Gentrix™ Versus Biological or Prosthetic Mesh

NCT ID: NCT03034213

Last Updated: 2021-09-29

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

TERMINATED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

17 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2017-10-06

Study Completion Date

2021-06-16

Brief Summary

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

The hypothesis for this study is complex incisional hernia repair using the separation of components technique reinforced with retrorectus placement of Gentrix™ Surgical Matrix will lead to fewer incisional hernia recurrences and fewer wound complications compared to the same incisional hernia repair techniques reinforced with other prosthetic or biologically-derived mesh.

Detailed Description

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

Biological and prosthetic mesh products are extensively used in hernia repairs. However, they also have their limitations. Potential complications associated with prosthetic mesh for hernia repairs include: adverse reactions to the mesh, mesh erosion, stricture formation, adhesions resulting in bowel obstruction, enterocutaneous fistulas, injuries to nearby organs, nerves or blood vessels, infection, chronic pain and hernia recurrence. Potential complications associated with biological mesh include: adverse inflammatory response, laxity, eventration, and recurrent herniation. This study is a two-arm, randomized, controlled trial comparing separation of components repair with retrorectus Gentrix™ Surgical Matrix versus biological or prosthetic mesh for open ventral hernia repair.

Conditions

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

Ventral Incisional Hernia

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

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

Treatment

Gentrix(TM) Surgical Matrix

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Gentrix™ Surgical Matrix (Treatment)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Gentrix™ Surgical Matrix will be placed in the retrorectus space. The anterior midline fascia will be closed with long-acting absorbable suture either with a running or interrupted manner as per the surgeon's discretion.

Control

Standard of care mesh

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Permacol, Parietex, Progrip, Strattice Perforated, or Surgimend (Control)

Intervention Type DEVICE

A biological or prosthetic mesh (Permacol, Parietex, Progrip, Strattice Perforated, or Surgimend) will be placed in the retrorectus space. The anterior midline fascia will be closed with long-acting absorbable suture either with a running or interrupted manner as per the surgeon's discretion.

Interventions

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

Gentrix™ Surgical Matrix (Treatment)

Gentrix™ Surgical Matrix will be placed in the retrorectus space. The anterior midline fascia will be closed with long-acting absorbable suture either with a running or interrupted manner as per the surgeon's discretion.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Permacol, Parietex, Progrip, Strattice Perforated, or Surgimend (Control)

A biological or prosthetic mesh (Permacol, Parietex, Progrip, Strattice Perforated, or Surgimend) will be placed in the retrorectus space. The anterior midline fascia will be closed with long-acting absorbable suture either with a running or interrupted manner as per the surgeon's discretion.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Male and female patients ≥ 18 years old.
* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification of I, II, III or IV.
* Able to provide informed consent in English or Spanish.
* Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study.
* Body Mass Index (BMI) =\< 45.
* Incisional hernia from a midline incision ≥ 4 cm in greatest diameter, or any recurrent incisional hernia.

