Surgeon Perception of Gastric Decompression at Time of Gynecologic Laparoscopy
NCT ID: NCT06137976
Last Updated: 2025-05-30
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
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
150 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2023-11-20
Study Completion Date
2025-04-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The goal of this clinical trial is to test whether it is necessary to decompress the stomach during gynecologic laparoscopy.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
* Is there appropriate visualization during surgery without stomach decompression?
* Can the surgeon tell the stomach is decompressed?
* Is the stomach at risk for injury during surgery?
* How is the patient's postoperative experience affected?
Participants will undergo their planned surgery as usual and will be asked to complete log about their recovery for the first week after surgery.
Researchers will compare patients who have their stomach decompressed during surgery to those who do not undergo stomach decompression to see if it is necessary.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
* Is there appropriate visualization during surgery without stomach decompression?
* Can the surgeon tell the stomach is decompressed?
* Is the stomach at risk for injury during surgery?
* How is the patient's postoperative experience affected?
Participants will undergo their planned surgery as usual and will be asked to complete log about their recovery for the first week after surgery.
Researchers will compare patients who have their stomach decompressed during surgery to those who do not undergo stomach decompression to see if it is necessary.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Assessing Gastric Motility and Distention in Postoperative Gastrointestinal Surgery Using Bedside Gastric Ultrasound: Predicting Risk of Aspiration Pneumonia, Ileus, Return of Bowel Function
NCT04747691
Postoperative Ileus
Postoperative Nausea
Postoperative Complications
+3 more
COMPLETED
Application of Laparoscopy in Gastrointestinal Injury
NCT01994148
Gastrointestinal Injury
UNKNOWN
NA
Pathophysiology of Perioperative Fluid Management in Emergency Laparotomy
NCT03997721
Intestinal Obstruction
Intestinal Perforation
Anastomotic Leak
+2 more
COMPLETED
Comparing the Variation in Laparoscopic Skills Acquisition in Obstetrics & Gynaecology and General Surgical Trainees
NCT05116332
Surgery
Fatigue, Mental
Fatigue
+2 more
COMPLETED
NOTES-Assisted Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery
NCT00848146
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic
Endoscopy
COMPLETED
NA
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways are a framework for management before, during, and after surgery that has demonstrated several benefits from a cost, complication, and satisfaction standpoint. In the field of gynecologic surgery, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends utilization of these pathways with particular emphasis on the importance of implementation of multiple components together. A literature review of 47 ERAS programs specific to obstetrics and gynecology (requiring at least four individual components of ERAS for inclusion) overall supported its use, however, recommended randomized control trials to evaluate each component of the pathway.
One component of the ERAS pathway includes gastric decompression in the perioperative setting. In 1999, before the advent of ERAS, an anesthesiologist recommended routine use of intraoperative gastric decompression to reduce risk of gastric perforation, citing laparoscopic general surgery anesthesia recommendations from 1993. The general surgery paper highlights the possibility for unintentional gastric distention with mask ventilation prior to anesthesia induction with associated increased risk of trocar injury, however, does not discuss incidence or rates of this phenomena. There is discussion of an association with increased intraabdominal pressure and regurgitation of gastric contents, however, nasogastric decompression is not addressed within this context.
Indications for nasogastric tube use in general include treatment of ileus, administration of medications, enteral nutrition, and stomach lavage. Currently available anesthesia recommendations include routine use of gastric tubes during induction with general endotracheal anesthesia. Importantly, it is noted that gastric drainage or suction does not remove particulate matter or guarantee full emptying. In fact, one study looking at use of nasogastric intubation after induction of anesthesia found that patients who underwent nasogastric intubation had significant gastroesophageal reflux disease in the perioperative period and a reduced ability to clear refluxed acid from the distal esophagus. Several other studies examining the routine placement of a nasogastric tube following abdominal surgery also found that patients who underwent gastric decompression had higher rates of fever, pneumonia, and other pulmonary complications. In these studies, those with a nasogastric tube had lower rates of emesis, but increased patient discomfort, no significant difference in the rates of nausea, and longer time to return of bowel function. One comparative study from the general surgery literature evaluating nasogastric decompression during open abdominal surgeries included a subgroup without placement at all in the perioperative period. This subgroup demonstrated significantly less events of atelectasis, fever, and patient discomfort. Furthermore, the routine use of gastric decompression is not benign, and some evidence suggests the benefits of routinely avoiding nasogastric intubations outweigh the risks.
