Surgical Site InfectionNCT03935659
Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Surgical Site Infection Prevention in Common Femoral Artery Exposure
A study testing Negative Pressure Pressure Wound Therapy and Standard Wound Care in people with Surgical Site Infection and Groin Infections, run by Henry Ford Health System at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this randomized clinical trial is to investigate the role of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard sterile gauze therapy on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) in primarily closed groin incisions in high risk patients undergoing any open common femoral artery exposure for a… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Surgical Site Infection, Groin Infections
- What is being tested?
- Negative Pressure Pressure Wound Therapy and Standard Wound Care
- Type of treatment
- Medical device, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 26 Mar 2018to 1 Oct 2021
- 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
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Body Mass Index >30 kg/m2
- Critical limb ischemia defined by Ankle Brachial Index<0.35, rest pain, tissue loss and/or non-healing ulcers
- Procedure time >240 min
- End Stage Renal Disease on dialysis
- Glycated hemoglobin ≥ 8.5%
- Transfusion ≥ 3 units packed Red Blood Cells
- Previous femoral artery cut-down
Who cannot join
- Preexisting groin infection
- Complete vacuum seal cannot be achieved with negative pressure device
- Allergy to Adhesive Material
- Groin Surgery within last 30 days
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Surgical Site Infection Prevention in Vascular Surgery Patients Undergoing Common Femoral Artery Exposure
The purpose of this randomized clinical trial is to investigate the role of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard sterile gauze therapy on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) in primarily closed groin incisions in high risk patients undergoing any open common femoral artery exposure for a vascular surgery procedure.
Read the detailed description
Eligible patients are randomized pre-operatively into either a standard dressing or NPWT for the groin incision.
- 1 The control group receive a standard sterile gauge dressing over the groin incision. The dressing is removed on post-operative day #2 and the wound is inspected for a SSI or dehiscence, followed by daily dressing changes and wound inspections until discharge.
- 2 The intervention group will receive a NPWT dressing which will be applied in the operating room under sterile conditions. The NPWT dressing will be removed on Post operative day 5. The wound is inspected for a SSI or dehiscence, followed by daily dressing changes and wound inspections until discharge.
- Conditions
- Surgical Site Infection, Groin Infections
- Being tested
- Negative Pressure Pressure Wound Therapy, Standard Wound Care
- Keywords
- Negative Pressure Wound Therapy
- 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.
Negative Pressure Pressure Wound TherapyDevice
Investigators will be using a Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Powered Suction Pump on primarily closed groin wounds after open common femoral artery exposure, The Negative pressure dressing will be applied in a sterile fashion in the operating room. The negative pressure dressing will be removed at day 5 postoperatively, or at discharge, whichever occurs first.
Standard Wound CareProcedure or surgery
Standard sterile gauze coverage of the primarily closed groin wound.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Standard gauze therapy | Active comparator | The control group will receive a standard sterile gauge dressing over the groin incision. The dressing will be removed on post-operative day #2 and the wound will be inspected for any complications, followed by daily dressing changes and wound inspections until discharge. Receives: Procedure: Standard Wound Care |
| Negative Pressure wound therapy | Experimental | The intervention group will receive a negative pressure dressing which will be applied in the operating room under sterile conditions. The brand of negative pressure dressing will be based on surgeon preference or center availability. The NPWT dressing will be removed on day 5 postoperatively or at discharge, whichever occurs first, and the groin wound inspected for any evidence of infection or dehiscence, and daily thereafter until discharge. Receives: Device: Negative Pressure Pressure Wound Therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Superficial surgical site infection
Surgical site infection as defined by the Center for disease control and prevention criteria
Measured: 30 days postoperatively
Secondary outcomes (4)
Mortality
Occurrence of mortality within 30 days of surgery
Measured: 30 days
Limb Loss
Occurrence of ipsilateral limb loss SSI within 30 days and 1 year of surgery
Measured: 30 days and 1 year
Emergency department visit for wound complication
Number of participants returning to the emergency department for wound complications within 30 days of surgery
Measured: within 30 days of surgery
Local reaction to negative wound dressing
Occurrence of a local reaction at the site of the negative pressure apparatus during application
Measured: 5 days postoperatively
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 May 2019
- Study start26 Mar 2018
- Primary completion31 Mar 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Oct 2021 (estimated)
Why it stopped: not recruiting patients.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (19)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Surgical Site InfectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Henry Ford Health SystemThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Model description
- Patient fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomized into a standard gauze therapy group or a negative pressure wound therapy group.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Henry Ford Health System
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, loay kabbani, MD, Henry Ford Health System
- Investigators
- Loay Kabbani, MD, Principal investigator, Henry Ford Health System
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03935659
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 11956
- Status last verified
- Feb 2021
- First submitted
- 25 Apr 2019
- Last updated
- 10 Feb 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Cassini A, Plachouras D, Eckmanns T, Abu Sin M, Blank HP, Ducomble T, Haller S, Harder T, Klingeberg A, Sixtensson M, Velasco E, Weiss B, Kramarz P, Monnet DL, Kretzschmar ME, Suetens C. Burden of Six Healthcare-Associated Infections on European Population Health: Estimating Incidence-Based Disability-Adjusted Life Years through a Population Prevalence-Based Modelling Study. PLoS Med. 2016 Oct 18;13(10):e1002150. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002150. eCollection 2016 Oct.
