Laparoscopic Adhesiolysis for Chronic Abdominal Pain Revisited

NCT ID: NCT02983916

Last Updated: 2019-05-06

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

106 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2015-01-31

Study Completion Date

2018-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Chronic abdominal and pelvic pain is a common complaint following peritoneal surgery, affecting 20-40% of patients. Adhesions account for 60% of chronic postoperative pain cases, suggesting that adhesiolysis can play an important role in the management of such pain. Despite initial promising results regarding the effect of adhesiolysis on post-operative pain, implementation of the procedure has been challenging. The major problems associated with adhesiolysis for pain are recurrence of pain, need for invasive diagnosis with high rates of 'negative' laparoscopies, and inadvertent bowel injury during surgery. However, diagnosis and treatment of adhesions may be improved through the use of novel cine-MRI techniques, and with application of anti-adhesion barriers following adhesiolysis.

In this study the investigators evaluate a new practice-based approach to the problem of chronic post-operative pain caused by adhesions. This practice-based approach includes use of a novel imaging technique for adhesions (cine-MRI) and shared decision making. Cine-MRI holds promise to diagnose and map adhesions. Thus patients with no adhesions, or high risk for bowel injury, can be waived from surgical treatment. By using anti-adhesion barriers the investigators attempt to prevent adhesion reformation and improve long-term outcomes of adhesiolysis.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis for chronic abdominal pain revisited.

Background Prevalence of chronic pain following abdominal surgery may be as high as 40%. Postoperative chronic pain can be caused by various reasons, but adhesions are identified as the most likely cause in more 60% of cases. Early studies of adhesiolysis reported high success rates, up to 80%, in patients with no other cause of pain. Nonetheless, adhesiolysis is now seldom used in the treatment of chronic abdominal pain. Controversy over laparoscopic adhesiolysis as treatment for abdominal pain was raised by the landmark trial of Swank et al. In this trial 100 patients were randomized after the diagnosis of adhesions was confirmed laparoscopy between adhesiolysis or diagnostic laparoscopy alone. In the adhesiolysis group 57% of patients reported long-term pain relief vs. 42% in the diagnostic group; this difference was not statistically significant. The authors concluded that adhesiolysis was not effective, and thereafter many surgeons discarded adhesiolysis as treatment for chronic abdominal pain.

However, there are some important critiques on this trial. First, a type II error by too low sample size cannot be excluded. Second, some experimental studies indicate that filmy adhesions, which may be disrupted by pneumoperitoneum in the control patient group, cause most pain. Third, adhesions might have reformed after adhesiolysis, diminishing long term effects in the adhesiolysis group. Adhesion formation and reformation can effectively be reduced by application of an anti-adhesion barrier. Apart from these critiques, there is no evidence for effective alternative treatments.

Patients with chronic postoperative pain are frequently referred to the outpatient clinical of the surgery department of the RadboudUMC for expert opinion. Since 2012 the investigators started a 'patient participation in care' project for this patient group, in which laparoscopic adhesiolysis was reintroduced as treatment for chronic abdominal in selected cases. Cine- MRI was used as a novel non-invasive tool to diagnose adhesions, waiving the need for a negative laparoscopy in patient with other causes for chronic abdominal pain. Cine- MRI was recently developed as a non-invasive diagnostic tool to detect symptomatic adhesions, with reported sensitivity between 85%- 89% and specificity between 93%-95%. Decision for operative treatment was made based on individualized assessment of benefits and risks based on cine-MRI results in a shared-decision approach. Further, all patients undergoing adhesiolysis were treated with an anti-adhesion barrier.

Purpose \& Research question The aim of this study is to evaluate the results of this novel shared decision approach using cine-MRI in a cohort of patients referred to the outpatient clinical of the department of surgery with chronic postoperative pain. Comparison is made between patients undergoing laparoscopic adhesiolysis, patients conservatively treated with adhesions on cine-MRI, and patients with no adhesions on cine-MRI.

Patients: Patients with chronic postoperative pain (\>6 months) caused by adhesions as proven by cine-MRI Intervention: Laparoscopic adhesiolysis with adhesion barrier Controls: - control group 1: Patients with chronic postoperative pain and cine-MRI proven adhesions who had conservative treatment - Control group 2 patients with alternative diagnosis who had conservative treatment Outcome: • Change in symptoms (measured by Patients' Global Impression of Change scale), current pain (measured by numeric rate scale), Healthcare utilization (hospital visits, paramedic visits, medication)

Plan of investigation We will perform an analysis in a cohort of approximately 100 patients who underwent Cine-MRI in the work-up for chronic abdominal pain. Adhesions were identified in approximately 80 of the patients, 40 of them were operated and underwent laparoscopic adhesiolysis (group 1). The other 40 patients waived operation for various reasons and received conservative treatment (group 2). Patients with negative cine-MRI are analyzed as group 3. In a few cases a diagnostic laparoscopy was performed in case history, physical examination and cine-MRI were inconclusive. These patients will be analyzed as part of group 1.

