AzTrials
AzTrials

ColostomyNCT01694238

A Randomized Trial on the Technical Aspects of Stoma Construction.

A study testing Cruciate incision, Circular incision and Mesh enforced cruciate incision in people with Colostomy and Colorectal Neoplasm, run by Sahlgrenska University Hospital at 1 site in Sweden.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

An investigation on the difference in stoma hernia frequency related to surgical technique when incising the fascia. All patients planned for elective colostomy formation are to be included. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any age
Conditions the study is for
Colostomy, Colorectal Neoplasm, Diverticulitis
What is being tested?
Cruciate incision, Circular incision and Mesh enforced cruciate incision
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
209 participants
Where
1 siteSweden
Study dates
Jun 2013to Oct 2018
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • presenting with a cancer or other conditions for which an elective surgical procedure is planned and includes a permanent colostomy formation
  • possible to operate in regard to concomitant disease
  • giving informed consent to participate

Who cannot join

  • Not possible to operate due to concomitant disease
  • Participation in other randomized trials in conflict with the protocol and end-points of the Stoma-Const trial.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Sweden1 site
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital/östra

    Gothenburg, 41685

Other trials in Sweden

About this study

Official title: Circular, Mesh Enforced or Cruciate Incision in the Abdominal Wall Fascia for coloStomy Construction - A Randomised Trial

An investigation on the difference in stoma hernia frequency related to surgical technique when incising the fascia. All patients planned for elective colostomy formation are to be included. Patients undergoing rectal resection with a TME and a colostomy (Hartmann's procedure) for rectal cancer, abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer or diverting colostomy for any reason are all included.

The three groups for randomization are:

  1. circular incision in the abdominal wall fascia B. cruciate incision in the abdominal wall fascia C. mesh enforced cruciate incision in the abdominal wall fascia Primary endpoint is the parastomal hernia rate within 12 months from index surgery. Secondary end-points include clinical variables, re-admission and/or re-operation due to any stoma complication, quality of life and health economy analyses, at 12 months.
Read the detailed description

Colostomy formation has been a standard surgical procedure for more than 100 years. Initially the quality of life for stoma patients was all but good, as the appliances to collect the feces were cumbersome, smelly and did not ensure non-leakage. As late as in the 60-ies bandages were still primitive(1). Gradually these problems have decreased as techniques for bandages have improved. A well functioning colostomy may in itself not negatively affect the patient's Quality of Life (QoL)(2), although thorough information and support from stoma care nurses is of utmost importance (3). However, this can only be said if the stoma is well functioning and if the complications are kept to a minimum. The complication rate after stoma formation is still considerable, with figures of 21-70% (4, 5) and studies have shown that adequate height; type of stoma, BMI, emergency surgery and gender may be of importance in reducing the risk of complications both in the short and long-term (6-8).

The surgical technique of stoma formation is only partly evidence based. There are few studies directed at technical details about stoma construction and their future impact on stoma function, apart from the importance of the stoma height (6). One study has tested to standardize the skin incision to 2/3rds of the width of the bowel (9), although the actual impact of this on the functional outcome of the stoma was not presented.. In the surgical literature a cruciate incision in the fascia and extraction of the bowel through a hole sufficient in size is a short description of the surgical technique (10). In clinical practice sufficient size of the hole has often been equal to "two fingers-width", is commonly used, which refers to the width of the surgeon's fingers, a fairly inexact measurement. A pilot study from Sahlgrenska University Hospital has found that this clinical practice for the most part results in a skin incision diameter of 50% of the bowel width.

There have been discussions regarding the placement of the stoma and effects on hernia incidence, whether in the obliquous muscle or the rectus abdominis (11) or if the bowel should take an extraperitoneal route (ad modum Goligher) or not (12). No studies have been sufficient in design or size to thoroughly answer the question.

Parastomal hernia is a long-term complication that is common, in the literature figures up to almost 50% have been reported (13, 14). Attempts to reduce the rates of parastomal hernias have been made in the last few years with a placement of a mesh, at the construction of the stoma, (15-19). This practice has not been universally accepted, in part due to a hesitance in the surgical society because of the risk of infections with foreign body material, and partly due to that most studies are underpowered for their main outcome variable. Another suggestion for the basic construction of the stoma has been to make a circular incision in the fascia instead of a cruciate, but this has not been documented in any studies. It has been described in conjunction with use of circular stapling devices in the skin, no hernias were found, however the patient numbers were small (20). It is apparent that further studies are most welcome.

The evaluation of parastomal hernias has been discussed. Janes et al. used clinical examination in their studies (16, 17), and confirmed in a later study that the concurrence with a CT-verified parastomal hernia was (21) sufficient if performed in a prone position. Another recent study found that results from a CT-scan was not correlated with patient symptoms (22). Other studies have evaluated the use of ultrasound and found it feasible (23). The conclusion must be that evaluation of parastomal hernias may be difficult and must be standardized in a study.

The hypothesis to be tested in this study is that a circular incision or mesh enforced cruciate incision in the abdominal wall fascia with a diameter of 50% of the width of the patients left colon results carries less risk of parastomal herniation than a cruciate incision where the each of the arms measure 1/2 of the diameter of the patients left colon.

The aim of this trial is to compare the parastomal hernia formation within 12 months after stoma surgery between circular, mesh enforced cruciate and cruciate incision.

Being tested
Cruciate incision, Circular incision, Mesh enforced cruciate incision
Keywords
Colostomy, Surgical technique
Medical subject headings
Colorectal Neoplasms, Diverticulitis

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Cruciate incisionProcedure or surgery

  • Circular incisionProcedure or surgery

  • Mesh enforced cruciate incisionOther

Study groups in NCT01694238
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Cruciate incisionActive comparatorCruciate incision in the abdominal wall fascia
Receives: Procedure: Cruciate incision
Circular incisionExperimentalCircular incision in the fascia
Receives: Procedure: Circular incision
Mesh enforced cruciate incisionExperimentalMesh enforcement and then cruciate incision in the abdominal wall fascia
Receives: Other: Mesh enforced cruciate incision

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Stoma hernia frequency at 12 months

    The frequency of stoma hernia at 12 months measured either by clinical examination or CT scan

    Measured: 12 months

Secondary outcomes (5)
  1. Readmission

    Number of readmissions in the two groups

    Measured: 12 months

  2. Postoperative infections

    Postoperative infections at 12 months

    Measured: 12 months

  3. Total hospital stay

    The total number of days in hospital during 12 months

    Measured: 12 months

  4. Other complications

    The number and type of complications during 12 months postoperatively

    Measured: 12 months

  5. 30 day mortality

    30 day mortality

    Measured: 30 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted27 Sep 2012 (estimated)
  2. Study startJun 2013
  3. Primary completionSep 2017
  4. Study completionOct 2018

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
209 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01694238
Sponsor's protocol ID
Stoma-Const
Status last verified
Mar 2019
First submitted
24 Sep 2012
Last updated
29 Mar 2019
Results posted
No

Publications

  • Correa Marinez A, Erestam S, Haglind E, Ekelund J, Angeras U, Rosenberg J, Helgstrand F, Angenete E. Stoma-Const--the technical aspects of stoma construction: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2014 Jun 27;15:254. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-254.

    PubMed 24970570

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Cruciate incision, Circular incision and Mesh enforced cruciate incision in people with Colostomy and Colorectal Neoplasm, run by Sahlgrenska University Hospital at 1 site in Sweden.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Mar 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Sweden. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Stoma hernia frequency at 12 months (time frame: 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01694238, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Mar 2019.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in