
- Previous breast radiotherapy
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: Pilot Study: Post-operative Outcomes of Enhanced Energy Delivery Dissection for Mastectomy Breast Flap Creation With Immediate Breast Reconstruction
Principal Investigator: Sheldon Feldman, MD Co-Principal Investigator: Mohamad Sebai, MD Department of Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center - Einstein College of Medicine
Title Pilot Study: Post-operative outcomes of enhanced energy delivery dissection for mastectomy breast flap creation with immediate breast reconstruction Goal Determine the feasibility of a study design that includes the evaluation of breast flap viability, postoperative surgical site drainage, post-operative pain/surgical site complications, time to complete mastectomy with Photonblade (PB) vs traditional electrosurgery devices.
Read more
Overall outcome If determined feasible, consider going to clinical trial. Timing 6 months starting after execution of contract Study population Women between 18-65 years old Choose bilateral mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction (through tissue expander insertion) No inflammatory breast cancer/no radiotherapy Study design Single blinded, randomized controlled pilot study (n=15) Only breast surgeon knows which device was used for each breast Study feasibility endpoints Flap Viability - compare perfusion, using PhotonVue, of flaps creation using PB vs Bovie (left is better, right is better or they are similar) Site drainage - Measure drainage volume and duration Pain scores and complications - Subjective pain assessment on days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30 post-op. (Pain visual Analog Scale).
Surgical site complications will be recorded up to 30-days post-op. Time to completion of mastectomy flap using PB vs Bovie will be recorded. (Time in minutes between initial incision and completion of mastectomy for each side) Analysis Descriptive analysis will be performed to examine data distribution, missing data and data errors.
Continuous variables will be summarized using means or medians; categorical variables will be summarized using proportions.
CLINICAL TRIAL Objectives Determine if post-op flap viability differs between women getting mastectomy flap creation using PB vs Bovie Determine if post-op site drainage measures differs between two devices Determine if post-op pain measures differ when using PB vs Bovie Determine if time to mastectomy flap creation differs between using Bovie and PB
Read the detailed description
Pilot Study: Post-Operative Outcomes of Enhanced Energy Delivery Dissection for Mastectomy Breast Flap Creation with Immediate Breast Reconstruction
Principal Investigator Sheldon M. Feldman, MD Chief, Division of Breast Surgery \& Breast Surgical Oncology Director, Breast Cancer Services; Professor of Surgery Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: sfeldman@montefiore.org
Co-Principal Investigator Mohamad E. Sebai, MD General Surgery Resident Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: msebai@montefiore.org
Biostatistics: Michael Parides, PhD Professor Department of Surgery Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: mparides@montefiore.org
Patricia Friedmann, MS Assistant Professor Department of Surgery Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: patricia.friedmann@einstein.yu.edu
- Rationale: Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United States. The American Cancer Society (ACS) estimated that 230,480 new cases of invasive breast cancer, a 19.8% increase over the ACS's 2009 estimates, and 39,520 deaths due to the disease would occur in 2011(1). In addition to breast conserving treatments, mastectomy can be an important and definitive treatment option for selected patients. Breast reconstruction has been shown to improve quality of life scores in patients treated with mastectomy (2). Immediate Breast reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy has typically been performed using prosthetic devices or autologous tissue transplantation (3). Skin sparing mastectomy is a commonly used method of surgical treatment for breast cancer that allows for immediate breast reconstruction (4). Preservation of the breast skin envelope (breast flap) provides excellent cosmetic results and the overall sensation is largely maintained (4-7). An important factor for breast reconstruction success is the creation of a well perfused breast flap, with minimum flap injury (8-10). One of the major complications associated with this surgery is breast flap death (necrosis, 11). This complication then requires the patient to endure further operations, prolonged hospital stays, and higher hospital costs. Rates of native skin flap ischemia and necrosis after skin-sparing mastectomy vary from 2% to 30% (11,12). Some evidence suggests that this flap necrosis could be due to decreased or loss of viability/ blood supply (ischemia) as a result of the thermal injury caused by traditional dissection devices (Bovie cautery) use for breast flap creation (13). The use of traditional dissection devices remains to be the most common in creating breast flaps, despite how old this technology is. Newer dissection devices that uses modern technology for enhanced energy delivery has been introduced recently, however, there is still paucity of data in regards to the clinical outcomes of using these devices for the cases of mastectomy and IBR. PhotonBlade (Invuity, San Francisco, CA, USA) has been approved by United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). PhotonBlade is a dynamic precision illuminator with enhanced energy delivery dissection device. The dynamic precision illumination is a thermally cool illumination technology that allows a uniformal illumination without glare or shadow (14). The enhanced energy delivery technology allows low thermal spread, surgeon controlled edge temperature, and wet field use (14). As such, PhotonBlade allows better blade control for achieving adequate visualization, hemostasis, with a minimum collateral damage to the created flap. The use of PhotonBlade demonstrated the least penetrating thermal tissue damage/spread when compared to other modern dissection devices (Valleylab Pencil, Valleylab EDGE Coated Pencil, PlasmaBlade 3.0S and PlasmaBlade 4.0)(15). The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of measuring breast flap viability, postoperative surgical site drainage, post-operative pain/ surgical site complications, and time to complete mastectomy with the use of enhanced energy delivery dissection devices, PhotonBlade, in comparison to traditional electrosurgery devices.