PubMed 27755545Mangram 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 10196487Davis FM, Sutzko DC, Grey SF, Mansour MA, Jain KM, Nypaver TJ, Gaborek G, Henke PK. Predictors of surgical site infection after open lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2017 Jun;65(6):1769-1778.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.11.053.
PubMed 28527931Adam DJ, Beard JD, Cleveland T, Bell J, Bradbury AW, Forbes JF, Fowkes FG, Gillepsie I, Ruckley CV, Raab G, Storkey H; BASIL trial participants. Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005 Dec 3;366(9501):1925-34. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67704-5.
PubMed 16325694Kalish JA, Farber A, Homa K, Trinidad M, Beck A, Davies MG, Kraiss LW, Cronenwett JL; Society for Vascular Surgery Patient Safety Organization Arterial Quality Committee. Factors associated with surgical site infection after lower extremity bypass in the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). J Vasc Surg. 2014 Nov;60(5):1238-1246. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.012. Epub 2014 Jun 20.
PubMed 24953898Wiseman JT, Guzman AM, Fernandes-Taylor S, Engelbert TL, Saunders RS, Kent KC. General and vascular surgery readmissions: a systematic review. J Am Coll Surg. 2014 Sep;219(3):552-69.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.05.007. Epub 2014 May 22. No abstract available.
PubMed 25067801Greenblatt DY, Rajamanickam V, Mell MW. Predictors of surgical site infection after open lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2011 Aug;54(2):433-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.01.034. Epub 2011 Mar 31.
PubMed 21458203Lee K, Murphy PB, Ingves MV, Duncan A, DeRose G, Dubois L, Forbes TL, Power A. Randomized clinical trial of negative pressure wound therapy for high-risk groin wounds in lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2017 Dec;66(6):1814-1819. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.06.084. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
PubMed 28865981Coomer NM, Kandilov AM. Impact of hospital-acquired conditions on financial liabilities for Medicare patients. Am J Infect Control. 2016 Nov 1;44(11):1326-1334. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.03.025. Epub 2016 May 9.
PubMed 27174461Conte MS, Bandyk DF, Clowes AW, Moneta GL, Seely L, Lorenz TJ, Namini H, Hamdan AD, Roddy SP, Belkin M, Berceli SA, DeMasi RJ, Samson RH, Berman SS; PREVENT III Investigators. Results of PREVENT III: a multicenter, randomized trial of edifoligide for the prevention of vein graft failure in lower extremity bypass surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2006 Apr;43(4):742-751; discussion 751. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.12.058.
PubMed 16616230Wiseman JT, Fernandes-Taylor S, Barnes ML, Saunders RS, Saha S, Havlena J, Rathouz PJ, Kent KC. Predictors of surgical site infection after hospital discharge in patients undergoing major vascular surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2015 Oct;62(4):1023-1031.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.04.453. Epub 2015 Jul 3.
PubMed 26143662Leekha S, Lahr BD, Thompson RL, Sampathkumar P, Duncan AA, Orenstein R. Preoperative risk prediction of surgical site infection requiring hospitalization or reoperation in patients undergoing vascular surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2016 Jul;64(1):177-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.01.029. Epub 2016 Feb 27.
PubMed 26926939Virkkunen J, Heikkinen M, Lepantalo M, Metsanoja R, Salenius JP; Finnvasc Study Group. Diabetes as an independent risk factor for early postoperative complications in critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2004 Oct;40(4):761-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2004.07.040.
PubMed 15472606Tan TW, Farber A, Hamburg NM, Eberhardt RT, Rybin D, Doros G, Eldrup-Jorgensen J, Goodney PP, Cronenwett JL, Kalish JA; Vascular Study Group of New England. Blood transfusion for lower extremity bypass is associated with increased wound infection and graft thrombosis. J Am Coll Surg. 2013 May;216(5):1005-1014.e2; quiz 1031-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.01.006. Epub 2013 Mar 25.