Exclusion Criteria

* Any other type of ventral hernia, such as umbilical, epigastric or Spigelian hernia.
* Pregnant, breastfeeding, or unwilling to practice birth control during participation in the study, if applicable.
* Allergy or hypersensitivity to materials in porcine-based study products, biological or prosthetic meshes, or personal preference.
* Contraindications to general anesthesia.
* Patient undergoing any emergency surgery prior to treatment.
* Severe comorbid conditions likely to limit survival to less than 3 years in the opinion of the Investigator.
* Have abdominal loss of domain such that the operation would be impractical or would adversely affect respiratory or cardiovascular function to an unacceptable degree in the opinion of the Investigator.
* Inability to close the fascia primarily with abdominal wall mobilization or component separation; confirmed intra-operatively.
* History of malignancy within the past 5 years except for non-melanoma skin cancer.
* Known active malignancy present and/or had chemotherapy 12 weeks prior to screening or planned chemotherapy within 12 weeks of treatment with exception of basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, or prostate cancer in situ.
* Cirrhosis with or without ascites.
* Received high dose steroids (\>/=100mg of prednisone) within the past 6 weeks of screening.
* Uncontrolled diabetes (i.e. known HbA1C value \> 7% within the prior 6 weeks of the Screening Visit).
* History of drug addiction (recreational drugs, prescription drugs or alcohol) that in the Investigator's opinion may interfere with protocol assessments and/or the subject's ability to complete the required follow up.
* Serious or active medical or psychiatric condition which, in the opinion of the Investigator, may interfere with treatment, assessment, or compliance with the protocol.
* Suspected presence of enterocutaneous fistula.
* Planned use of external VAC dressing intra-operatively.
* Suspected bowel obstruction (partial or intermittent), strangulation, peritonitis, or perforation.
* Active necrotizing fasciitis or any other known active local or systemic infection.
* Subject report of participation in an investigational drug or device study that would impact the safety or scientific integrity of this study (in the opinion of the Investigator and with the approval of the Sponsor) within the past 6 weeks prior to treatment in this trial.
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.

Integra LifeSciences Corporation

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of South Florida

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.

Vic Velanovich, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of South Florida

Locations

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

Tampa General Hospital

Tampa, Florida, United States

Site Status

University of South Florida - South Tampa Campus

Tampa, Florida, United States

Site Status

University of South Florida Morsani Center for Advanced Health Care

Tampa, Florida, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

References

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

FitzGerald JF, Kumar AS. Biologic versus Synthetic Mesh Reinforcement: What are the Pros and Cons? Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2014 Dec;27(4):140-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1394155.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26106284 (View on PubMed)

Zhou XH, Melfi CA, Hui SL. Methods for comparison of cost data. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Oct 15;127(8 Pt 2):752-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-8_part_2-199710151-00063.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9382393 (View on PubMed)

Holihan JL, Alawadi Z, Martindale RG, Roth JS, Wray CJ, Ko TC, Kao LS, Liang MK. Adverse Events after Ventral Hernia Repair: The Vicious Cycle of Complications. J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Aug;221(2):478-85. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.04.026. Epub 2015 May 9.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26206646 (View on PubMed)

Fekkes JF, Velanovich V. Amelioration of the effects of obesity on short-term postoperative complications of laparoscopic and open ventral hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2015 Apr;25(2):151-7. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000100.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 25222715 (View on PubMed)

Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD. Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia. 2012 Apr;16(2):179-83. doi: 10.1007/s10029-011-0879-9. Epub 2011 Sep 9.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 21904861 (View on PubMed)

Fischer JP, Wink JD, Tuggle CT, Nelson JA, Kovach SJ. Wound risk assessment in ventral hernia repair: generation and internal validation of a risk stratification system using the ACS-NSQIP. Hernia. 2015 Feb;19(1):103-11. doi: 10.1007/s10029-014-1318-5. Epub 2014 Dec 4.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 25472771 (View on PubMed)

Heniford BT, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Novitsky YW, Hope WW, Kercher KW. Comparison of generic versus specific quality-of-life scales for mesh hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg. 2008 Apr;206(4):638-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.11.025. Epub 2008 Feb 1.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 18387468 (View on PubMed)

Nielsen K, Poelman MM, den Bakker FM, van der Ploeg T, Bonjer HJ, Schreurs WH. Comparison of the Dutch and English versions of the Carolinas Comfort Scale: a specific quality-of-life questionnaire for abdominal hernia repairs with mesh. Hernia. 2014 Aug;18(4):459-64. doi: 10.1007/s10029-013-1173-9. Epub 2013 Oct 29.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 24166693 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

CA2017-002

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Hernia Repair in Multiply Morbid Patients
NCT00930787 TERMINATED PHASE4
Strattice in Repair of Inguinal Hernias
NCT00681291 COMPLETED PHASE4
Parietex Progrip Study
NCT00827944 COMPLETED PHASE4
Antimicrobial Hernia Repair Device
NCT02730936 WITHDRAWN NA