- Study Design: This is a single-blinded, controlled pilot study (n=15) to determine the feasibility of comparing postoperative flap viability and surgical site drainage between patients randomized to breast flap creation by PhotonBlade on one breast and by a Bovie cautery (Control) for the contralateral breast. Candidates will have elected to undergo bilateral post-mastectomy IBR through tissue expander insertion. Participants meeting inclusion criteria will be enrolled and baseline data collection completed prior to randomization and surgery. Patients will be blinded in regards to which side will be treated with which cautery device. Initially, the plastic surgeon will be blinded as to the electrocautery device used on the breast until after completing the flap evaluation, when the plastic surgeon will be unblinded. This is done to allow the plastic surgeon to use same dissection device for each breast side during the reconstruction part of the surgery. Only the breast oncology surgeon has initial knowledge of which device was used for each breast flap. Patient-specific surgical details will be recorded intraoperatively. Following the surgery, post-operative flap perfusion will be recorded using PhotonVue imaging system and will be used a tool for flap viability assessment by the plastic surgeon clinical evaluation. Surgical site drainage will be measured until drainage removal. Post- operative pain scores and the occurrence of adverse events will be recorded up until 30 days post-op. Before starting enrollment, the breast and plastic surgeons will do up to 5 non-pilot study cases using PhotonBlade in order be familiar with the device. Figure 1 demonstrates study design schema for the pilot study. Figure 1 does not include the up to 5 non-pilot study cases.
- Sample Size: The proposed sample size of 15 patients for this pilot study is based on ensuring acceptable operating characteristics for the decision process for assessing feasibility. Feasibility will be determined by whether breast flaps created using the PhotonBlade have better viability than those created using Bovie cautery. The null hypothesis is that the probability that flaps created using the PhotonBlade have better viability than those created by Bovie cautery (π) is less than one-half. The alternative hypothesis is that this probability is greater than one-half. Feasibility is defined as observing superior viability with the PhotonBlade in 10 or more of the 15 randomized patients. The sample size of 15 ensures that the false positive rate (Type I error) for determining feasibility using this definition is 0.15 (i.e., the binomial probability of observing 10 or more patients with better viability using the PhotonBlade out of 15 total patients given π=0.50 is 0.15). This probability (i.e., power) is 0.85 under the alternative that π=0.75, and 0.72 under the alternative that π=0.70.
- Randomizations: Patients will have their breasts randomized, with the left breast receiving mastectomy flap creation using the randomized assignment (PhotonBlade or Bovie cautery), and the right breast receiving the other approach. Randomization of breast side will be performed by the breast surgical oncologist on the day of the surgery from a master randomization list created by the study statistician. A simple randomization scheme will be employed.
- Flap Perfusion Viability This will be done by the plastic surgeon who will evaluate the flaps by using PhotonVue near-infrared fluorescence images for flap perfusion of each breast flap after the mastectomy and before the immediate breast reconstruction. PhotonVue is an FDA approved fluorescence imaging system that is used as an adjuvant assessment tool of tissue perfusion, and blood circulation of free flaps used in plastic, micro- reconstruction, and organ transplant surgeries.16 PhotonVue images of the flap perfusion will be taken at 45-60 seconds post ICG injection. For each case, the plastic surgeons will report one of three outcomes: a) Left breast flap has a better viability, b) Right breast flap has a better viability, or c) both sides are similarly viable. After unbinding, the results will be reported according to the usage of PhotonBlade or Bovie cautery for each side.
- Surgical Site Drainage Assessments This will be done by measuring surgical site drainage volume and days until removal of the drains for each breast.
