Meningitis and Sinusitis in Transnasal SurgeryNCT06313281
Effectiveness of Preoperative Antiseptic Preparation in Transnasal Skull Base Surgery
A study testing Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery in people with Meningitis and Sinusitis in Transnasal Surgery, run by King Saud University at 1 site in Saudi Arabia.
Trial summary
Objective: Transnasal skull-base surgery is a complex and invasive procedure that involves the use of preoperative antiseptic preparations. However, evidence supporting their use in preventing postoperative infectious complications is limited. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 14 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Meningitis and Sinusitis in Transnasal Surgery
- What is being tested?
- Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 142 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSaudi Arabia
- Study dates
- 1 Feb 2019to 30 Sep 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 14 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults with skull base pathologies scheduled for ETSBS
Who cannot join
- Pediatric patients aged <14 years
- Known allergy to CHG or gentamicin
- Evidence of infection at or adjacent to the operative site prior to surgery
- Open craniotomy during hospitalization
- Immunosuppression
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effectiveness of Preoperative Antiseptic Preparation in Transnasal Skull Base Surgery: A Randomized Three-Arm Controlled Trial
Objective: Transnasal skull-base surgery is a complex and invasive procedure that involves the use of preoperative antiseptic preparations. However, evidence supporting their use in preventing postoperative infectious complications is limited. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of preoperative antiseptic techniques in reducing postoperative infectious complications within 30 days of surgery.
Methods: A multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, three-arm trial was conducted from February 2019 to October 2021. Participants were randomized to either of three antiseptic preparation techniques: external 0.9%NaCl nasal preparation, external 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate, or intranasal irrigation with 80 mg of gentamicin added to 1000 ml of 0.9%NaCl plus external nasal preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate 0.05%. A total of 130 adults with skull-base pathologies were randomized, 12 were excluded before randomization for failure to meet inclusion criteria (n=9) or refusal to participate (n=3). The investigators excluded patients with evidence of infection adjacent to the surgical site, allergies to preparation methods, those who underwent craniotomy during the same admission, and pediatric patients.
Read the detailed description
Study Design This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, three-arm trial conducted at three skull base centers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The null hypothesis was that infectious outcomes would not differ between the three intervention groups.
Ethics Consideration The patients provided written informed consent to participate, and the institutional review boards approved the study of the participating institutions. This study was approved by the Ethics Review Boards (E-18-3331). This study was conducted using the CONSORT guidelines.7
Population Patients were screened at neurosurgery service in three skull base centers from February 2019 to September 2021; follow-up was completed in October 2021. Eligible patients were adults with skull base pathologies scheduled for ETSBS. The exclusion criteria included pediatric patients aged <14 years, known allergy to CHG or gentamicin, evidence of infection at or adjacent to the operative site prior to surgery, open craniotomy during hospitalization, and immunosuppression. Fourteen years of age was used as the age limit as this is the age of the pediatric population in the Saudi health system.
Interventional Groups Three antiseptic preparation techniques were utilized in this study in a stepwise fashion, from minimal to maximal antisepsis: Group 1, external 0.9% NaCl nasal preparation; Group 2, external nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05%; and Group 3, intranasal irrigation with 80 mg of gentamicin added to 1000 ml of 0.9% NaCl plus external nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05%
Randomization Procedure Patients were randomized into blocks of three intervention groups and distributed to the participating centers. The primary surgeon was blinded to the intervention method until the day of surgery. The patients were randomized using a computer-generated list of random numbers (http://www.randomizer.org). Block randomization in three-patient blocks based on the institution was performed to ensure that approximately equal numbers of patients in each group from each site were randomized.
Perioperative Intravenous Antibiotic Protocol One dose of preoperative intravenous antibiotics (cefazolin 1-2 g or ceftriaxone 1-2 g for most patients or vancomycin 15 mg/kg for patients allergic to cephalosporin) was administered within 60 min before the start of surgery. For postoperative antibiotics, three doses of the same antibiotic were administered if no lumbar drain was inserted. When a lumbar drain or an external ventricular drain was inserted, antibiotics were administered until the drain was removed.
Study Outcome The study's primary endpoint was the difference in the incidence of postoperative infections within 30 days of surgery between the three interventional groups. The investigators defined infections as any CNS or sinonasal infections confirmed by clinical or laboratory testing within 30 days post-surgery.
CNS infections CNS infections were defined as clinical signs of CNS infection with biochemical and/or microbiological evidence of infection. In cases of infection, biochemical markers, organism cultures, and outcomes were recorded.
