NCT04033484

Brief Summary

Perineal wound healing is a significant challenge after extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) due to a high rate of wound breakdown. And it was proved that neoadjuvant radiotherapy significantly increases perineal wound problems after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. Negative pressure therapy has proven benefits in open wounds, and recently a negative pressure system has been developed for use on closed wounds at high risk of breakdown. A systematic review suggested a significant decrease in perineal wound complications when using incisional negative pressure wound therapy was demonstrated, with surgical site infection rates as low as 9% (vs 41% in control groups). The review suggested that incisional negative pressure wound therapy decreases perineal wound complications after abdominoperineal resection. Prospective study also suggested that after ELAPE the application of a negative pressure system to the perineal wound closed with biologic mesh may reduce perineal wound complications. The aim of the present study was to determine whether negative pressure therapy combined with biological mesh compared with biological mesh alone after ELAPE could improve wound healing.

Trial Health

43
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
66

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Jul 2019

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
unknown

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

July 1, 2019

Completed
23 days until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

July 24, 2019

Completed
2 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

July 26, 2019

Completed
2 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

July 31, 2021

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

July 31, 2021

Completed
Last Updated

February 8, 2021

Status Verified

February 1, 2021

Enrollment Period

2.1 years

First QC Date

July 24, 2019

Last Update Submit

February 4, 2021

Conditions

Keywords

extralevator abdominoperineal excisionPerineal wound healingnegative pressure wound therapybiological mesh

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • perineal wound complications

    perineal wound complications after pelvic floor reconstruction following ELAPE

    6 months after operation

Study Arms (2)

Biological Mesh

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Using biological mesh to recnostruct the pelvic floor following ELAPE

Procedure: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Biological Mesh With Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

EXPERIMENTAL

Using biological mesh compined with negative pressure wound therapy to recnostruct the pelvic floor following ELAPE

Procedure: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Interventions

The perineal wound was reconstructed with biologic mesh after ELAPE. The subcutaneous adipose layer was closed with 2/0 vicryl sutures, and a suction drain was left in the deep layer. The subcuticular layer and skin were closed with 3/0 vicryl mattress sutures and the negative pressure system applied at 80 mmHg

Biological MeshBiological Mesh With Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 80 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Rectal cancer within 4 cm of the anal verge
  • T3 or T4, as determined by pre-operative MRI examination; patient did receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy
  • Absence of distant metastases
  • Absence of intestinal obstruction

You may not qualify if:

  • T1-T2, as determined by pre-operative MRI before neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy
  • Distant metastases
  • Intestinal obstruction
  • Pregnancy or lactating
  • Contraindications to surgery
  • A mental disorder

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Zhen Jun. Wang

Beijing, 100020, China

RECRUITING

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

DrainageTherapeuticsSurgical Procedures, OperativeWound Closure Techniques

Central Study Contacts

Jia Gang Han, MD

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Chairman of General Surgery

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

July 24, 2019

First Posted

July 26, 2019

Study Start

July 1, 2019

Primary Completion

July 31, 2021

Study Completion

July 31, 2021

Last Updated

February 8, 2021

Record last verified: 2021-02

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will share

Perineal wound healing is a significant challenge after extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) due to a high rate of wound breakdown. And it was proved that neoadjuvant radiotherapy significantly increases perineal wound problems after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. Negative pressure therapy has proven benefits in open wounds, and recently a negative pressure system has been developed for use on closed wounds at high risk of breakdown. Prospective study also suggested that after ELAPE the application of a negative pressure system to the perineal wound closed with biologic mesh may reduce perineal wound complications. The aim of the present study was to determine whether negative pressure therapy combined with biological mesh compared with biological mesh alone after ELAPE could improve wound healing.

Shared Documents
STUDY PROTOCOL
Time Frame
2019.07.1-2021.07.31
Access Criteria
Inclusion criteria 1. Tumor within 4 cm of the anal verge 2. T3 or T4, as determined by pre-operative MRI examination; patient did receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy 3. Absence of distant metastases 4. Absence of intestinal obstruction

Locations