- Post-Operative Pain Assessment Pain Visual Analog Scale will be used to assess pain preoperatively and postoperatively. Patient will be asked to report their pain score for each breast using the validated Pain Visual Analog Scale (Appendix A). Short term post pain will be reported as the mean of pain scores up to day 7, and longer term post op pain will be the pain score at day 30 post op. Up to 30 days post-op follow-up medical records will be used to collect incidences of post op surgical site complications. Additionally, patients will be asked to report their experience at the 30 days follow up appointment. Their response will be recorded. They will be also asked to report one of the following: 1) I believe the right breast had a better patient reported outcomes based on my experience, 2) I believe the left breast had a better patient reported outcomes based on my experience, or 3) I believe both breasts had similar patient reported outcomes based on my experience. After completion of data collection of the 30 days post-op follow up visit, patients will be unblinded and they will be made aware of which dissection device was used for which breast.
- Time for Mastectomy Completion This will be done by measuring time in minutes from the incision time until the completion of mastectomy for each breast side.
- Outcome Evaluation: Sources of data: The sources of the data are our institutional medical records system. Data collection: Data will be collected from the medical records through chart review process done by study team officials. Data analysis: The main analytic goal of this pilot study is assessment of feasibility which is based on the number of patients with PhotonBlade flaps having better viability than Bovie flaps (a "success"), and quantified by the exact (binomial) probability of observing at least that many successes if the true success probability is 0.5. Additional outcomes will be summarized numerically using descriptive statistics (appropriate point and interval estimates) and graphically (histograms, box-plots, stem and leaf plots as required).
- Toxicity grading: All adverse events will be recorded and reported in accordance to The National Cancer Institute's published Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0.
- Data Storage All study data will be stored within a password secured electronic dataset. Study data will be accessed only by IRB approved study staff.
- Timeline:
The estimated period for the feasibility pilot study (n=15) is 6 months starting from signing the contract. Once IRB approval is attained for the pilot study, patient enrollment will begin. Patients data and study outcomes will be collected on rolling basis in parallel with patient enrollment and study execution. Once all data are gathered, data reporting will be done.
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Being tested
- Mastectomy with PhotonBlade, Mastectomy with Bovie
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Mastectomy with PhotonBladeProcedure or surgery
One of the breasts of each patient undergoing double mastectomy will be randomly assigned to breast flap creation with PhotonBlade
Mastectomy with BovieProcedure or surgery
One of the breasts of each patient undergoing double mastectomy will be randomly assigned to breast flap creation with Bovie
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Mastectomy with PhotonBlade | Active comparator | Patients undergoing double mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with expanders. One breast will be randomly selected to be operated with PhotonBlade Receives: Procedure: Mastectomy with PhotonBlade |
| Mastectomy with Bovie | Active comparator | Patients undergoing double mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with expanders. One breast will be randomly selected to be operated with Bovie. Receives: Procedure: Mastectomy with Bovie |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Flap perfusion viability
This will be done by the plastic surgeon who will evaluate the flaps using PhotonVue images for flap perfusion of each breast flap after the mastectomy and before the immediate breast reconstruction.
PhotonVue is an FDA approved fluorescence imaging system that is used as an adjuvant assessment tool of tissue perfusion, and blood circulation of free flaps used in plastic, micro- reconstruction, and organ transplant surgeries.16 PhotonVue images of the flap perfusion will be taken at 45-60 seconds post ICG injection.
For each case, the plastic surgeons will report one of three outcomes: a) Left breast flap has a better viability, b) Right breast flap has a better viability, or c) both sides are similarly viable. After unbinding, the results will be reported according to the usage of PhotonBlade or Bovie cautery for each side.
Measured: Immediately after mastectomy
Change in Surgical Site Drainage
This will be done by measuring surgical site drainage volume until removal of the drains for each breast.
Measured: Post surgery until removal of drains from each breast, assessed up to 5 weeks
Post-Operative Pain Assessment
Pain Visual Analog Scale will be used to assess pain pre-operatively and post-operatively. Patient will be asked to report their pain score for each breast using the validated Pain Visual Analog Scale. The Visual Analog Scale For pain, asks the patient to draw a line indicating their level of pain on a 10 cm vertical line (where the bottom of the vertical line indicates no pain and the top indicates highest pain level). The line drawn by the patient will provide the pain score which will be calculated as the distance in mm from the bottom (no pain) level to the patient mark. As such, higher values will mean higher level of pain. Short term post pain will be reported as the mean of pain scores up to day 7, and longer term post op pain will be the pain score at day 30 post op. Up to 30 days post-op follow-up medical records will be used to collect incidences of post op surgical site complications.
Measured: Change in pain for each breast will be assessed preoperatively and then postoperatively on days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30.
Surgical Site Complications
Will document any surgical site complications.
Measured: Day 1, 2 and 3 pot-surgery (until discharge) and up to 30 days.