Sinonasal infections Sinusitis: Acute bacterial sinusitis was defined, according to EPOS 2020 guideline definition 8, as the presence of three or more of the following: (1) nasal congestion based on patient reports or physical examination; (2) purulent nasal discharge based on patient reports or physical examination; (3) facial pressure, pain, or headache; and (4) antibiotics prescribed by a provider to treat sinusitis.
Patient Follow-Up All patients were followed up for at least 30 days postoperatively. Upon discharge, the patients were instructed to return if any signs or symptoms of infection occurred earlier than the follow-up clinical visit. They were followed up after discharge from the neurosurgery and rhinology clinics at least once within 30 days. At the end of the 30 days, the patient received a call if the clinic follow-up visit was not attended by the participant. During rhinology clinic visits, patients underwent a nasal scope examination by a rhinology attending.
Sample Size Sample size calculations were based on patient turnout and the infection rate in previous years in all three centers. With a confidence interval of 95%, and 5% as margin of error, the calculated sample size was123 patients over 24 months. This was divided into three arms of 41 patients in each intervention arm.
Statistical Analysis The data were entered and analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 28 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA). Descriptive statistics such as frequencies and percentages were calculated to summarize categorical data and means and standard deviations to describe numerical variables. The chi-square test evaluated the association between the determinants and outcome variables. In contrast, the arithmetic means of continuous variables were compared using one-way analysis of variance for more than two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis expressed as adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) was performed to control for the effect of confounding. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
- Being tested
- Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery
- Keywords
- Antisepsis, Skull Base, Sinusitis, Meningitis
- Medical subject headings
- Meningitis, Sinusitis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgeryProcedure or surgery
The patient received one of three antiseptic preparation before transnasal skull base surgery
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Active comparator | External 0.9% NaCl nasal preparation Receives: Procedure: Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery |
| Group 2 | Active comparator | External nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05% Receives: Procedure: Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery |
| Group 3 | Active comparator | Intranasal irrigation with 80 mg of gentamicin added to 1000 ml of 0.9% NaCl plus external nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05% Receives: Procedure: Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
the difference in the incidence of postoperative infections within 30 days of surgery between the three interventional groups
Measured: 30 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Mar 2024
- Study start1 Feb 2019
- Primary completion30 Sep 2021
- Study completion30 Sep 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Meningitis and Sinusitis in Transnasal SurgeryStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Single group
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 142 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- King Saud University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Sarah Basindwah, King Saud University
- Investigators
- Abdulrazag Ajlan, MD, Principal investigator, King Saud University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06313281
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- E-18-3331
- Status last verified
- Mar 2024
- First submitted
- 9 Mar 2024
- Last updated
- 20 Mar 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Mar 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effectiveness of Preoperative Antiseptic Preparation in Transnasal Skull Base Surgery: A Randomized Three-Arm Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06313281
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- E-18-3331
- Keywords
- Antisepsis, Skull Base, Sinusitis, Meningitis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 142 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- King Saud UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Feb 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Mar 2024 (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.
Objective: Transnasal skull-base surgery is a complex and invasive procedure that involves the use of preoperative antiseptic preparations. However, evidence supporting their use in preventing postoperative infectious complications is limited. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of preoperative antiseptic techniques in reducing postoperative infectious complications within 30 days of surgery.
Methods: A multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, three-arm trial was conducted from February 2019 to October 2021. Participants were randomized to either of three antiseptic preparation techniques: external 0.9%NaCl nasal preparation, external 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate, or intranasal irrigation with 80 mg of gentamicin added to 1000 ml of 0.9%NaCl plus external nasal preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate 0.05%. A total of 130 adults with skull-base pathologies were randomized, 12 were excluded before randomization for failure to meet inclusion criteria (n=9) or refusal to participate (n=3). The investigators excluded patients with evidence of infection adjacent to the surgical site, allergies to preparation methods, those who underwent craniotomy during the same admission, and pediatric patients.
Detailed description
Study Design This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, three-arm trial conducted at three skull base centers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The null hypothesis was that infectious outcomes would not differ between the three intervention groups.
Ethics Consideration The patients provided written informed consent to participate, and the institutional review boards approved the study of the participating institutions. This study was approved by the Ethics Review Boards (E-18-3331). This study was conducted using the CONSORT guidelines.7
Population Patients were screened at neurosurgery service in three skull base centers from February 2019 to September 2021; follow-up was completed in October 2021. Eligible patients were adults with skull base pathologies scheduled for ETSBS. The exclusion criteria included pediatric patients aged <14 years, known allergy to CHG or gentamicin, evidence of infection at or adjacent to the operative site prior to surgery, open craniotomy during hospitalization, and immunosuppression. Fourteen years of age was used as the age limit as this is the age of the pediatric population in the Saudi health system.
