Irrigation Versus No Irrigation for Perforated Appendicitis
NCT ID: NCT00854815
Last Updated: 2012-08-01
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
220 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2008-12-31
2012-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Power calculation was based on abscess rate in the previous prospective study. An unacceptable abscess rate needed to be chosen. Our current rate is 20%, or one-fifth of the patients. If this were to increase by 15%, it would place just over one third of the patients at risk which would be unacceptable. This is comparable to the 36% rejection level we used for the previous IRB approved trial (#07 02-031). Using a delta of 0.15 with alpha of 0.05 and power of 0.8, the sample size is 109 patients in each arm. Therefore we will anticipate enrolling 220.
Subjects will be those children who are found to have severe inflammatory changes on imaging or a high clinical suspicion of perforation. Permission will be obtained from parents prior to the operation. All of these children will be under duress prior to randomization, therefore we request waiving assent as we have done with the previous perforated appendicitis studies.
The final decision to include a child in the study will made after perforation has been visually confirmed during surgery. Perforation will be defined as an identifiable hole in the appendix or stool in the abdomen. The randomization assignment will be made known at the initiation of the operation, and confirmation of perforation will confirm the patient will utilize the next randomization slot.
The irrigation group will have suction irrigator set up with a 1 liter bag of normal saline. The surgeon must use at least 500 ml of this bag but may use as much as they choose.
The no irrigation group will have the suction irrigator set up without the saline attachment. This will leave them with the capacity for suction only. Since several suction devices exist, this will assure the same type of suction for both groups.
After the operation, both groups will be managed in the same manner. When the patient is tolerating a regular diet, on oral pain medication and has been afebrile for over 12 hours, they will be discharged on oral antibiotics to complete a course of 7 days. If they stay until the 5th post-operative day, a white blood cell count will be checked, which if it is normal, they will be discharged to home without antibiotics. This is standard post-operative care as delineated by our previous prospective, randomized.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Irrigation
Irrigation of the area with at least 500ml normal saline using the power suction/irrigator
Irrigation
Irrigation of the area with at least 500ml NS using the power suction/irrigator
No Irrigation
Only suction with the power suction/irrigator without saline attached
No Irrigation
Suction only using suction/irrigator
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Irrigation
Irrigation of the area with at least 500ml NS using the power suction/irrigator
No Irrigation
Suction only using suction/irrigator
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Perforation identified as hole in the appendix or fecalith in the abdomen
Exclusion Criteria
* A significant comorbidity that would limit their ability to recover from appendectomy in a normal fashion
1 Month
17 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Children's Mercy Hospital Kansas City
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Shawn St. Peter
MD
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Shawn D St. Peter, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Children's Mercy Hospital Kansas City
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Children's Mercy Hospital
Kansas City, Missouri, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
08 11 181
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id