AzTrials
AzTrials

Surgical Wound InfectionAlexisNCT03365219

Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor for the Prevention of Post-cesarean Surgical Site Infections

A study testing Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor and Standard Surgical Retractors in people with Surgical Wound Infection, run by The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston.

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

Post cesarean section surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication that can affect patient recovery and overall outcome. Several approaches have been studied to improve SSI rates such as timing of antibiotic administration and skin preparation. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Surgical Wound Infection
What is being tested?
Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor and Standard Surgical Retractors
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
564 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
Oct 2010to Oct 2013
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 18 years and older
  • Women only
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • maternal age of at least 18 years
  • a gestational age of at least 24 0/7 wks by best obstetric estimate
  • a viable gestation
  • a non-emergent cesarean delivery
  • a planned transverse skin incision
  • Deliveries included: primary cesarean for failed induction, maternal request, or other obstetric indications; and repeat cesarean deliveries that were elective or had obstetric indications (such as spontaneous labor in a subject with a term gestation and with history of 2 or more prior cesarean deliveries)

Who cannot join

  • chorioamnionitis
  • chronic corticosteroid therapy
  • prior abdominal vertical skin incision scar or planned vertical incision
  • history of a prior wound infection or separation
  • planned cesarean hysterectomy
  • maternal or fetal complications requiring an emergent delivery

About this study

Official title: Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor for the Prevention of Post-cesarean Surgical Site Infections: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Post cesarean section surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication that can affect patient recovery and overall outcome. Several approaches have been studied to improve SSI rates such as timing of antibiotic administration and skin preparation. Alexis retractors have been suggested as a reasonable option to decrease SSI. However, to date there is only one randomized controlled study assessing its efficacy. The aim of this study is to whether Alexis wound retractors are beneficial in preventing cesarean section SSI.

Read the detailed description

The study design was a randomized controlled study to evaluate wound infection rates in patients undergoing a cesarean delivery. The patients were randomized into two sub- groups; the first group received routine hand-held metal retractors as needed by the surgical team, and the second group received an Alexis Wound Retractor. Inclusion criteria included: maternal age of at least 18 years, a gestational age of at least 24 0/7 wks by best obstetric estimate, a viable gestation, a non-emergent cesarean delivery, and a planned transverse skin incision. Deliveries included: primary cesarean for failed induction, maternal request, or other obstetric indications; and repeat cesarean deliveries that were elective or had obstetric indications (such as spontaneous labor in a subject with a term gestation and with history of 2 or more prior cesarean deliveries). Exclusion criteria included chorioamnionitis, chronic corticosteroid therapy, a prior abdominal vertical skin incision scar or planned vertical incision, history of a prior wound infection or separation, a planned cesarean hysterectomy, or maternal or fetal complications requiring an emergent delivery.

Randomization was done using a web-based randomization generator. Variables were allocated as: 1 for Alexis, and 0 for conventional surgical retractors. Packages including consent forms, data sheets, and the randomized allocation were prepared for the entire study and were stored in one office. Study packets were prepared to include a sealed envelope indicating randomization to be opened after the consent form was signed. Only after randomization, the Alexis retractor was opened and placed on the surgical field.

Prior to initiation of the study, in-service sessions were conducted with OB surgical teams to facilitate the use of the retractors. Information provided included optimal use of the retractor and selection of the appropriate retractor size. The primary surgeon of each case was previously trained by the principle investigator in placement of the retractor on actual patients.

Once a decision was made to proceed with cesarean delivery, the subject was approached and offered to participate in the study. After the patient had been enrolled and consent forms signed, an allocated envelope for each study subject determined which arm of the study to which the patient would be randomized; no other management decisions was made as part of the RCT. Surgical decisions were independent of the patient's designated study arm and retractor type. Such decisions included: type of anesthesia, length of transverse skin incision , method of tissue dissection (blunt vs. instrumental), creation of bladder flap, size and nature of uterine incision (transverse, low vertical, classical, J-type, T-incision), surgical material used, exteriorization of the uterus, manual vs. spontaneous delivery of placenta, layer closure techniques (bladder flap, peritoneum, subcutaneous tissue), and skin closure technique (staples, subcuticular sutures). Skin preoperative preparation was performed as standard with ChloraPrep® Applicator (2% Chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% isopropyl alcohol). Intravenous antibiotics were given preoperatively in accordance to national guidelines (12). The primary outcome of this study was the development of a surgical site infection after cesarean delivery within two weeks after cesarean.

Incisions were checked daily in-house. However, the exams that were used in this study to determine the occurrences of SSI were the first exam done in the outpatient setting for removal of staples (post op days 5 - 7), and the two week post partum visit (post op days 14 - 18). SSIs were diagnosed according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria.(13). The most commonly seen characteristics were purulent drainage or localized swelling and/or redness of the surgical wound.

In addition, other wound complications were also assessed and included: seroma (wounds with clear drainage) and/or hematomas. Other secondary outcomes included skin time to uterine incision (minutes) , exteriorization of the uterus(yes, no), total operative time (minutes), estimated blood loss (mL) estimated by the primary surgeon, and postoperative pain based on a subjective 1-10 pain scale, assessed 4 times daily while hospitalized and at the outpatient visits previously mentioned.