Surgical Site Drainage - Time
This will be done by counting the days until removal of the drains for each breast
Measured: Postsurgery and until removal of the drains
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Aug 2018
- Study start15 Aug 2018 (estimated)
- Primary completion15 Aug 2019 (estimated)
- Study completion15 Oct 2019 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (13)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Breast 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Single blinded, randomized controlled pilot study (n=15) Only breast surgeon knows which device was used for each breast at initiation of surgery
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 15 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Invuity, Inc.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Montefiore Medical Center
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Mohamad Sebai, MD, Principal investigator, Montefiore Medical CenterSheldon Feldman, MD, Principal investigator, Montefiore Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03627442
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2017-8737
- Status last verified
- Jul 2018
- First submitted
- 18 Jul 2018
- Last updated
- 13 Aug 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
ACS. Breast Cancer Facts and Figures 2011-2012. (2012).
Girotto JA, Schreiber J, Nahabedian MY. Breast reconstruction in the elderly: preserving excellent quality of life. Ann Plast Surg. 2003 Jun;50(6):572-8. doi: 10.1097/01.SAP.0000069064.68579.19.
PubMed 12783001Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, Disa JJ, Pusic AL, McCarthy CM, Cordeiro PG, Matros E. A paradigm shift in U.S. Breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Jan;131(1):15-23. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182729cde.
PubMed 23271515Gonzalez EG, Rancati AO. Skin-sparing mastectomy. Gland Surg. 2015 Dec;4(6):541-53. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.04.21.
PubMed 26645008Cho JW, Yoon ES, You HJ, Kim HS, Lee BI, Park SH. Nipple-Areola Complex Necrosis after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Autologous Breast Reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg. 2015 Sep;42(5):601-7. doi: 10.5999/aps.2015.42.5.601. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
PubMed 26430632Martinez CA, Reis SM, Sato EA, Boutros SG. The Nipple-Areola Preserving Mastectomy: A Multistage Procedure Aiming to Improve Reconstructive Outcomes following Mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Oct 20;3(10):e538. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000516. eCollection 2015 Oct.
PubMed 26579344van Verschuer VM, Maijers MC, van Deurzen CH, Koppert LB. Oncological safety of prophylactic breast surgery: skin-sparing and nipple-sparing versus total mastectomy. Gland Surg. 2015 Dec;4(6):467-75. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.02.01.
PubMed 26645001Tindholdt TT, Saidian S, Tonseth KA. Microcirculatory evaluation of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps with laser Doppler perfusion imaging in breast reconstruction. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2011 Jun;45(3):143-7. doi: 10.3109/2000656X.2011.579721.
PubMed 21682611Lin SJ, Nguyen MD, Chen C, Colakoglu S, Curtis MS, Tobias AM, Lee BT. Tissue oximetry monitoring in microsurgical breast reconstruction decreases flap loss and improves rate of flap salvage. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Mar;127(3):1080-1085. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31820436cb.
PubMed 21364410Garvey PB, Salavati S, Feng L, Butler CE. Perfusion-related complications are similar for DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps harvested on medial or lateral deep inferior epigastric Artery branch perforators for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Dec;128(6):581e-589e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c122.
PubMed 22094755Chirappapha P, Petit JY, Rietjens M, De Lorenzi F, Garusi C, Martella S, Barbieri B, Gottardi A, Andrea M, Giuseppe L, Hamza A, Lohsiriwat V. Nipple sparing mastectomy: does breast morphological factor related to necrotic complications? Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014 Feb 7;2(1):e99. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000038. eCollection 2014 Jan.
PubMed 25289296Patel KM, Hill LM, Gatti ME, Nahabedian MY. Management of massive mastectomy skin flap necrosis following autologous breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Aug;69(2):139-44. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182250e23.
PubMed 21734543Rusby JE, Smith BL, Gui GP. Nipple-sparing mastectomy. Br J Surg. 2010 Mar;97(3):305-16. doi: 10.1002/bjs.6970.
PubMed 20101646
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Aug 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Pilot Study: Post-operative Outcomes of Enhanced Energy Delivery Dissection for Mastectomy Breast Flap Creation With Immediate Breast Reconstruction
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03627442
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2017-8737
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 15 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Invuity, Inc.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Montefiore Medical Center
- Study start
- 15 Aug 2018 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 15 Aug 2019 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 15 Oct 2019 (estimated)
- First posted
- 13 Aug 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.
