Tissue Reinforcement of Incisional Closure Among High Risk Patients

NCT ID: NCT03148496

Last Updated: 2022-07-22

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

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

163 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2017-09-13

Study Completion Date

2021-06-19

Brief Summary

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

Half of all individuals will undergo abdominal surgery in their lifetime. Following abdominal surgery, 30% of patients will suffer a major chronic complication with their wound closure in the first post-operative year. This may include significant wound infections, open wounds, fluid collections, fascial dehiscence, or incisional hernia. These complications not only have a substantial impact on the health care system (cost and chronic disease) and the hospital (cost and space), but most importantly have a substantial impact on the patient. Major chronic wound complications adversely impact patient quality of life and function. Potential methods to reduce major wound complications include utilizing specific suturing techniques or reinforcing the incision line. Suturing technique of small-bites (0.5x0.5 cm bites) as opposed to large bites (1.0x1.0 cm bites) has been shown to be efficacious in European populations with a typical body mass index of 20-25 kg/m2. Tissue reinforcement has been shown to decrease rates of major wound complications in small randomized controlled trials.

However, the lack of widespread adoption of these practices may be due to issues of generalizability including strict inclusion criteria, careful patient selection, and small study size. For example, the generalizability of small bites to an overweight population (mean BMI in the United States is 28 kg/m2) as opposed to a normal-weight population are unclear. The use of synthetic materials in comorbid patients or complex settings may risk major wound complications such as prosthetic infection. Biologic materials have been shown to be effective in decreasing major wound complications but in different settings. This study is being done to assess the effectiveness of different efficacious strategies to decrease the rate of major wound complications following abdominal surgery among high-risk individuals The researchers hypothesize:

1. Among high-risk patients undergoing abdominal surgery, the use of "small-bites" closure as opposed to "large-bites" closure will increase the proportion of patients who are free of major, chronic wound complications at 1-year post-operative.
2. Among high-risk patients undergoing abdominal surgery, the biologic tissue reinforcement of the suture line as opposed to no reinforcement will increase the proportion of patients who are free of major, chronic wound complications at 1-year post-operative.

Detailed Description

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

Conditions

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

Wound Complication

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

FACTORIAL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

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

Biologic Mesh and Small Bites

Biologic mesh placement and small bites used for suturing.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Biologic Mesh

Intervention Type DEVICE

Biologic mesh placed during surgery

Small Bites

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

0.5 cm x 0.5 cm sutures used

Small Bites and No Biologic Mesh

Small bites used for suturing with no placement of biologic mesh

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Small Bites

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

0.5 cm x 0.5 cm sutures used

Biologic mesh and Large Bites

Biologic mesh placement and large bites used for suturing

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Biologic Mesh

Intervention Type DEVICE

Biologic mesh placed during surgery

Large Bites

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

1.0 x 1.0 sutures used

Large Bites and no biologic mesh

Large bites used for suturing and no placement of biologic mesh.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Large Bites

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

1.0 x 1.0 sutures used

Interventions

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

Biologic Mesh

Biologic mesh placed during surgery

Intervention Type DEVICE

Small Bites

0.5 cm x 0.5 cm sutures used

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Large Bites

1.0 x 1.0 sutures used

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

All high-risk patients undergoing laparotomy or laparoscopic-assisted abdominal surgery. This includes:

1. all overweight patients (BMI\>=25 kg/m2),
2. current smokers,
3. those who are immunosuppressed,
4. those who are malnourished, or
5. those who are undergoing a contaminated case (CDC wound classification of 2 or 3).

Exclusion Criteria

1. patients unlikely to follow-up in a year (e.g. no phone or lives out of state),
2. patients unlikely to survive more than 2 years based upon surgeon judgment (e.g. metastatic cancer, end-stage cirrhosis),
3. patients where the clinician would not place prosthetic (e.g. pregnant patient, pediatric patient during growth stage),
4. patient has a planned second surgery within the next year (e.g. ostomy reversal).
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.

The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Julie Holihan

Assistant Professor of Surgery-Clinical

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Julie Holihan, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston

Locations

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

Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) Hospital

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston

Houston, Texas, 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.

Goodenough CJ, Ko TC, Kao LS, Nguyen MT, Holihan JL, Alawadi Z, Nguyen DH, Flores JR, Arita NT, Roth JS, Liang MK. Development and validation of a risk stratification score for ventral incisional hernia after abdominal surgery: hernia expectation rates in intra-abdominal surgery (the HERNIA Project). J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Apr;220(4):405-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.027. Epub 2015 Jan 2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25690673 (View on PubMed)

Armananzas L, Ruiz-Tovar J, Arroyo A, Garcia-Peche P, Armananzas E, Diez M, Galindo I, Calpena R. Prophylactic mesh vs suture in the closure of the umbilical trocar site after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in high-risk patients for incisional hernia. A randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2014 May;218(5):960-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.01.049. Epub 2014 Feb 18.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24680572 (View on PubMed)

McCarthy M Jr, Jonasson O, Chang CH, Pickard AS, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gibbs J, Edelman P, Fitzgibbons R, Neumayer L. Assessment of patient functional status after surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2005 Aug;201(2):171-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.03.035.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16038812 (View on PubMed)