An initial sample size estimate was performed using the frequentist approach with an assumption of power 80% and Type 1 error = 5% (2-sided). The primary outcome of the study is expected to occur in 15% of women in the "usual care" group. In order to detect a 50% reduction (15% to 7.5%) in the rate of wound complications with the use of the Alexis retractor, a total sample size of 564 women will be needed (282 per group). The planned study was to be carried out at two distinct sites: the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston (UTMB) and the University of Texas in Houston. The Institutional Review Board of UTMB-Galveston IRB # 10-188 approved the study.

Being tested
Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor, Standard Surgical Retractors
Keywords
Surgical Site Infection, Cesarean delivery infection
Medical subject headings
Surgical Wound Infection

What participants receive

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

  • Alexis O-Ring Wound RetractorDevice

    A flexible self-retaining plastic Alexis retractor was used in place of standard surgical retractors.

  • Standard Surgical RetractorsOther

    Routine hand-held metal retractors as needed by the surgical team

Study groups in NCT03365219
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Alexis RetractorExperimentalThis group received an Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor during cesarean delivery.
Receives: Device: Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor
Standard Surgical RetractorsActive comparatorThis group received routine hand-held metal retractors as needed by the surgical team during cesarean delivery.
Receives: Other: Standard Surgical Retractors

What is being measured

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

  1. Surgical Site Infection

    Assessed as present or absent. Defined as the development of wound infection, seroma, or other wound disruption in patients who underwent a cesarean delivery

    Measured: Time of surgery up to 14 post operative days

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Postoperative pain

    Patients are asked to report pain on a scale of 1-10, 1 no pain and 10 the worst pain.

    Measured: Time of surgery up to 14 post operative days

  2. Estimated blood loss

    Defined as the amount of blood loss during the cesarean delivery as estimated by the operating surgeons.

    Measured: intraoperative assessment

  3. Uterus exteriorization

    Quantified as yes or no; defined as whether or not the surgeons' exteriorized the uterus extra-corporally (removed from abdominal cavity) at any time of the cesarean delivery

    Measured: intraoperative assessment

  4. Total operative time

    Defined as the total length of time in minutes required to perform the cesarean delivery from time of initial skin incision to completion of skin closure.

    Measured: intraoperative assessment

Timeline

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

  1. First posted7 Dec 2017
  2. Study startOct 2010
  3. Primary completionOct 2013
  4. Study completionOct 2013

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
Prevention
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
564 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03365219
Sponsor's protocol ID
10-188
Acronym
Alexis
Status last verified
May 2018
First submitted
9 Jun 2015
Last updated
19 Oct 2018
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Menacker F, Hamilton BE. Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States. NCHS Data Brief. 2010 Mar;(35):1-8.

    PubMed 20334736
  • Kirkland KB, Briggs JP, Trivette SL, Wilkinson WE, Sexton DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999 Nov;20(11):725-30. doi: 10.1086/501572.

    PubMed 10580621
  • Stone PW, Braccia D, Larson E. Systematic review of economic analyses of health care-associated infections. Am J Infect Control. 2005 Nov;33(9):501-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2005.04.246.

    PubMed 16260325
  • Moir-Bussy B, Hutton R, Thompson J. Wound infection after caesarean section. Nurs Times. 1985 Jun 5-11;81(23):suppl 13-4. No abstract available.

    PubMed 3847906
  • Rauk PN. Educational intervention, revised instrument sterilization methods, and comprehensive preoperative skin preparation protocol reduce cesarean section surgical site infections. Am J Infect Control. 2010 May;38(4):319-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2009.10.004. Epub 2010 Feb 19.

    PubMed 20171756
  • Schneid-Kofman N, Sheiner E, Levy A, Holcberg G. Risk factors for wound infection following cesarean deliveries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005 Jul;90(1):10-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.03.020.

    PubMed 15913620
  • Tran TS, Jamulitrat S, Chongsuvivatwong V, Geater A. Risk factors for postcesarean surgical site infection. Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Mar;95(3):367-71. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00540-2.

    PubMed 10711546
  • Weiss JL, Malone FD, Emig D, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, Saade G, Eddleman K, Carter SM, Craigo SD, Carr SR, D'Alton ME; FASTER Research Consortium. Obesity, obstetric complications and cesarean delivery rate--a population-based screening study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Apr;190(4):1091-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2003.09.058.

    PubMed 15118648
  • Cedergren MI. Maternal morbid obesity and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Feb;103(2):219-24. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000107291.46159.00.

    PubMed 14754687
  • ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 120: Use of prophylactic antibiotics in labor and delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jun;117(6):1472-1483. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182238c31. No abstract available.

    PubMed 21606770
  • Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Am J Infect Control. 1999 Apr;27(2):97-132; quiz 133-4; discussion 96.

    PubMed 10196487
  • Cheng KP, Roslani AC, Sehha N, Kueh JH, Law CW, Chong HY, Arumugam K. ALEXIS O-Ring wound retractor vs conventional wound protection for the prevention of surgical site infections in colorectal resections(1). Colorectal Dis. 2012 Jun;14(6):e346-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.02943.x.

    PubMed 22568647

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Alexis O-Ring Wound Retractor and Standard Surgical Retractors in people with Surgical Wound Infection, run by The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston.

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 6 inclusion and 6 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 19 Oct 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

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?

Surgical Site Infection (time frame: Time of surgery up to 14 post operative days). 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 NCT03365219, which also lists 12 linked publications.

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 19 Oct 2018.

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