Principal Investigator: Sheldon Feldman, MD Co-Principal Investigator: Mohamad Sebai, MD Department of Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center - Einstein College of Medicine
Title Pilot Study: Post-operative outcomes of enhanced energy delivery dissection for mastectomy breast flap creation with immediate breast reconstruction Goal Determine the feasibility of a study design that includes the evaluation of breast flap viability, postoperative surgical site drainage, post-operative pain/surgical site complications, time to complete mastectomy with Photonblade (PB) vs traditional electrosurgery devices.
Overall outcome If determined feasible, consider going to clinical trial. Timing 6 months starting after execution of contract Study population Women between 18-65 years old Choose bilateral mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction (through tissue expander insertion) No inflammatory breast cancer/no radiotherapy Study design Single blinded, randomized controlled pilot study (n=15) Only breast surgeon knows which device was used for each breast Study feasibility endpoints Flap Viability - compare perfusion, using PhotonVue, of flaps creation using PB vs Bovie (left is better, right is better or they are similar) Site drainage - Measure drainage volume and duration Pain scores and complications - Subjective pain assessment on days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30 post-op. (Pain visual Analog Scale).
Surgical site complications will be recorded up to 30-days post-op. Time to completion of mastectomy flap using PB vs Bovie will be recorded. (Time in minutes between initial incision and completion of mastectomy for each side) Analysis Descriptive analysis will be performed to examine data distribution, missing data and data errors.
Continuous variables will be summarized using means or medians; categorical variables will be summarized using proportions.
CLINICAL TRIAL Objectives Determine if post-op flap viability differs between women getting mastectomy flap creation using PB vs Bovie Determine if post-op site drainage measures differs between two devices Determine if post-op pain measures differ when using PB vs Bovie Determine if time to mastectomy flap creation differs between using Bovie and PB
Detailed description
Pilot Study: Post-Operative Outcomes of Enhanced Energy Delivery Dissection for Mastectomy Breast Flap Creation with Immediate Breast Reconstruction
Principal Investigator Sheldon M. Feldman, MD Chief, Division of Breast Surgery \& Breast Surgical Oncology Director, Breast Cancer Services; Professor of Surgery Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: sfeldman@montefiore.org
Co-Principal Investigator Mohamad E. Sebai, MD General Surgery Resident Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: msebai@montefiore.org
Biostatistics: Michael Parides, PhD Professor Department of Surgery Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: mparides@montefiore.org
Patricia Friedmann, MS Assistant Professor Department of Surgery Montefiore Medical Center- Albert Einstein College of Medicine New York, NY Email: patricia.friedmann@einstein.yu.edu
- Rationale: Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United States. The American Cancer Society (ACS) estimated that 230,480 new cases of invasive breast cancer, a 19.8% increase over the ACS's 2009 estimates, and 39,520 deaths due to the disease would occur in 2011(1). In addition to breast conserving treatments, mastectomy can be an important and definitive treatment option for selected patients. Breast reconstruction has been shown to improve quality of life scores in patients treated with mastectomy (2). Immediate Breast reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy has typically been performed using prosthetic devices or autologous tissue transplantation (3). Skin sparing mastectomy is a commonly used method of surgical treatment for breast cancer that allows for immediate breast reconstruction (4). Preservation of the breast skin envelope (breast flap) provides excellent cosmetic results and the overall sensation is largely maintained (4-7). An important factor for breast reconstruction success is the creation of a well perfused breast flap, with minimum flap injury (8-10). One of the major complications associated with this surgery is breast flap death (necrosis, 11). This complication then requires the patient to endure further operations, prolonged hospital stays, and higher hospital costs. Rates of native skin flap ischemia and necrosis after skin-sparing mastectomy vary from 2% to 30% (11,12). Some evidence suggests that this flap necrosis could be due to decreased or loss of viability/ blood supply (ischemia) as a result of the thermal injury caused by traditional dissection devices (Bovie cautery) use for breast flap creation (13). The use of traditional dissection devices remains to be the most common in creating breast flaps, despite how old this technology is. Newer dissection devices that uses modern technology for enhanced energy delivery has been introduced recently, however, there is still paucity of data in regards to the clinical outcomes of using these devices for the cases of mastectomy and IBR. PhotonBlade (Invuity, San Francisco, CA, USA) has been approved by United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). PhotonBlade is a dynamic precision illuminator with enhanced energy delivery dissection device. The dynamic precision illumination is a thermally cool illumination technology that allows a uniformal illumination without glare or shadow (14). The enhanced energy delivery technology allows low thermal spread, surgeon controlled edge temperature, and wet field use (14). As such, PhotonBlade allows better blade control for achieving adequate visualization, hemostasis, with a minimum collateral damage to the created flap. The use of PhotonBlade demonstrated the least penetrating thermal tissue damage/spread when compared to other modern dissection devices (Valleylab Pencil, Valleylab EDGE Coated Pencil, PlasmaBlade 3.0S and PlasmaBlade 4.0)(15). The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of measuring breast flap viability, postoperative surgical site drainage, post-operative pain/ surgical site complications, and time to complete mastectomy with the use of enhanced energy delivery dissection devices, PhotonBlade, in comparison to traditional electrosurgery devices.