Hawn MT, Itani KM, Giobbie-Hurder A, McCarthy M Jr, Jonasson O, Neumayer LA. Patient-reported outcomes after inguinal herniorrhaphy. Surgery. 2006 Aug;140(2):198-205. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2006.02.003.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16904970 (View on PubMed)

Blackstock R, Hernandez NC. Characterization of the macrophage subset affected and its response to a T suppressor factor (TsFmp) found in cryptococcosis. Infect Immun. 1989 Oct;57(10):2931-7. doi: 10.1128/iai.57.10.2931-2937.1989.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 2777368 (View on PubMed)

Holihan JL, Henchcliffe BE, Mo J, Flores-Gonzalez JR, Ko TC, Kao LS, Liang MK. Is Nonoperative Management Warranted in Ventral Hernia Patients With Comorbidities?: A Case-matched, Prospective, Patient-centered Study. Ann Surg. 2016 Oct;264(4):585-90. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001865.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27355269 (View on PubMed)

Deerenberg EB, Harlaar JJ, Steyerberg EW, Lont HE, van Doorn HC, Heisterkamp J, Wijnhoven BP, Schouten WR, Cense HA, Stockmann HB, Berends FJ, Dijkhuizen FPH, Dwarkasing RS, Jairam AP, van Ramshorst GH, Kleinrensink GJ, Jeekel J, Lange JF. Small bites versus large bites for closure of abdominal midline incisions (STITCH): a double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015 Sep 26;386(10000):1254-1260. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60459-7. Epub 2015 Jul 15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26188742 (View on PubMed)

Millbourn D, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA. Effect of stitch length on wound complications after closure of midline incisions: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Surg. 2009 Nov;144(11):1056-9. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2009.189.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19917943 (View on PubMed)

Millbourn D, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA. Risk factors for wound complications in midline abdominal incisions related to the size of stitches. Hernia. 2011 Jun;15(3):261-6. doi: 10.1007/s10029-010-0775-8. Epub 2011 Jan 30.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21279664 (View on PubMed)

Bhangu A, Fitzgerald JE, Singh P, Battersby N, Marriott P, Pinkney T. Systematic review and meta-analysis of prophylactic mesh placement for prevention of incisional hernia following midline laparotomy. Hernia. 2013 Aug;17(4):445-55. doi: 10.1007/s10029-013-1119-2. Epub 2013 May 28.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23712289 (View on PubMed)

Fortelny RH, Hofmann A, May C, Kockerling F; BioMesh Study Group. Prevention of a Parastomal Hernia by Biological Mesh Reinforcement. Front Surg. 2015 Oct 22;2:53. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00053. eCollection 2015.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26557646 (View on PubMed)

Muysoms FE, Detry O, Vierendeels T, Huyghe M, Miserez M, Ruppert M, Tollens T, Defraigne JO, Berrevoet F. Prevention of Incisional Hernias by Prophylactic Mesh-augmented Reinforcement of Midline Laparotomies for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2016 Apr;263(4):638-45. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001369.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26943336 (View on PubMed)

Sarr MG, Hutcher NE, Snyder S, Hodde J, Carmody B. A prospective, randomized, multicenter trial of Surgisis Gold, a biologic prosthetic, as a sublay reinforcement of the fascial closure after open bariatric surgery. Surgery. 2014 Oct;156(4):902-8. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.06.022.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25239343 (View on PubMed)

Bali C, Papakostas J, Georgiou G, Kouvelos G, Avgos S, Arnaoutoglou E, Papadopoulos G, Matsagkas M. A comparative study of sutured versus bovine pericardium mesh abdominal closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Hernia. 2015 Apr;19(2):267-71. doi: 10.1007/s10029-014-1262-4. Epub 2014 May 13.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24820007 (View on PubMed)

Ferzoco SJ. A systematic review of outcomes following repair of complex ventral incisional hernias with biologic mesh. Int Surg. 2013 Oct-Dec;98(4):399-408. doi: 10.9738/INTSURG-D-12-00002.1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24229031 (View on PubMed)

Stampfer MJ, Buring JE, Willett W, Rosner B, Eberlein K, Hennekens CH. The 2 x 2 factorial design: its application to a randomized trial of aspirin and carotene in U.S. physicians. Stat Med. 1985 Apr-Jun;4(2):111-6. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780040202.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 4023472 (View on PubMed)

Coelho R, Dhanani NH, Lyons NB, Bernardi K, Askenasy EP, Millas S, Holihan JL, Ali Z, Liang MK. Hernia Prevention Using Biologic Mesh and/or Small Bites: A Multispecialty 2 x 2 Factorial Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2023 Aug 1;237(2):309-317. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000705. Epub 2023 Apr 11.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 37458369 (View on PubMed)

Provided Documents

Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.

Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan

View Document

Other Identifiers

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

HSC-MS-17-0063

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Small Bites Vs Large Bites Abdominal Midline Incisional Closure
NCT07154277 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING PHASE2/PHASE3
DuraMesh Laparotomy Study
NCT03966768 WITHDRAWN NA