PubMed 23535163Semsarzadeh NN, Tadisina KK, Maddox J, Chopra K, Singh DP. Closed Incision Negative-Pressure Therapy Is Associated with Decreased Surgical-Site Infections: A Meta-Analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Sep;136(3):592-602. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001519.
PubMed 26313829
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Feb 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Surgical Site Infection Prevention in Vascular Surgery Patients Undergoing Common Femoral Artery Exposure
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03935659
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 11956
- Conditions
- Surgical Site Infection, Groin Infections
- Keywords
- Negative Pressure Wound Therapy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: not recruiting patients.
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Henry Ford Health SystemUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 26 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Mar 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Oct 2021 (estimated)
- First posted
- 2 May 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this randomized clinical trial is to investigate the role of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard sterile gauze therapy on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) in primarily closed groin incisions in high risk patients undergoing any open common femoral artery exposure for a vascular surgery procedure.
Detailed description
Eligible patients are randomized pre-operatively into either a standard dressing or NPWT for the groin incision.
- 1 The control group receive a standard sterile gauge dressing over the groin incision. The dressing is removed on post-operative day #2 and the wound is inspected for a SSI or dehiscence, followed by daily dressing changes and wound inspections until discharge.
- 2 The intervention group will receive a NPWT dressing which will be applied in the operating room under sterile conditions. The NPWT dressing will be removed on Post operative day 5. The wound is inspected for a SSI or dehiscence, followed by daily dressing changes and wound inspections until discharge.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Patient fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomized into a standard gauze therapy group or a negative pressure wound therapy group.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Standard gauze therapy | Active comparator | Procedure: Standard Wound CareThe control group will receive a standard sterile gauge dressing over the groin incision. The dressing will be removed on post-operative day #2 and the wound will be inspected for any complications, followed by daily dressing changes and wound inspections until discharge. |
| Negative Pressure wound therapy | Experimental | Device: Negative Pressure Pressure Wound TherapyThe intervention group will receive a negative pressure dressing which will be applied in the operating room under sterile conditions. The brand of negative pressure dressing will be based on surgeon preference or center availability. The NPWT dressing will be removed on day 5 postoperatively or at discharge, whichever occurs first, and the groin wound inspected for any evidence of infection or dehiscence, and daily thereafter until discharge. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Body Mass Index >30 kg/m2
- Critical limb ischemia defined by Ankle Brachial Index<0.35, rest pain, tissue loss and/or non-healing ulcers
- Procedure time >240 min
- End Stage Renal Disease on dialysis
- Glycated hemoglobin ≥ 8.5%
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Preexisting groin infection
- Complete vacuum seal cannot be achieved with negative pressure device
- Allergy to Adhesive Material
- Groin Surgery within last 30 days
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Negative Pressure Pressure Wound TherapyInvestigators will be using a Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Powered Suction Pump on primarily closed groin wounds after open common femoral artery exposure, The Negative pressure dressing will be applied in a sterile fashion in the operating room. The negative pressure dressing will be removed at day 5 postoperatively, or at discharge, whichever occurs first. | Device | Negative Pressure wound therapy |
| Standard Wound CareStandard sterile gauze coverage of the primarily closed groin wound. | Procedure or surgery | Standard gauze therapy |
Primary outcome
Superficial surgical site infection
Time frame: 30 days postoperatively
Surgical site infection as defined by the Center for disease control and prevention criteria
4 secondary outcomes
Mortality
Time frame: 30 days
Limb Loss
Time frame: 30 days and 1 year
Emergency department visit for wound complication
Time frame: within 30 days of surgery
Local reaction to negative wound dressing
Time frame: 5 days postoperatively
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Feb 2021.
- Background: PubMed 27755545Cassini A, Plachouras D, Eckmanns T, Abu Sin M, Blank HP, Ducomble T, Haller S, Harder T, Klingeberg A, Sixtensson M, Velasco E, Weiss B, Kramarz P, Monnet DL, Kretzschmar ME, Suetens C. Burden of Six Healthcare-Associated Infections on European Population Health: Estimating Incidence-Based Disability-Adjusted Life Years through a Population Prevalence-Based Modelling Study. PLoS Med. 2016 Oct 18;13(10):e1002150. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002150. eCollection 2016 Oct.
- Background: PubMed 10196487Mangram 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.
- Background: PubMed 28527931Davis FM, Sutzko DC, Grey SF, Mansour MA, Jain KM, Nypaver TJ, Gaborek G, Henke PK. Predictors of surgical site infection after open lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2017 Jun;65(6):1769-1778.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.11.053.
