Morbidity of Conventional and No-touch Saphenectomy in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.
NCT ID: NCT06496321
Last Updated: 2024-07-11
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.
RECRUITING
NA
52 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2024-03-15
2025-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Clinical Impact of Surgical Wound Morbidity According to the Type of Saphenous Vein Harvesting Technique (Endoscopic vs. Open) in Patients Undergoing Myocardial Revascularization Surgery
NCT07002658
Assessing Vein Graft Properties Between Conventional & No-Touch Harvesting Technique - (PATENT SVG)
NCT01488084
Proximal Versus Distal Segments of No-Touch Saphenous Vein Grafts
NCT04284956
No-Touch Versus Conventional Saphenous Vein Harvesting Technique
NCT03126409
Clinical Effect of No-touch Harvesting Technique in OPCABG
NCT03729531
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Given this disparity in the application of the techniques, it is considered essential to compare both methods in terms of morbidity. For this purpose, a prospective randomized clinical trial will be carried out.
The primary objective is to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the "no touch" technique over the conventional technique in terms of wound morbidity in patients undergoing coronary revascularization, within a non-inferiority margin. Defining morbidity as the combined result of local infection, hematoma, blisters, secretions, necrosis, wound dehiscence, paresthesias, pain and functional impotence.
The investigators will seek to achieve as a specific objective the incidence of each of the study factors: local infection, hematoma, blisters, secretions, necrosis, wound dehiscence, paresthesias, pain, functional impotence and then compare them between both groups at different times.
The anatomopathological study of some of the saphenous vein preparations, one "no touch" and the other conventional, will also be carried out using optical microscopy and ultrastructural comparisons using transmission electron microscopy.
Additionally, patients will be offered computed tomography angiography every year to evaluate graft patency.
There are not many relevant randomized clinical trials that compare the morbidity of this technique with the conventional one. In this context, we consider it crucial to evaluate whether there are significant differences in terms of wound morbidity in the mid-postoperative period (1 week), late (1 month) and long-term postoperative period (6 months).
We will define each variable previously: it will be considered to have a local infection when the wound shows signs of flow and it has been necessary to start antibiotic treatment, hematoma when there is a tumor or abnormal hardening caused by the accumulation of blood, flictenes when a skin blister appears on the wound that contains watery substances and not pus, secretions when the wound secretes a liquid (serous, bloody, purulent), necrosis when there is a necrotic plaque in the wound larger than 10 x 10 mm, dehiscence of the wound when the suture loses continuity, paresthesia when there is a tingling sensation due to an irritative sensitivity disorder, pain when it is located at the level of the wound and functional impotence when it prevents or limits ambulation.
Through multivariate analysis, the relationship with independent factors will be analyzed.
Null hypothesis: "no touch" saphenectomy is inferior to the conventional technique.
Alternative hypothesis: "no touch" saphenectomy is not inferior to the conventional technique.
Existing studies have focused their attention on evaluating the patency of the ducts; however, there is a lack of solid information on the morbidity associated with this technique in the lower limb of patients. Currently, the most widely used technique remains the conventional one, which involves a continuous incision in the skin of the leg or thigh. In this technique, a dissection of the subcutaneous tissue surrounding the vein is performed, the collaterals are ligated, and the free venous duct is sectioned. The length of the conduit varies depending on the amount of bypass to be performed. During the extraction of the saphenous vein using the "no touch" technique, it is sectioned with the perivascular adipose tissue and the saphenous nerve of the leg, therefore, it is of great interest for us to evaluate the incidence of the postoperative complications, previously mentioned, and compare these results with those obtained through the conventional technique.
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
A probability of complication of saphenectomy by conventional or "control" technique of 10% was assumed, based on studies from our institution, and according to preliminary studies we expect to find 50% more in the "no touch" technique, therefore 15%. The non-inferiority limit will be 20%. With these values, assuming a 95% confidence interval and a power (1 - beta) of 80%, and taking into account a probable 20% of lost patients, we can calculate the necessary population sample size, which was in total 52 patients; 26 people in the group with conventional technique and 26 in the "no touch".
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Conventional
26 patients will be randomized to this group. The vein harvest technique will be the conventional one.
Conventional Saphenous vein harvest
The conventional one involves harvesting only the vein, without perivascular tissue or the nerve.
No Touch
26 patients will be randomized to this group. The vein harvest technique will be the "no touch".
No touch Saphenous vein harvest
During the extraction of the saphenous vein using the "no touch" technique, it is sectioned with the perivascular adipose tissue and the saphenous nerve of the leg.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Conventional Saphenous vein harvest
The conventional one involves harvesting only the vein, without perivascular tissue or the nerve.
No touch Saphenous vein harvest
During the extraction of the saphenous vein using the "no touch" technique, it is sectioned with the perivascular adipose tissue and the saphenous nerve of the leg.
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
Exclusion Criteria
* Poor metabolic control (HbA1c \> 6.5%).
* Chronic venous insufficiency or chronic obstructive arteriopathy of the lower limbs.
* Type II obesity (BMI\>35).
18 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Instituto Nacional de Cirugia Cardiaca, Uruguay
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.
Juan A Montero, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Instituto Nacional de Cirugía Cardíaca
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Instituto Nacional de Cirugia Cardiaca
Montevideo, , Uruguay
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Dashwood MR, Pinheiro BB, Souza DSR. Impact of saphenous vein harvesting on graft diameter: Supporting the no-touch technique. JTCVS Tech. 2022 Aug 18;16:105-106. doi: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.08.011. eCollection 2022 Dec. No abstract available.