- Study Design: This is a single-blinded, controlled pilot study (n=15) to determine the feasibility of comparing postoperative flap viability and surgical site drainage between patients randomized to breast flap creation by PhotonBlade on one breast and by a Bovie cautery (Control) for the contralateral breast. Candidates will have elected to undergo bilateral post-mastectomy IBR through tissue expander insertion. Participants meeting inclusion criteria will be enrolled and baseline data collection completed prior to randomization and surgery. Patients will be blinded in regards to which side will be treated with which cautery device. Initially, the plastic surgeon will be blinded as to the electrocautery device used on the breast until after completing the flap evaluation, when the plastic surgeon will be unblinded. This is done to allow the plastic surgeon to use same dissection device for each breast side during the reconstruction part of the surgery. Only the breast oncology surgeon has initial knowledge of which device was used for each breast flap. Patient-specific surgical details will be recorded intraoperatively. Following the surgery, post-operative flap perfusion will be recorded using PhotonVue imaging system and will be used a tool for flap viability assessment by the plastic surgeon clinical evaluation. Surgical site drainage will be measured until drainage removal. Post- operative pain scores and the occurrence of adverse events will be recorded up until 30 days post-op. Before starting enrollment, the breast and plastic surgeons will do up to 5 non-pilot study cases using PhotonBlade in order be familiar with the device. Figure 1 demonstrates study design schema for the pilot study. Figure 1 does not include the up to 5 non-pilot study cases.
- Sample Size: The proposed sample size of 15 patients for this pilot study is based on ensuring acceptable operating characteristics for the decision process for assessing feasibility. Feasibility will be determined by whether breast flaps created using the PhotonBlade have better viability than those created using Bovie cautery. The null hypothesis is that the probability that flaps created using the PhotonBlade have better viability than those created by Bovie cautery (π) is less than one-half. The alternative hypothesis is that this probability is greater than one-half. Feasibility is defined as observing superior viability with the PhotonBlade in 10 or more of the 15 randomized patients. The sample size of 15 ensures that the false positive rate (Type I error) for determining feasibility using this definition is 0.15 (i.e., the binomial probability of observing 10 or more patients with better viability using the PhotonBlade out of 15 total patients given π=0.50 is 0.15). This probability (i.e., power) is 0.85 under the alternative that π=0.75, and 0.72 under the alternative that π=0.70.
- Randomizations: Patients will have their breasts randomized, with the left breast receiving mastectomy flap creation using the randomized assignment (PhotonBlade or Bovie cautery), and the right breast receiving the other approach. Randomization of breast side will be performed by the breast surgical oncologist on the day of the surgery from a master randomization list created by the study statistician. A simple randomization scheme will be employed.
- Flap Perfusion Viability This will be done by the plastic surgeon who will evaluate the flaps by using PhotonVue near-infrared fluorescence images for flap perfusion of each breast flap after the mastectomy and before the immediate breast reconstruction. PhotonVue is an FDA approved fluorescence imaging system that is used as an adjuvant assessment tool of tissue perfusion, and blood circulation of free flaps used in plastic, micro- reconstruction, and organ transplant surgeries.16 PhotonVue images of the flap perfusion will be taken at 45-60 seconds post ICG injection. For each case, the plastic surgeons will report one of three outcomes: a) Left breast flap has a better viability, b) Right breast flap has a better viability, or c) both sides are similarly viable. After unbinding, the results will be reported according to the usage of PhotonBlade or Bovie cautery for each side.
- Surgical Site Drainage Assessments This will be done by measuring surgical site drainage volume and days until removal of the drains for each breast.
- Post-Operative Pain Assessment Pain Visual Analog Scale will be used to assess pain preoperatively and postoperatively. Patient will be asked to report their pain score for each breast using the validated Pain Visual Analog Scale (Appendix A). Short term post pain will be reported as the mean of pain scores up to day 7, and longer term post op pain will be the pain score at day 30 post op. Up to 30 days post-op follow-up medical records will be used to collect incidences of post op surgical site complications. Additionally, patients will be asked to report their experience at the 30 days follow up appointment. Their response will be recorded. They will be also asked to report one of the following: 1) I believe the right breast had a better patient reported outcomes based on my experience, 2) I believe the left breast had a better patient reported outcomes based on my experience, or 3) I believe both breasts had similar patient reported outcomes based on my experience. After completion of data collection of the 30 days post-op follow up visit, patients will be unblinded and they will be made aware of which dissection device was used for which breast.
