AzTrials
AzTrials

Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous TissueNCT03911518

Loop Drainage Versus Incision and Drainage for Abscesses

A study testing Loop drainage and Incision and drainage in people with Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous Tissue, run by Gary Peksa.

Withdrawn

Withdrawn. The study stopped before anyone enrolled.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial of loop drainage versus traditional incision and drainage in adult patients presenting to the emergency department. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 100 years
What is being tested?
Loop drainage and Incision and drainage
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
0 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
Jul 2019to Dec 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 100 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Adults age 18 years or older
  • Abscess is considered simple, purulent, and cutaneous
  • Abscess is deemed amenable to outpatient drainage

Who cannot join

  • Inability to speak English
  • Abscess location of breast or face
  • Pilonidal abscesses
  • Concurrent use of chemotherapy or steroids
  • Allergy to sulfa/trimethoprim or lidocaine
  • Inability to provide consent
Show all 14Show fewer
  • Incarcerated patients
  • Inability to give a valid contact number or email address
  • Presence of multiple abscesses
  • Abscess size less than 2 cm
  • Pregnant patients
  • History of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency
  • History of Steven Johnson's Syndrome
  • Patients with fever greater than 100.4 Fahrenheit

About this study

Official title: Loop vs. Traditional Incision and Drainage: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial

This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial of loop drainage versus traditional incision and drainage in adult patients presenting to the emergency department.

Read the detailed description

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE

The usual care in the United States for abscess management is generally incision and drainage. There have been various techniques described for incision and drainage: 1. incision and drainage followed by healing by secondary intention, 2. Incision and drainage followed by primary closure, and 3. Loop drainage (more recently, the topic of this study) with subsequent loop removal and healing by secondary intention. The treatment failure rate for traditional incision and drainage is variable, but can range from 10-30%. Costs associated with treatment failure are between $1,000 and $2,0005. The relatively high failure rate associated with traditional incision and drainage has led to research into less invasive, more effective techniques. In 2010, the loop drainage technique was first described. This technique consists of making 2 small incisions on either end of the abscess cavity followed by pulling a small drain through the incisions and then tying the drain in place. It remains in place and is removed once no further drainage is noticed (usually in 10-14 days). Original studies were primarily done by pediatric surgeons using vessel loops or penrose drains.

In 2014, the concept of using the cuff from the bottom of a sterile glove was introduced. This allows for this technique to easily be used with materials found easily in any emergency department. The amount of research done with this technique on adults is limited. To date, only two studies with a total of 109 patients evaluated loop drainage in adults. One of these studies was retrospective and included only 63 patients. The other prospective study was limited in that it included only 46 patients. Given the demonstration of increased clinical cure rate in pediatric populations and the potential for increased clinical cure rates in adults, more study into this topic is worthwhile to determine the optimal approach to adult subcutaneous abscess drainage.

STUDY DESCRIPTION

This study will be a pilot study and multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating loop drainage compared to conventional incision and drainage in adults older than 18 who have simple, purulent, cutaneous abscesses deemed amenable to outpatient incision and drainage by the attending clinician.

Study participants will be randomized to investigational vs control arm in a 1:1 ratio (Randomization will occur via blocked randomization in blocks of 10). Enrollment will occur primarily when investigators are on shift (convenience sampling). This study will not be blinded, however, observer bias will be reduced by having an investigator blinded to treatment assignment determine the cosmetic healing rate at 90 days.

Participants will receive drainage of their abscess (either conventional or loop). For conventional drainage, the wound will be incised with a #11 blade scalpel along the point of maximal fluctuance, approximately 2-3 cm, and then all loculations bluntly dissected with a set of Kelly clamps. After drainage of pus, the wound will be loosely packed with gauze. Afterwards, a dry dressing will be placed and the patient will be instructed to change the external dressing twice daily or every time it becomes saturated. Patients randomized to standard care will be instructed to remove the packing at 48 hours after incision and drainage.

Loop drainage will occur via 2 small incisions, approximately 2 cm, with the cuff from the base of a sterile glove pulled through and then tied off3. The patient will be instructed to move this cuff back and forth three times daily and cover it with a dry dressing.

Once the abscess drainage procedure is complete, the participant will complete a questionnaire asking about pain during procedure and satisfaction with the procedure. All participants will be discharged with a prescription trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) 160mg/800mg, two tablets by mouth twice daily for ten days. All participants will be instructed to return to the emergency department and contact the PI if they have any worsening signs of infection. Between 10 and 14 days after the initial procedure, patients will follow up in the emergency department for wound recheck. At this visit, the maximal diameter of both erythema and swelling will be measured, and a questionnaire will be administered regarding wound care satisfaction, repeat medical visits, fevers, and any side effects of either the procedure or antibiotic therapy. Loop participants will have the loop removed at the follow up visit. Participants will be called at 30 days for data collection on abscess recurrences. Patient will be asked to return for a wound recheck and submit a photo of the wound, to assess cosmetic appearance of wound at 90 days.

