Accuracy of Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Mapping - Color Doppler Ultrasound Versus CT Angiography
NCT ID: NCT05687006
Last Updated: 2023-01-17
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
60 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-01-01
2021-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Participants underwent scheduled reconstruction of one or both breasts with a free flap transferred from the lower abdomen. If there is a comparison group: Researchers compared interventional groups - examined using preoperative CTA of the abdominal wall supplemented with an examination of the perforators using CDU (active comparator group), and examined exclusively by using the CDU (experimental group), to see the comparison of the accuracy and contribution of CDU-guided DIEA perforator mapping with CTA mapping.
The hypothesis is that CDU examination alone is not inferior to CTA examination supplemented with parameters that CTA does not show (flow velocity, vessel diameters), by measuring these parameters with CDU.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
* To evaluate the comparison of the accuracy of surgeon-conducted CDU perforator mapping in defining the significant/dominant perforators and their exact location \[XY coordinates\] with the accuracy of CTA mapping.
* To compare the time duration of the CDU examination was measured.
* To measure the Fat Necrosis of the flap \[3 months postoperative \]
* To measure the Flap Loss \[1-week post-op, 2 weeks post-op, 6-8 weeks post-op and 3 months post-op\].
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Non-contrast Magnetic Resonance Angiography in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction Planning
NCT06061835
CT-Angiography Prior to DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction
NCT02883387
Study the Usefulness of Bio-impedance Spectroscopy in the Early Assessment of Breast Cancer Related Lymphoedema
NCT01599039
Combined Elastography and Color Doppler Ultrasonography for Breast Screening With Ultrasound
NCT01963624
Dynamic Infrared Thermography as an Alternative to CT Angiography
NCT02806518
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Women were originally randomized 1:1 to the groups one of which will undergo only CDU perforator mapping (experimental group) and the other using CTA+CDU (active comparator group). Every patient included in the CTA+CDU group preoperatively underwent CT angiography of the abdominal wall. Based on the CTA examination XY coordinates of DIEA perforators with a vessel calibre of 1 mm were determined.
The velocity and vessel diameters of these perforators were additionally examined using a CDU device. Any additional perforators were marked, nor were CTA deducted XY coordinates of marked perforators changed, based on the CDU examination. The same sonography surgeon performed all CDU examinations.
All patients included in the CDU group were examined with the same CDU device by the same sonography surgeon as patients included in CTA + CDU group. During the examination, DIEA perforators were mapped and those with a vessel calibre of 1 mm were marked and XY coordinates deducted. Calibres and velocities of perforator vessels and the abdominal subcutaneous tissue thickness were measured.
In the CTA+CDU group, CDU was used only to determine the additional parameters necessary to define categories 1-3 (according to the number of perforators). Based on CDU, coordinates were not measured in the CTA+CDU group. The main aim of this clinical study is to compare the accuracy of perforator localization (coordinates) using CDU vs. CTA.
Based on the preoperative mapping, all patients in both groups were assigned a category for each flap as follows:
A) At least one perforator of the flap meets the criteria defined for a dominant perforator. In such a case, the tactic was to dissect a single perforator flap.
B) Any perforator meets the criteria defined for a dominant perforator, but at least two perforators on the same DIEA branch meet the criteria for a significant perforator. In such a case, the tactic was to dissect the flap with the pedicle of two of those perforators.
C) Any perforator meets the criteria defined for a dominant perforator or significant perforator. In such a case, the surgical tactic was to dissect the flap with a pedicle of three perforators or as an MS-TRAM flap.
The operating surgeon was fully informed of the results of the preoperative examination and the recommended perforator or perforator selected for the flap's pedicle. However, these recommendations were not binding, and the surgeon chose the tactics of the operation taking into consideration his clinical experience. Participating in the project did not change the surgical technique and the surgery was performed as standard according to current knowledge of medicine and common practice of the department. The surgery itself was not the subject of the research. XY coordinates and diameters of the dissected perforators were measured during the surgery.