- Background: PubMed 16325694Adam DJ, Beard JD, Cleveland T, Bell J, Bradbury AW, Forbes JF, Fowkes FG, Gillepsie I, Ruckley CV, Raab G, Storkey H; BASIL trial participants. Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005 Dec 3;366(9501):1925-34. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67704-5.
- Background: PubMed 24953898Kalish JA, Farber A, Homa K, Trinidad M, Beck A, Davies MG, Kraiss LW, Cronenwett JL; Society for Vascular Surgery Patient Safety Organization Arterial Quality Committee. Factors associated with surgical site infection after lower extremity bypass in the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). J Vasc Surg. 2014 Nov;60(5):1238-1246. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.012. Epub 2014 Jun 20.
- Background: PubMed 25067801Wiseman JT, Guzman AM, Fernandes-Taylor S, Engelbert TL, Saunders RS, Kent KC. General and vascular surgery readmissions: a systematic review. J Am Coll Surg. 2014 Sep;219(3):552-69.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.05.007. Epub 2014 May 22. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 21458203Greenblatt DY, Rajamanickam V, Mell MW. Predictors of surgical site infection after open lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2011 Aug;54(2):433-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.01.034. Epub 2011 Mar 31.
- Background: PubMed 28865981Lee K, Murphy PB, Ingves MV, Duncan A, DeRose G, Dubois L, Forbes TL, Power A. Randomized clinical trial of negative pressure wound therapy for high-risk groin wounds in lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2017 Dec;66(6):1814-1819. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.06.084. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
- Background: PubMed 27174461Coomer NM, Kandilov AM. Impact of hospital-acquired conditions on financial liabilities for Medicare patients. Am J Infect Control. 2016 Nov 1;44(11):1326-1334. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.03.025. Epub 2016 May 9.
- Background: PubMed 16616230Conte MS, Bandyk DF, Clowes AW, Moneta GL, Seely L, Lorenz TJ, Namini H, Hamdan AD, Roddy SP, Belkin M, Berceli SA, DeMasi RJ, Samson RH, Berman SS; PREVENT III Investigators. Results of PREVENT III: a multicenter, randomized trial of edifoligide for the prevention of vein graft failure in lower extremity bypass surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2006 Apr;43(4):742-751; discussion 751. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.12.058.
- Background: PubMed 26143662Wiseman JT, Fernandes-Taylor S, Barnes ML, Saunders RS, Saha S, Havlena J, Rathouz PJ, Kent KC. Predictors of surgical site infection after hospital discharge in patients undergoing major vascular surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2015 Oct;62(4):1023-1031.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.04.453. Epub 2015 Jul 3.
- Background: PubMed 26926939Leekha S, Lahr BD, Thompson RL, Sampathkumar P, Duncan AA, Orenstein R. Preoperative risk prediction of surgical site infection requiring hospitalization or reoperation in patients undergoing vascular surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2016 Jul;64(1):177-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.01.029. Epub 2016 Feb 27.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Surgical Site Infection
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Pilot Study on the Effectiveness and Safety of OPTILENE® SILVER MESH ELASTIC in Prevention of Surgical Site Infection (SSI) and Incisional Hernia (IH)
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm, Morbid Obesity
RecruitingPhase 2
A Single Arm Phase II Trial in p16-positive Oropharynx Cancer of Selective Dose De-escalation of nodAl VolumEs at Minimal Risk and Primary Site Disease (SAVED)
Head and Neck Cancer, Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer
Recruiting
Safety and Efficacy of NTP in Thyroid Surgery: Pilot Study on Morbidity Prevention and Adjuvant Oncological Control
Thyroid Diseases, Wound Healing
RecruitingObservational study
Novosyn® CHD vs Polyglactin 910 Suture to Close Wounds After Emergency or Elective Laparotomy or Laparoscopic Surgery
Surgical Site Infection
Not yet recruiting
Safety Assessment of Placing a Single Dental Implant Without Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Simple Cases: A Pilot Study
Tooth Loss and Rehabillitation, Dental Implant Failure
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Loay Kabbani, MD principal investigator
Henry Ford Health System
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Negative Pressure Pressure Wound Therapy and Standard Wound Care in people with Surgical Site Infection and Groin Infections, run by Henry Ford Health System at 1 site in United States.
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 7 inclusion and 4 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: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Feb 2021. 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 United States. 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 was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
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?
Superficial surgical site infection (time frame: 30 days postoperatively). 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 NCT03935659, which also lists 19 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 10 Feb 2021.