- Time for Mastectomy Completion This will be done by measuring time in minutes from the incision time until the completion of mastectomy for each breast side.
- Outcome Evaluation: Sources of data: The sources of the data are our institutional medical records system. Data collection: Data will be collected from the medical records through chart review process done by study team officials. Data analysis: The main analytic goal of this pilot study is assessment of feasibility which is based on the number of patients with PhotonBlade flaps having better viability than Bovie flaps (a "success"), and quantified by the exact (binomial) probability of observing at least that many successes if the true success probability is 0.5. Additional outcomes will be summarized numerically using descriptive statistics (appropriate point and interval estimates) and graphically (histograms, box-plots, stem and leaf plots as required).
- Toxicity grading: All adverse events will be recorded and reported in accordance to The National Cancer Institute's published Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0.
- Data Storage All study data will be stored within a password secured electronic dataset. Study data will be accessed only by IRB approved study staff.
- Timeline:
The estimated period for the feasibility pilot study (n=15) is 6 months starting from signing the contract. Once IRB approval is attained for the pilot study, patient enrollment will begin. Patients data and study outcomes will be collected on rolling basis in parallel with patient enrollment and study execution. Once all data are gathered, data reporting will be done.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Single blinded, randomized controlled pilot study (n=15) Only breast surgeon knows which device was used for each breast at initiation of surgery
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Mastectomy with PhotonBlade | Active comparator | Procedure: Mastectomy with PhotonBladePatients undergoing double mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with expanders. One breast will be randomly selected to be operated with PhotonBlade |
| Mastectomy with Bovie | Active comparator | Procedure: Mastectomy with BoviePatients undergoing double mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with expanders. One breast will be randomly selected to be operated with Bovie. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Patients with or without breast cancer whom are candidates for and choose bilateral mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction (tissue expander based breast reconstruction).
- Patients who had neoadjuvant chemotherapy are not excluded from participation
- Understand the study purpose, requirements, and risks.
- Be able and willing to give informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Inflammatory breast cancer
- Connective tissue disease
- Previous breast radiotherapy
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mastectomy with PhotonBladeOne of the breasts of each patient undergoing double mastectomy will be randomly assigned to breast flap creation with PhotonBlade | Procedure or surgery | Mastectomy with PhotonBlade |
| Mastectomy with BovieOne of the breasts of each patient undergoing double mastectomy will be randomly assigned to breast flap creation with Bovie | Procedure or surgery | Mastectomy with Bovie |
Primary outcome
Flap perfusion viability
Time frame: Immediately after mastectomy
This will be done by the plastic surgeon who will evaluate the flaps using PhotonVue images for flap perfusion of each breast flap after the mastectomy and before the immediate breast reconstruction. PhotonVue is an FDA approved fluorescence imaging system that is used as an adjuvant assessment tool of tissue perfusion, and blood circulation of free flaps used in plastic, micro- reconstruction, and organ transplant surgeries.16 PhotonVue images of the flap perfusion will be taken at 45-60 seconds post ICG injection. For each case, the plastic surgeons will report one of three outcomes: a) Left breast flap has a better viability, b) Right breast flap has a better viability, or c) both sides are similarly viable. After unbinding, the results will be reported according to the usage of PhotonBlade or Bovie cautery for each side.
Change in Surgical Site Drainage
Time frame: Post surgery until removal of drains from each breast, assessed up to 5 weeks
This will be done by measuring surgical site drainage volume until removal of the drains for each breast.
Post-Operative Pain Assessment
Time frame: Change in pain for each breast will be assessed preoperatively and then postoperatively on days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30.
Pain Visual Analog Scale will be used to assess pain pre-operatively and post-operatively. Patient will be asked to report their pain score for each breast using the validated Pain Visual Analog Scale. The Visual Analog Scale For pain, asks the patient to draw a line indicating their level of pain on a 10 cm vertical line (where the bottom of the vertical line indicates no pain and the top indicates highest pain level). The line drawn by the patient will provide the pain score which will be calculated as the distance in mm from the bottom (no pain) level to the patient mark. As such, higher values will mean higher level of pain. Short term post pain will be reported as the mean of pain scores up to day 7, and longer term post op pain will be the pain score at day 30 post op. Up to 30 days post-op follow-up medical records will be used to collect incidences of post op surgical site complications.
Surgical Site Complications
Time frame: Day 1, 2 and 3 pot-surgery (until discharge) and up to 30 days.