R 4.1.3 software and Joinpoint Regression 4.9.0.0. were used to perform data management and exploratory statistical analysis (p = 0.05). A two-sided Wilcoxon test was used for verification of both patient groups' comparability. The same test was used to compare the length of the CDU examination in both groups. The breaking point on the curve showing the length of the CDU examination depending on the numerical order of the examined patient was searched using the Joinpoint Regression as a secondary outcome. Euclidean distance was used to determine the difference between the CDU/CTA and during the surgery measured coordinates of the dissected perforators. Statistical testing of the difference between the accuracy of CTA and CDU examinations was performed using the GLS method. The GEE model was used to determine the difference between the CDU/CTA+CDU recommended and finally dissected a number of perforators supplying the flap.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
The CTA+CDU Group
Every patient included in the CTA+CDU group preoperatively underwent CT angiography of the abdominal wall. Based on the CTA examination XY coordinates of DIEA perforators localized within the area between 2 cm cranial and 10 cm caudal from the umbilicus and with a vessel calibre of more than 1 mm were determined. The day before the surgery, the main perforators were marked on the patient's abdomen according to the coordinates deducted from the CTA. These perforators were additionally examined using a LOGIQ S8/V1 CDU device with a linear transducer of frequency 4-11 MHz. Any additional perforators were marked nor have CTA deducted XY coordinates of marked perforators changed based on the CDU examination. The same sonography surgeon performed all CDU examinations. The time duration of the CDU examination was measured.
No interventions assigned to this group
The CDU Group
All patients included in the CDU group were examined a day before the surgery with the same CDU device by the same sonography surgeon as patients included in CTA + CDU group. During the examination, DIEA perforators were mapped and the following parameters were monitored: 1) XY coordinates of DIEA perforators localized within the area between 2 cm cranial and 10 cm caudal from the umbilicus and with a vessel calibre of more than 1 mm; 2) calibres of perforator arteries and veins; 3) PSV in the perforator artery \[cm/s\]; 4) velocity in the perforator vein \[cm/s\]; 5) the thickness of the subcutaneous tissue of the lower abdomen measured 4 cm caudal and lateral to the umbilicus. The time duration of the CDU examination was measured.
Colour Doppler Ultrasound
The main perforators were examined using a LOGIQ S8/V1 CDU device (GE Healthcare, Chalfont St Giles, Great Britain) with a linear transducer of frequency 4-11 MHz. Measured parameters were: 1) calibre of artery and vein; 2) Peak systolic velocity (PSV) of blood in the artery \[cm/s\]; 3) blood velocity in the perforator vein \[cm/s\]; 2) the thickness of the subcutaneous tissue of the lower abdomen measured 4 cm caudal and lateral to the umbilicus. Any additional perforators were marked nor have CTA deducted XY coordinates of marked perforators changed based on the CDU examination. The same sonography surgeon performed all CDU examinations. The time duration of the CDU examination was measured.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Colour Doppler Ultrasound
The main perforators were examined using a LOGIQ S8/V1 CDU device (GE Healthcare, Chalfont St Giles, Great Britain) with a linear transducer of frequency 4-11 MHz. Measured parameters were: 1) calibre of artery and vein; 2) Peak systolic velocity (PSV) of blood in the artery \[cm/s\]; 3) blood velocity in the perforator vein \[cm/s\]; 2) the thickness of the subcutaneous tissue of the lower abdomen measured 4 cm caudal and lateral to the umbilicus. Any additional perforators were marked nor have CTA deducted XY coordinates of marked perforators changed based on the CDU examination. The same sonography surgeon performed all CDU examinations. The time duration of the CDU examination was measured.
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
* aged 18 to 65 years;
* undergoing uni- or bilateral breast free flap reconstruction harvested from the lower abdomen;
* signed informed consent to participate in the study.
Exclusion Criteria
* history of abdominoplasty;
* Body Mass index \> 35;
* active oncological disease ;
* Karnofsky Performance Status \< 50;
* change of the reconstructive method as a result of the preoperative mapping;
* non-standard performed CTA examination.
18 Years
65 Years
FEMALE
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Masaryk University
OTHER
St. Anne's University Hospital Brno, Czech Republic
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Libor Streit, MD, PhD.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
St. Anne´s University Hospital Brno
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
St. Anne´s University Hospital Brno
Brno, , Czechia
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.
CDU2021
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.