Being tested
Loop drainage, Incision and drainage
Keywords
incision and drainage, loop drainage, soft tissue infection, abscess
Medical subject headings
Surgical Wound, Soft Tissue Infections, Abscess

What participants receive

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

  • Loop drainageProcedure or surgery

    Loop drainage will occur via 2 small incisions, approximately 2 cm, with the cuff from the base of a sterile glove pulled through and then tied off.

  • Incision and drainageProcedure or surgery

    The wound will be incised with a #11 blade scalpel along the point of maximal fluctuance, approximately 2-3 cm, and then all loculations bluntly dissected with a set of Kelly clamps. After drainage of pus, the wound will be loosely packed with gauze.

Study groups in NCT03911518
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
ControlActive comparatorIncision and drainage.
Receives: Procedure: Incision and drainage
InterventionExperimentalLoop drainage.
Receives: Procedure: Loop drainage

What is being measured

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

  1. Rate of Clinical Cure

    Defined as healing of the abscess without the need for further clinical intervention (change in antibiotics, repeat drainage, or admission)

    Measured: Days 10-14

Secondary outcomes (6)
  1. Intra-Procedure Pain Rating

    Numeric rating scale of 0-10. A rating of 0 indicates no pain. A rating of 10 indicates the worst pain.

    Measured: Day 0

  2. Time to Complete Drainage

    Time from initial incision to application of dry dressing

    Measured: Day 0

  3. Patient Satisfaction: Numeric rating scale

    Likert scale of 1-5. A rating of 1 indicates poor satisfaction. A rating of 5 indicates the best satisfaction.

    Measured: Days 0, 10-14

  4. Provider Satisfaction: Numeric rating scale

    Likert scale of 1-5. A rating of 1 indicates poor satisfaction. A rating of 5 indicates the best satisfaction.

    Measured: Day 0

  5. Recurrence Rate

    New lesions requiring drainage

    Measured: Day 30

  6. Cosmetic Healing

    Visual analog scale of 1-100 mm. A score of 1 indicates poor cosmetic healing. A score of 100 indicates excellent cosmetic healing.

    Measured: Day 90

Timeline

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

  1. First posted11 Apr 2019
  2. Study startJul 2019 (estimated)
  3. Primary completionNov 2019 (estimated)
  4. Study completionDec 2019 (estimated)

Why it stopped: Pilot study not necessary as new data has become available.

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 N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
0 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03911518
Sponsor's protocol ID
19021803
Status last verified
Jul 2019
First submitted
9 Apr 2019
Last updated
5 Jul 2019
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Ladde JG, Baker S, Rodgers CN, Papa L. The LOOP technique: a novel incision and drainage technique in the treatment of skin abscesses in a pediatric ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2015 Feb;33(2):271-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.10.014. Epub 2014 Oct 16.

    PubMed 25435407
  • Thompson DO. Loop drainage of cutaneous abscesses using a modified sterile glove: a promising technique. J Emerg Med. 2014 Aug;47(2):188-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2014.04.035. Epub 2014 Jun 11.

    PubMed 24928539
  • Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, Dellinger EP, Goldstein EJ, Gorbach SL, Hirschmann JV, Kaplan SL, Montoya JG, Wade JC; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Jul 15;59(2):e10-52. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu444.

    PubMed 24973422
  • McNamara WF, Hartin CW Jr, Escobar MA, Yamout SZ, Lau ST, Lee YH. An alternative to open incision and drainage for community-acquired soft tissue abscesses in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2011 Mar;46(3):502-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.08.019.

    PubMed 21376200
  • 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
  • Ozturan IU, Dogan NO, Karakayali O, Ozbek AE, Yilmaz S, Pekdemir M, Suner S. Comparison of loop and primary incision & drainage techniques in adult patients with cutaneous abscess: A preliminary, randomized clinical trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Jun;35(6):830-834. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2017.01.036. Epub 2017 Jan 22.

    PubMed 28162873
  • Gottlieb M, Peksa GD. Comparison of the loop technique with incision and drainage for soft tissue abscesses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Emerg Med. 2018 Jan;36(1):128-133. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2017.09.007. Epub 2017 Sep 10.

    PubMed 28917436

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Loop drainage and Incision and drainage in people with Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous Tissue, run by Gary Peksa.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 14 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: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Jul 2019. 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?

The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.

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?

Rate of Clinical Cure (time frame: Days 10-14). 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 NCT03911518, which also lists 7 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 5 Jul 2019.

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