Will document any surgical site complications.
Surgical Site Drainage - Time
Time frame: Postsurgery and until removal of the drains
This will be done by counting the days until removal of the drains for each breast
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Aug 2018.
- BackgroundACS. Breast Cancer Facts and Figures 2011-2012. (2012).
- Background: PubMed 12783001Girotto JA, Schreiber J, Nahabedian MY. Breast reconstruction in the elderly: preserving excellent quality of life. Ann Plast Surg. 2003 Jun;50(6):572-8. doi: 10.1097/01.SAP.0000069064.68579.19.
- Background: PubMed 23271515Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, Disa JJ, Pusic AL, McCarthy CM, Cordeiro PG, Matros E. A paradigm shift in U.S. Breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Jan;131(1):15-23. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182729cde.
- Background: PubMed 26645008Gonzalez EG, Rancati AO. Skin-sparing mastectomy. Gland Surg. 2015 Dec;4(6):541-53. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.04.21.
- Background: PubMed 26430632Cho JW, Yoon ES, You HJ, Kim HS, Lee BI, Park SH. Nipple-Areola Complex Necrosis after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Autologous Breast Reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg. 2015 Sep;42(5):601-7. doi: 10.5999/aps.2015.42.5.601. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
- Background: PubMed 26579344Martinez CA, Reis SM, Sato EA, Boutros SG. The Nipple-Areola Preserving Mastectomy: A Multistage Procedure Aiming to Improve Reconstructive Outcomes following Mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Oct 20;3(10):e538. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000516. eCollection 2015 Oct.
- Background: PubMed 26645001van Verschuer VM, Maijers MC, van Deurzen CH, Koppert LB. Oncological safety of prophylactic breast surgery: skin-sparing and nipple-sparing versus total mastectomy. Gland Surg. 2015 Dec;4(6):467-75. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.02.01.
- Background: PubMed 21682611Tindholdt TT, Saidian S, Tonseth KA. Microcirculatory evaluation of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps with laser Doppler perfusion imaging in breast reconstruction. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2011 Jun;45(3):143-7. doi: 10.3109/2000656X.2011.579721.
- Background: PubMed 21364410Lin SJ, Nguyen MD, Chen C, Colakoglu S, Curtis MS, Tobias AM, Lee BT. Tissue oximetry monitoring in microsurgical breast reconstruction decreases flap loss and improves rate of flap salvage. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Mar;127(3):1080-1085. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31820436cb.
- Background: PubMed 22094755Garvey PB, Salavati S, Feng L, Butler CE. Perfusion-related complications are similar for DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps harvested on medial or lateral deep inferior epigastric Artery branch perforators for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Dec;128(6):581e-589e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c122.
- Background: PubMed 25289296Chirappapha P, Petit JY, Rietjens M, De Lorenzi F, Garusi C, Martella S, Barbieri B, Gottardi A, Andrea M, Giuseppe L, Hamza A, Lohsiriwat V. Nipple sparing mastectomy: does breast morphological factor related to necrotic complications? Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014 Feb 7;2(1):e99. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000038. eCollection 2014 Jan.
- Background: PubMed 21734543Patel KM, Hill LM, Gatti ME, Nahabedian MY. Management of massive mastectomy skin flap necrosis following autologous breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Aug;69(2):139-44. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182250e23.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Breast Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingPhase 2
Gene Signatures to Guide HR+MBC Therapy in a Diverse Cohort
Invasive Mammary Carcinoma, Metastatic Breast Cancer
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Comparison of Reliability, Time Cost, and Participant Comfort of Lymphedema Assessments in Upper Extremity
Lymphedema, Upper Extremity Lymphedema
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study of Camrelizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Combination With or Without Famitinib as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Participants With Triple Negative Breast Cancer (BCTOP-T-N01)
TNBC - Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
Testing Whether Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib is as Effective as Chemotherapy Followed by Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib for the Treatment of High Anatomic Stage Breast Cancer With Low Recurrence Risk, The RxFINE-Low Trial
Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8, Anatomic Stage IIIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8
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.
Mohamad Sebai, MD principal investigator
Montefiore Medical Center
Sheldon Feldman, MD principal investigator
Montefiore Medical Center
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Mastectomy with PhotonBlade and Mastectomy with Bovie in people with Breast Cancer, run by Invuity, Inc..
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 3 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 13 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Dennise D Dalma-Weiszhausz, PhD (6502486662, ddalma@invuity.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Flap perfusion viability (time frame: Immediately after mastectomy). The study lists 5 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 NCT03627442, which also lists 13 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 13 Aug 2018.