Data has shown that early post-operative nasogastric tube discontinuation (including prior to transfer to post-anesthesia care) is associated with faster return to bowel function and decreased rates of postoperative ileus, as well as decreased hospital stay and rates of pulmonary complications. While it is commonplace for recommended ERAS diet status leading up to and after surgery in most institutions, (i.e., elimination of mechanical bowel prep, removal of nasogastric decompression prior to extubation), there is no clinical evidence available to date on utilization of intraoperative gastric decompression specifically for gynecologic laparoscopic cases.
Additionally, nasogastric or orogastric tubes may contribute to high costs of the operating room. On average, a nasogastric tube costs on average 4 dollars and seventy-five cents (based on cost for pack of 10) at this institution according to 2023 supply invoices. In 2022, a call to action in the Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery urged gynecologic surgeons to consider their role in safe and green practices in the operating room. Evaluating use of routine gastric decompression at time of gynecologic surgery is an opportunity to decrease potential costs and environmental impact.
Within the field of gynecologic oncology, recommendations are against routine nasogastric intubation and for early post-operative removal prior to extubation, however, possible reduction of risk of injury associated with Veress needle or trocar entry are noted. Regarding minimally invasive gynecologic surgery recommendations specifically, the first guidelines in 2020 discussed that patients with normal gastric emptying may intake up to 400 milliliters of clear liquids up to 2 hours prior to anesthesia with an equivalent gastric volume to overnight fasting. Nasogastric decompression was not recommended for prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting; however, its use was not discussed in terms of prevention of entry injury or prevention of postoperative pneumonia.
Overall, gastric injury is a rare complication of gynecologic surgery estimated to occur less than 0.5% of the time. A systematic review of 28 articles assessed the location and mechanism of gastric injury at the time of gynecologic surgery by analyzing 42 injuries. In the study, 93% of gastric injuries occurred upon entry with the Veress needle, which was used in 79% of cases. There was only one case with nasogastric decompression prior to entry and the location of entry was the left upper quadrant as opposed to the umbilicus.
Given rarity of gastric injury at time of laparoscopic gynecologic surgery and limited to no data regarding purported benefit of intraoperative gastric decompression, particularly regarding reduction of trocar injury rates, its routine use should be examined. Routine use may be associated with harmful potential for post-operative complications including pneumonia, delayed bowel function, and patient discomfort. In 2014, a similar evaluation of routine mechanical bowel preparation at time of laparoscopic hysterectomy demonstrated no difference in surgeon perception of visualization and ability to complete the procedure safely with or without mechanical bowel preparation. Similarly, the paper recognizes the purported benefits of routine mechanical bowel preparation to be largely untested prior to this study and the potential association for harm with patient discomfort and risks without improved surgical outcomes with existing data derived from laparotomies. When examined, both the primary and assistant surgeon had moderate agreement and accurately assessed preoperative bowel preparation a little more than half of the time, indicating that surgeon perception may not be reflective of perioperative measures.
The aim of this study is to examine the routine use of intraoperative gastric decompression during gynecologic laparoscopy. The primary outcome is surgeon perception of visualization of gastric decompression and surgery characteristics. Secondary outcomes are factors associated with patients' post-operative experience such as nausea and vomiting, return of bowel function, and naso- and oro-pharyngeal discomfort. The investigators hypothesize that limiting gastric decompression for specific medical indications as opposed to routine use will not be associated with an increased risk of harm such as gastric injury and poor surgical visualization for gynecologic laparoscopy.