Interventional Groups Three antiseptic preparation techniques were utilized in this study in a stepwise fashion, from minimal to maximal antisepsis: Group 1, external 0.9% NaCl nasal preparation; Group 2, external nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05%; and Group 3, intranasal irrigation with 80 mg of gentamicin added to 1000 ml of 0.9% NaCl plus external nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05%
Randomization Procedure Patients were randomized into blocks of three intervention groups and distributed to the participating centers. The primary surgeon was blinded to the intervention method until the day of surgery. The patients were randomized using a computer-generated list of random numbers (http://www.randomizer.org). Block randomization in three-patient blocks based on the institution was performed to ensure that approximately equal numbers of patients in each group from each site were randomized.
Perioperative Intravenous Antibiotic Protocol One dose of preoperative intravenous antibiotics (cefazolin 1-2 g or ceftriaxone 1-2 g for most patients or vancomycin 15 mg/kg for patients allergic to cephalosporin) was administered within 60 min before the start of surgery. For postoperative antibiotics, three doses of the same antibiotic were administered if no lumbar drain was inserted. When a lumbar drain or an external ventricular drain was inserted, antibiotics were administered until the drain was removed.
Study Outcome The study's primary endpoint was the difference in the incidence of postoperative infections within 30 days of surgery between the three interventional groups. The investigators defined infections as any CNS or sinonasal infections confirmed by clinical or laboratory testing within 30 days post-surgery.
CNS infections CNS infections were defined as clinical signs of CNS infection with biochemical and/or microbiological evidence of infection. In cases of infection, biochemical markers, organism cultures, and outcomes were recorded.
Sinonasal infections Sinusitis: Acute bacterial sinusitis was defined, according to EPOS 2020 guideline definition 8, as the presence of three or more of the following: (1) nasal congestion based on patient reports or physical examination; (2) purulent nasal discharge based on patient reports or physical examination; (3) facial pressure, pain, or headache; and (4) antibiotics prescribed by a provider to treat sinusitis.
Patient Follow-Up All patients were followed up for at least 30 days postoperatively. Upon discharge, the patients were instructed to return if any signs or symptoms of infection occurred earlier than the follow-up clinical visit. They were followed up after discharge from the neurosurgery and rhinology clinics at least once within 30 days. At the end of the 30 days, the patient received a call if the clinic follow-up visit was not attended by the participant. During rhinology clinic visits, patients underwent a nasal scope examination by a rhinology attending.
Sample Size Sample size calculations were based on patient turnout and the infection rate in previous years in all three centers. With a confidence interval of 95%, and 5% as margin of error, the calculated sample size was123 patients over 24 months. This was divided into three arms of 41 patients in each intervention arm.
Statistical Analysis The data were entered and analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 28 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA). Descriptive statistics such as frequencies and percentages were calculated to summarize categorical data and means and standard deviations to describe numerical variables. The chi-square test evaluated the association between the determinants and outcome variables. In contrast, the arithmetic means of continuous variables were compared using one-way analysis of variance for more than two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis expressed as adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) was performed to control for the effect of confounding. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Active comparator | Procedure: Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgeryExternal 0.9% NaCl nasal preparation |
| Group 2 | Active comparator | Procedure: Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgeryExternal nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05% |
| Group 3 | Active comparator | Procedure: Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgeryIntranasal irrigation with 80 mg of gentamicin added to 1000 ml of 0.9% NaCl plus external nasal preparation with antisepsis by CHG 0.05% |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 14 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Adults with skull base pathologies scheduled for ETSBS
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Pediatric patients aged <14 years
- Known allergy to CHG or gentamicin
- Evidence of infection at or adjacent to the operative site prior to surgery
- Open craniotomy during hospitalization
- Immunosuppression
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgeryThe patient received one of three antiseptic preparation before transnasal skull base surgery | Procedure or surgery | Group 1, Group 2, Group 3 |
Primary outcome
the difference in the incidence of postoperative infections within 30 days of surgery between the three interventional groups
Time frame: 30 days
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Mar 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
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.
Abdulrazag Ajlan, MD principal investigator
King Saud University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Preoperative Antiseptic preparation prior to transnasal skull base surgery in people with Meningitis and Sinusitis in Transnasal Surgery, run by King Saud University at 1 site in Saudi Arabia.
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 1 inclusion and 5 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 20 Mar 2024. 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 Saudi Arabia. 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?
the difference in the incidence of postoperative infections within 30 days of surgery between the three interventional groups (time frame: 30 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 20 Mar 2024.