Patients will be asked to participate in this study by telephone or letter. If agreed, a questionnaire will be sent comparing pain, improvement of pain since treatment, use of analgesics and other healthcare utilization between the operated and non-operated groups. Further data on the operation and peri-operative complications are gathered from the case records. Primary outcome is reduction or alleviation of pain. Secondary outcomes are current pain score (measured by VAS), analgesics use and healthcare utilization. Additional secondary outcomes for the operatively treated group are the incidence of conversion to open surgery, and peri-operative complications.

Patients admitted to the outpatient clinic of the department of surgery for chronic postoperative pain who underwent a cine-MRI are screened for eligibility.

Inclusion criteria are :

* Age ≥ 18 years
* Pain exists for at least 6 months postoperatively

Exclusion criteria are:

\- Cine-MRI not performed for chronic pain (e.g. recurrent pain with episodes of bowel obstructions)

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Chronic Pain Tissue Adhesion

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Group 1: adhesiolysis

Group 1 (the operative group) consisted of all patients who underwent laparoscopy and/or laparotomy. Typically patients had positive cine-MRI. A few patients with inconclusive cine-MRI who underwent diagnostic laparoscopy are also included in this group. Patients with no adhesions found during operation remain in group 1, because analysis is performed on intention-to-treat basis.

Adhesiolysis

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy with lysis of adhesions.

Group 2: Adhesions, conservative

Patients with evidence of adhesions based on cine-MRI who did not undergo laparoscopy or laparotomy.

No interventions assigned to this group

Group 3: No adhesions

Patients in whom no evidence of adhesions was found on cine-MRI, and who did not undergo laparoscopy or laparotomy .

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Adhesiolysis

Diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy with lysis of adhesions.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Age ≥ 18 years
* Pain exists for at least 6 months postoperatively

Exclusion Criteria

\- Cine-MRI not performed for chronic pain (e.g. recurrent pain with episodes of bowel obstructions)
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Rijnstate Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Radboud University Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Harry van Goor, MD, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Radboud University Medical Center

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Rijnstate Hospital

Arnhem, Gelderland, Netherlands

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Netherlands

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

ten Broek RP, Bakkum EA, Laarhoven CJ, van Goor H. Epidemiology and Prevention of Postsurgical Adhesions Revisited. Ann Surg. 2016 Jan;263(1):12-9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001286.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26135678 (View on PubMed)

Ten Broek RPG, Stommel MWJ, Strik C, van Laarhoven CJHM, Keus F, van Goor H. Benefits and harms of adhesion barriers for abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2014 Jan 4;383(9911):48-59. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61687-6. Epub 2013 Sep 27.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24075279 (View on PubMed)

Gerner-Rasmussen J, Burcharth J, Gogenur I. The efficacy of adhesiolysis on chronic abdominal pain: a systematic review. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2015 Jul;400(5):567-76. doi: 10.1007/s00423-015-1316-9. Epub 2015 Jun 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26088873 (View on PubMed)

Swank DJ, Swank-Bordewijk SC, Hop WC, van Erp WF, Janssen IM, Bonjer HJ, Jeekel J. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis in patients with chronic abdominal pain: a blinded randomised controlled multi-centre trial. Lancet. 2003 Apr 12;361(9365):1247-51. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(03)12979-0.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12699951 (View on PubMed)

Cheong YC, Reading I, Bailey S, Sadek K, Ledger W, Li TC. Should women with chronic pelvic pain have adhesiolysis? BMC Womens Health. 2014 Mar 4;14(1):36. doi: 10.1186/1472-6874-14-36.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24588989 (View on PubMed)

van den Beukel BAW, Stommel MWJ, van Leuven S, Strik C, IJsseldijk MA, Joosten F, van Goor H, Ten Broek RPG. A Shared Decision Approach to Chronic Abdominal Pain Based on Cine-MRI: A Prospective Cohort Study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 Aug;113(8):1229-1237. doi: 10.1038/s41395-018-0158-9. Epub 2018 Jun 27.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 29946174 (View on PubMed)

Study Documents

Access uploaded study-related documents such as protocols, statistical analysis plans, or lay summaries.

Document Type: Clinical Study Report

View Document

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

RU-RTB-0005

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.