One component of the ERAS pathway includes gastric decompression in the perioperative setting. In 1999, before the advent of ERAS, an anesthesiologist recommended routine use of intraoperative gastric decompression to reduce risk of gastric perforation, citing laparoscopic general surgery anesthesia recommendations from 1993. The general surgery paper highlights the possibility for unintentional gastric distention with mask ventilation prior to anesthesia induction with associated increased risk of trocar injury, however, does not discuss incidence or rates of this phenomena. There is discussion of an association with increased intraabdominal pressure and regurgitation of gastric contents, however, nasogastric decompression is not addressed within this context.
Indications for nasogastric tube use in general include treatment of ileus, administration of medications, enteral nutrition, and stomach lavage. Currently available anesthesia recommendations include routine use of gastric tubes during induction with general endotracheal anesthesia. Importantly, it is noted that gastric drainage or suction does not remove particulate matter or guarantee full emptying. In fact, one study looking at use of nasogastric intubation after induction of anesthesia found that patients who underwent nasogastric intubation had significant gastroesophageal reflux disease in the perioperative period and a reduced ability to clear refluxed acid from the distal esophagus. Several other studies examining the routine placement of a nasogastric tube following abdominal surgery also found that patients who underwent gastric decompression had higher rates of fever, pneumonia, and other pulmonary complications. In these studies, those with a nasogastric tube had lower rates of emesis, but increased patient discomfort, no significant difference in the rates of nausea, and longer time to return of bowel function. One comparative study from the general surgery literature evaluating nasogastric decompression during open abdominal surgeries included a subgroup without placement at all in the perioperative period. This subgroup demonstrated significantly less events of atelectasis, fever, and patient discomfort. Furthermore, the routine use of gastric decompression is not benign, and some evidence suggests the benefits of routinely avoiding nasogastric intubations outweigh the risks.
Data has shown that early post-operative nasogastric tube discontinuation (including prior to transfer to post-anesthesia care) is associated with faster return to bowel function and decreased rates of postoperative ileus, as well as decreased hospital stay and rates of pulmonary complications. While it is commonplace for recommended ERAS diet status leading up to and after surgery in most institutions, (i.e., elimination of mechanical bowel prep, removal of nasogastric decompression prior to extubation), there is no clinical evidence available to date on utilization of intraoperative gastric decompression specifically for gynecologic laparoscopic cases.
Additionally, nasogastric or orogastric tubes may contribute to high costs of the operating room. On average, a nasogastric tube costs on average 4 dollars and seventy-five cents (based on cost for pack of 10) at this institution according to 2023 supply invoices. In 2022, a call to action in the Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery urged gynecologic surgeons to consider their role in safe and green practices in the operating room. Evaluating use of routine gastric decompression at time of gynecologic surgery is an opportunity to decrease potential costs and environmental impact.
Within the field of gynecologic oncology, recommendations are against routine nasogastric intubation and for early post-operative removal prior to extubation, however, possible reduction of risk of injury associated with Veress needle or trocar entry are noted. Regarding minimally invasive gynecologic surgery recommendations specifically, the first guidelines in 2020 discussed that patients with normal gastric emptying may intake up to 400 milliliters of clear liquids up to 2 hours prior to anesthesia with an equivalent gastric volume to overnight fasting. Nasogastric decompression was not recommended for prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting; however, its use was not discussed in terms of prevention of entry injury or prevention of postoperative pneumonia.
Overall, gastric injury is a rare complication of gynecologic surgery estimated to occur less than 0.5% of the time. A systematic review of 28 articles assessed the location and mechanism of gastric injury at the time of gynecologic surgery by analyzing 42 injuries. In the study, 93% of gastric injuries occurred upon entry with the Veress needle, which was used in 79% of cases. There was only one case with nasogastric decompression prior to entry and the location of entry was the left upper quadrant as opposed to the umbilicus.
Given rarity of gastric injury at time of laparoscopic gynecologic surgery and limited to no data regarding purported benefit of intraoperative gastric decompression, particularly regarding reduction of trocar injury rates, its routine use should be examined. Routine use may be associated with harmful potential for post-operative complications including pneumonia, delayed bowel function, and patient discomfort. In 2014, a similar evaluation of routine mechanical bowel preparation at time of laparoscopic hysterectomy demonstrated no difference in surgeon perception of visualization and ability to complete the procedure safely with or without mechanical bowel preparation. Similarly, the paper recognizes the purported benefits of routine mechanical bowel preparation to be largely untested prior to this study and the potential association for harm with patient discomfort and risks without improved surgical outcomes with existing data derived from laparotomies. When examined, both the primary and assistant surgeon had moderate agreement and accurately assessed preoperative bowel preparation a little more than half of the time, indicating that surgeon perception may not be reflective of perioperative measures.
The aim of this study is to examine the routine use of intraoperative gastric decompression during gynecologic laparoscopy. The primary outcome is surgeon perception of visualization of gastric decompression and surgery characteristics. Secondary outcomes are factors associated with patients' post-operative experience such as nausea and vomiting, return of bowel function, and naso- and oro-pharyngeal discomfort. The investigators hypothesize that limiting gastric decompression for specific medical indications as opposed to routine use will not be associated with an increased risk of harm such as gastric injury and poor surgical visualization for gynecologic laparoscopy.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Gynecologic Surgical Procedures
Gastric Injury
Aspiration
Nausea, Postoperative
Postoperative Complications
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
Laparoscopy
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
* Block randomization in groups of 10 to either receive nasogastric or orogastric intubation after endotracheal intubation prior to abdominal entry for the duration of the surgery or no gastric decompression at all.
* Sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelope (SNOSE) technique
* Sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelope (SNOSE) technique
Primary Study Purpose
OTHER
Blinding Strategy
DOUBLE
Participants
Caregivers
* Patient will masked to group assignment and will be under anesthesia during intervention.
* Surgeon will be masked to group assignment. Placement of the nasogastric or orogastric tube will occur while the surgeon is scrubbing and out of the room. There will be a drape over the face until the surgical drapes are covering the patient to maintain surgeon blinding. Removal of tube will take place prior to undraping the patient to maintain blinding.
* All documents noted group assignment will be in an opaque envelope.
* Surgeon will be masked to group assignment. Placement of the nasogastric or orogastric tube will occur while the surgeon is scrubbing and out of the room. There will be a drape over the face until the surgical drapes are covering the patient to maintain surgeon blinding. Removal of tube will take place prior to undraping the patient to maintain blinding.
* All documents noted group assignment will be in an opaque envelope.
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Gastric decompression
Placement of the nasogastric or orogastric tube will occur after intubation while surgeons are scrubbing and out of the room to maintain blinding. At the end of surgery, the nasogastric or orogastric tube will be removed prior to removal of the surgical drapes to ensure the surgeon remains blinded. Patients will then be returned to routine post-operative care as otherwise planned or necessitated by surgery.
Group Type
EXPERIMENTAL
Gastric decompression (oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal gastric tube)
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Placement of tube through the nose or mouth into the stomach for gastric decompression
No gastric decompression
No placement of gastric decompression tube.
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.
Gastric decompression (oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal gastric tube)
Placement of tube through the nose or mouth into the stomach for gastric decompression
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Undergoing gynecologic laparoscopy for the following indications: hysterectomy, adnexal surgery, benign and malignant tumors or disease, diagnostic purposes, lysis of adhesions, and pelvic pain.
* Surgery being performed by gynecologic surgeon with or without minimally invasive gynecologist certification, gynecologic oncologists, urogynecologists, and reproductive endocrinologists.
* Surgery being performed by gynecologic surgeon with or without minimally invasive gynecologist certification, gynecologic oncologists, urogynecologists, and reproductive endocrinologists.
Exclusion Criteria
* Entry sites other than umbilical
* Planned or high suspicion for bowel surgery
* Anticipated surgical time \>4 hours
* Known diagnosis of gastric reflux disease or peptic ulcer disease
* Prior history of gastric or esophageal surgery excluding endoscopy
* Day of surgery emesis events
* Difficult intubation determined by anesthesia
* Intrauterine pregnancy
* Chronic lung disease
* Individuals with smoking history.
* Individuals who do not speak English due to limitations in ability to reliably obtain informed consent in their primary language.
* Planned or high suspicion for bowel surgery
* Anticipated surgical time \>4 hours
* Known diagnosis of gastric reflux disease or peptic ulcer disease
* Prior history of gastric or esophageal surgery excluding endoscopy
* Day of surgery emesis events
* Difficult intubation determined by anesthesia
* Intrauterine pregnancy
* Chronic lung disease
* Individuals with smoking history.
* Individuals who do not speak English due to limitations in ability to reliably obtain informed consent in their primary language.
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Eligible Sex
FEMALE
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Northwestern University
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Magdy Milad, MD
Chief of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery
Responsibility Role
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
259 E Erie - Northwestern
Chicago, Illinois, United States
Site Status
Prentice Women'S Hospital
Chicago, Illinois, 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.
Berkow, L. Rapid sequence induction and intubation (RSII) for anesthesia. UpToDate, 2023. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/rapid-sequence-induction-and-intubation-rsii-for-anesthesia
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Cheatham ML, Chapman WC, Key SP, Sawyers JL. A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy. Ann Surg. 1995 May;221(5):469-76; discussion 476-8. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199505000-00004.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Chui PT, Gin T, Oh TE. Anaesthesia for laparoscopic general surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993 Apr;21(2):163-71. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9302100205.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Coskun F. Anesthesia for gynecologic laparoscopy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1999 Aug;6(3):245-58. doi: 10.1016/s1074-3804(99)80057-7.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Feldheiser A, Aziz O, Baldini G, Cox BP, Fearon KC, Feldman LS, Gan TJ, Kennedy RH, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN, Miller T, Radtke FF, Ruiz Garces T, Schricker T, Scott MJ, Thacker JK, Ytrebo LM, Carli F. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for gastrointestinal surgery, part 2: consensus statement for anaesthesia practice. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016 Mar;60(3):289-334. doi: 10.1111/aas.12651. Epub 2015 Oct 30.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Hodin, R. Inpatient placement and management of nasogastric and nasoenteric tubes in adults. UpToDate, 2023. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/inpatient-placement-and-management-of-nasogastric-and-nasoenteric-tubes-in-adults
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Hu H, Choi JDW, Edye MB, Aitken T, Kapurubandara S. Gastric Injury at Laparoscopy for Gynecologic Indications: A Systematic Review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022 Nov;29(11):1224-1230. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2022.09.058. Epub 2022 Sep 30.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Manning BJ, Winter DC, McGreal G, Kirwan WO, Redmond HP. Nasogastric intubation causes gastroesophageal reflux in patients undergoing elective laparotomy. Surgery. 2001 Nov;130(5):788-91. doi: 10.1067/msy.2001.116029.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Michowitz M, Chen J, Waizbard E, Bawnik JB. Abdominal operations without nasogastric tube decompression of the gastrointestinal tract. Am Surg. 1988 Nov;54(11):672-5.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Nelson R, Edwards S, Tse B. Prophylactic nasogastric decompression after abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18;2007(3):CD004929. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004929.pub3.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, Antrobus J, Huang J, Scott M, Wijk L, Acheson N, Ljungqvist O, Dowdy SC. Guidelines for pre- and intra-operative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(R)) Society recommendations--Part I. Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Feb;140(2):313-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.11.015. Epub 2015 Nov 18. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Nelson G, Bakkum-Gamez J, Kalogera E, Glaser G, Altman A, Meyer LA, Taylor JS, Iniesta M, Lasala J, Mena G, Scott M, Gillis C, Elias K, Wijk L, Huang J, Nygren J, Ljungqvist O, Ramirez PT, Dowdy SC. Guidelines for perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations-2019 update. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019 May;29(4):651-668. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000356. Epub 2019 Mar 15.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Rao W, Zhang X, Zhang J, Yan R, Hu Z, Wang Q. The role of nasogastric tube in decompression after elective colon and rectum surgery: a meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011 Apr;26(4):423-9. doi: 10.1007/s00384-010-1093-4. Epub 2010 Nov 24.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Scheib SA, Thomassee M, Kenner JL. Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in Gynecology: A Review of the Literature. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019 Feb;26(2):327-343. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.12.010. Epub 2018 Dec 20.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Schwartz KM, Wright KN, Richards EG, King LP, Park AJ. Sustainability in Healthcare: A Call to Action for Surgeons and Healthcare Leaders. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022 Sep;29(9):1040-1042. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2022.06.024. Epub 2022 Jul 1. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Siedhoff MT, Clark LH, Hobbs KA, Findley AD, Moulder JK, Garrett JM. Mechanical bowel preparation before laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Mar;123(3):562-567. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000121.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Stone R, Carey E, Fader AN, Fitzgerald J, Hammons L, Nensi A, Park AJ, Ricci S, Rosenfield R, Scheib S, Weston E. Enhanced Recovery and Surgical Optimization Protocol for Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: An AAGL White Paper. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021 Feb;28(2):179-203. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.08.006. Epub 2020 Aug 20.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
ACOG Committee Opinion No. 750 Summary: Perioperative Pathways: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Sep;132(3):801-802. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002819.
Reference Type
RESULT
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
STU00219580
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Laparoscopic Exploration Versus Abdominal CT Scan
NCT03923647
UNKNOWN
Optimizing the Previs Device for Prediction of Postoperative Ileus
NCT03505476
COMPLETED
NA
Efficacy of Proficiency-based Versus Free Laparoscopic Training in Cholecystectomy on a Virtual Reality Simulator
NCT01615549
UNKNOWN
NA
Nasogastric Tube Clamping Trial vs. Immediate Removal
NCT04001985
UNKNOWN
NA
the Effect of Simple Clinical Maneuver on Shoulder and Abdominal Pain a Laparascopic Gynecological Surgery:a Prospective Randomised Trial
NCT01940042
COMPLETED
NA
Operating Room Outcomes After Resident Training on a Virtual Reality Simulator
NCT00459472
TERMINATED
NA
Endo-Vac-Therapy for Post-Sleeve Gastrectomy Leaks
NCT05189574
COMPLETED
Transgastric Peritoneoscopy and Appendectomy
NCT00952146
UNKNOWN
NA
Evaluation of Abdominal Wall Lifting During Laparoscopic Direct Trocar Insertion
NCT01726231
COMPLETED
Intra-Abdominal Pressure Effect on Intra-Abdominal Volume and Airway Pressures During Laparoscopy
NCT04468698
COMPLETED
Evaluation of the Value of Ultrasound Measurement of Stomach Diameter in Predicting Postoperative Nausea/Vomiting
NCT07063069
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Standardizing Language in Laparoscopic Surgery
NCT02565875
UNKNOWN
NA
Is Nasogastric Tube Necessary After Pancreaticoduodenectomy?
NCT01991392
UNKNOWN
NA
Prospective Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Tissue Apposition
NCT03626194
RECRUITING
Changes in Cerebral Oxygenation During Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy
NCT03650842
COMPLETED
NA
Natural Orifice Transgastric Endoscopic (NOTES) Transgastric Diagnostic Peritoneoscopy With Laparoscopic Assistance
NCT00962650
COMPLETED
NA
Different Feeding Methods After Pyloromyotomy
NCT01509417
COMPLETED
NA
Standardized Perioperative Management of Patients Operated With Acute Abdominal Surgery in a High-risk Emergency Setting
NCT03549624
UNKNOWN
Pilot Study of Laparoscopic Gastric Plication in Adolescents With Severe Obesity
NCT01980758
COMPLETED
NA
Outcome After Laparoscopic Surgery for Peptic Ulcer Perforation
NCT05147870
COMPLETED
Study of the Relationship Between Curarization and Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Surgery
NCT07005518
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Comprehensive Laparoscopic Curriculum for Medical Students
NCT01857180
COMPLETED
NA
Bedside Ultrasound of Gastric Contents in Pediatric Populations
NCT03520374
RECRUITING
NA
Outcomes After Laparotomy for Penetrating Abdominal Trauma
NCT04536818
COMPLETED
ONSD According to the Position During Laparoscopy
NCT01937104
COMPLETED
NA