Randomized Controlled Trial of Bladder Flap vs.None
1 other identifier
interventional
123
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Objective: To compare outcomes in cesarean section patients undergoing bladder flap versus none. Hypotheses: Operative time will be reduced with the elimination of a bladder flap during cesarean delivery and intra-operative and post-operative morbidity will not be significantly different. Patients \>= 35 wks gestation undergoing cesarean delivery will be randomized to bladder flap vs. none. Primary outcome is operative time (start to delivery); secondary outcomes include: injuries, EBL, intra-operative and post-operative complications,pain medication, hospital stay duration.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Oct 2005
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
October 1, 2005
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
May 4, 2007
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
May 7, 2007
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
June 1, 2007
CompletedMay 7, 2007
April 1, 2007
May 4, 2007
May 4, 2007
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
operative time: start of surgery to delivery of infant
immediate: during cesarean surgery
Secondary Outcomes (8)
estimated blood loss
immediate
bladder injuries
immediate
other intra-operative complications
immediate
intra-operative transfusions
immediate
post-operative complications
post-op hospitalization
- +3 more secondary outcomes
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Cesarean delivery at \>=35 weeks gestation;
- Able to provide informed consent
You may not qualify if:
- Vaginal delivery;
- Delivery \< 35 weeks gestation;
- STAT surgery;
- Unable to provide consent;
- Medical complication/condition incompatable with random asiignment
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Mission Hospitals
Asheville, North Carolina, 28801, United States
Related Publications (3)
Hohlagschwandtner M, Ruecklinger E, Husslein P, Joura EA. Is the formation of a bladder flap at cesarean necessary? A randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;98(6):1089-92. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01570-8.
PMID: 11755558BACKGROUNDWood RM, Simon H, Oz AU. Pelosi-type vs. traditional cesarean delivery. A prospective comparison. J Reprod Med. 1999 Sep;44(9):788-95.
PMID: 10509303BACKGROUNDEisenkop SM, Richman R, Platt LD, Paul RH. Urinary tract injury during cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol. 1982 Nov;60(5):591-6.
PMID: 7145252BACKGROUND
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Eric C Helms, MD
MAHEC OB/GYN
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Shelley L Galvin, MA
MAHEC OB/GYN
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
May 4, 2007
First Posted
May 7, 2007
Study Start
October 1, 2005
Study Completion
June 1, 2007
Last Updated
May 7, 2007
Record last verified: 2007-04