Deb S, Singh SK, de Souza D, Chu MWA, Whitlock R, Meyer SR, Verma S, Jeppsson A, Al-Saleh A, Brady K, Rao-Melacini P, Belley-Cote EP, Tam DY, Devereaux PJ, Novick RJ, Fremes SE; SUPERIOR SVG Study Investigators. SUPERIOR SVG: no touch saphenous harvesting to improve patency following coronary bypass grafting (a multi-Centre randomized control trial, NCT01047449). J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 May 2;14(1):85. doi: 10.1186/s13019-019-0887-x.
Gaudino M, Antoniades C, Benedetto U, Deb S, Di Franco A, Di Giammarco G, Fremes S, Glineur D, Grau J, He GW, Marinelli D, Ohmes LB, Patrono C, Puskas J, Tranbaugh R, Girardi LN, Taggart DP; ATLANTIC (Arterial Grafting International Consortium) Alliance. Mechanisms, Consequences, and Prevention of Coronary Graft Failure. Circulation. 2017 Oct 31;136(18):1749-1764. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.027597.
Inaba Y, Yamazaki M, Ohono M, Yamashita K, Izumida H, Hayashi K, Takahashi T, Kimura N, Ito T, Shimizu H. No-touch saphenous vein graft harvesting technique for coronary artery bypass grafting. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020 Mar;68(3):248-253. doi: 10.1007/s11748-019-01186-4. Epub 2019 Aug 2.
Kopjar T, Dashwood MR. Endoscopic Versus "No-Touch" Saphenous Vein Harvesting for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Trade-Off Between Wound Healing and Graft Patency. Angiology. 2016 Feb;67(2):121-32. doi: 10.1177/0003319715584126. Epub 2015 May 13.
Pettersen O, Haram PM, Winnerkvist A, Karevold A, Wahba A, Stenvik M, Wiseth R, Hegbom K, Nordhaug DO. Pedicled Vein Grafts in Coronary Surgery: Perioperative Data From a Randomized Trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017 Oct;104(4):1313-1317. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.03.076. Epub 2017 Jun 23.
Ragnarsson S, Janiec M, Modrau IS, Dreifaldt M, Ericsson A, Holmgren A, Hultkvist H, Jeppsson A, Sartipy U, Ternstrom L, Per Vikholm MD, de Souza D, James S, Thelin S. No-touch saphenous vein grafts in coronary artery surgery (SWEDEGRAFT): Rationale and design of a multicenter, prospective, registry-based randomized clinical trial. Am Heart J. 2020 Jun;224:17-24. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.03.009. Epub 2020 Mar 13.
Souza DS, Christofferson RH, Bomfim V, Filbey D. "No-touch" technique using saphenous vein harvested with its surrounding tissue for coronary artery bypass grafting maintains an intact endothelium. Scand Cardiovasc J. 1999;33(6):323-9. doi: 10.1080/14017439950141362.
Samano N, Geijer H, Liden M, Fremes S, Bodin L, Souza D. The no-touch saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass grafting maintains a patency, after 16 years, comparable to the left internal thoracic artery: A randomized trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015 Oct;150(4):880-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.07.027. Epub 2015 Jul 15.
Souza DS, Dashwood MR, Tsui JC, Filbey D, Bodin L, Johansson B, Borowiec J. Improved patency in vein grafts harvested with surrounding tissue: results of a randomized study using three harvesting techniques. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002 Apr;73(4):1189-95. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(02)03425-2.
Souza DS, Arbeus M, Botelho Pinheiro B, Filbey D. The no-touch technique of harvesting the saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Multimed Man Cardiothorac Surg. 2009 Jan 1;2009(731):mmcts.2008.003624. doi: 10.1510/mmcts.2008.003624.
Tian M, Wang X, Sun H, Feng W, Song Y, Lu F, Wang L, Wang Y, Xu B, Wang H, Liu S, Liu Z, Chen Y, Miao Q, Su P, Yang Y, Guo S, Lu B, Sun Z, Liu K, Zhang C, Wu Y, Xu H, Zhao W, Han C, Zhou X, Wang E, Huo X, Hu S. No-Touch Versus Conventional Vein Harvesting Techniques at 12 Months After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: Multicenter Randomized, Controlled Trial. Circulation. 2021 Oct 5;144(14):1120-1129. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.055525. Epub 2021 Sep 13.
Tsuneyoshi H, Setozaki S, Katayama H, Wada T, Shimomura S, Takeuchi A, Sugaya A, Komiya T. Early and Midterm Outcomes of "No-Touch" Saphenous Vein Grafts in Japanese Institutions. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2022 Sep 2;37(Spec 1):42-48. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2022-0121.
Verma S, Lovren F, Pan Y, Yanagawa B, Deb S, Karkhanis R, Quan A, Teoh H, Feder-Elituv R, Moussa F, Souza DS, Fremes SE. Pedicled no-touch saphenous vein graft harvest limits vascular smooth muscle cell activation: the PATENT saphenous vein graft study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014 Apr;45(4):717-25. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezt560. Epub 2013 Dec 9.
Weiss MG, Nielsen PH, James S, Thelin S, Modrau IS. Clinical Outcomes After Surgical Revascularization Using No-Touch Versus Conventional Saphenous Vein Grafts: Mid-Term Follow-Up of Propensity Score Matched Cohorts. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023 Summer;35(2):228-236. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2021.12.002. Epub 2021 Dec 5.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Document Type: Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
TNT
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.