Comparison Between Postoperative Tubular Dressing and a Vacuum Removable Rigid Dressing After Transtibial Amputation

NCT ID: NCT03948087

Last Updated: 2019-05-13

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

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

100 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-05-31

Study Completion Date

2021-05-31

Brief Summary

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

Comparison of wound healing, edema level, knee range of motion, rate of revision post falls, device application time, time to prosthetic fit, and cost between postoperative soft dressing and a vacuum removable rigid dressing after unilateral transtibial amputation.

Detailed Description

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

The gold standard after transtibial amputation is casting of the residual limb to limit room for post-surgical edema, enable faster wound healing and shorter hospital stays, as well as, reduce time to prosthetic fitting. Casting also reduces the risk of impact damage to the limb. Casting, however, is costly and impractical due to the requirement of a prosthetist available on call for after emergency amputation surgeries and a need for multiple repeat prosthetist visits to cut off and reapply casting after wound healing checks. Thus current practice involves use of a compression elastic tube bandage (like a tensor bandage) applied within 15 minutes after surgery. However this bandage applies pressure to the residual limb, which can increase risk of reduced blood supply to the healing limb especially in vascular compromised patients. Further, this soft bandage does not offer any protection to the residual limb, a fall or severe contusion could lead to a requirement for costly revision surgery. There is evidence that rigid removable dressings can improve wound healing times, protect the limb, prevent contractures and enable earlier prosthetic fitting. This study aims to examine the the differences in wound healing time, changes in limb edema, knee range of motion, limb protection post falls, device application time, time to prosthetic fitting and cost between currently used postoperative soft dressing (SD) and vacuum removable rigid dressing (VRRD) after transtibial amputation.

Conditions

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

Amputation Stump Peripheral Vascular Disease With Complications Edema Leg Wound Healing Delayed

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

Participants will be randomly assigned to an interventional group (vacuum rigid removable dressing) vs a non-interventional group (standard of care control group of soft dressing application).
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors
Wound assessments will be determined in a blinded capacity by utilizing the Photographic Wound Assessment Tool. Photos of individual study participant's wounds will be taken and then assigned a non-identifying marker prior to being submitted by the wound assessor.

Study Groups

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

Vacuum Removable Rigid Dressing (VRRD)

Application of a Vacuum Removable Rigid Dressing (VRRD)

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Vacuum Removable Rigid Dressing (VRRD)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Intra-operative application of device.

Soft Dressing Control Group

Application of standard of care soft dressing (SD) intra-operatively.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

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.

Vacuum Removable Rigid Dressing (VRRD)

Intra-operative application of device.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Ossur (TM) Rigid Dressing (ORD)

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

1. Transtibial amputation related to peripheral vascular disease with or without diabetes or trauma.

Justification: The form and function of the ORD device relates solely to transtibial amputees. The device is not useable for any other limb amputation type (e.g. transfemoral, transmetatarsal). The choice of using vascular compromised participants is intentional. Ischemia and necrosis rapidly ensue as a result of vessel occlusion which can easily happen with any external compressive force (e.g. tensor bandaging). The ORD does not apply compressive force to the residual limb.
2. Transtibial amputation that includes myodesis and/or myoplasty.

Justification: Myoplasty and myodesis are preferred surgical techniques while performing an amputation. They involve the surgical attachment of muscle to muscle (myoplasty) or muscle to bone (myodesis) across the end of the residual limb prior to skin flap closure. This allows increased stability and provides a better interface with a future prosthetic device.
3. Greater than 18 years of age

Justification: Below the age of 18 informed consent must be obtained by a parent or guardian
4. Patient must be able to speak and understand English in order to provide informed consent. No reliance on translator services will be implemented.
5. Has no major illness where life expectancy is less than 2 years.

Justification: This is the study timeline and co-morbidities that limit participation within this timeframe will introduce confounding factors.

Exclusion Criteria

1. Severe dementia or insufficient cognition.

Justification: Inability to provide informed consent to participate in the study.
2. Knee contracture greater than 30 degrees

Justification: The ORD will not fit a limb with too much flexion at the knee. Wound healing is also affected due to pressure across the end of the residual limb without the use of offloading techniques.
3. Severe peripheral vascular disease involving the contralateral lower limb

Justification: Having severe peripheral vascular disease to the contralateral limb may affect the secondary outcome measures due to the need for further medical or surgical intervention.
4. Inability to speak, read, or understand English.

Justification: For a patient to participate in the study informed consent must be obtained. There is a high probability that there would be too much variability among translators (family member or institutional) to ensure consistent informed consent.
5. Neurological condition or medical disorder that could affect rehabilitation.

Justification: Rehabilitation post transtibial amputation is critical to overall functional outcomes as well as study outcomes. If a patient has difficulty with participation in rehabilitation then this will be a confounding factor.
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.

Alberta Innovates Health Solutions

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Covenant Health, Canada

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Trent Duchscherer

Amputee Coordinator Northern Alberta Vascular Center

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Trent I Duchscherer, MSc

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Amputee Coordinator Northern Alberta Vascular Center

Gerrit B Winkelaar, MD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Divisional Director and Clinical Head of Vascular Surgery for the Edmonton zone

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Amputee Coordinator

Role: CONTACT

780-735-7161

Other Identifiers

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

EMPAR

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Incidence of Adductor Canal Catheter Dislodgment
NCT05961085 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING