Dataset Information

DRAPA trial--closed-suction drains versus closed gravity drains in pancreatic surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: The morbidity of pancreatic resection remains high, with pancreatic fistula being the most common cause. The important question is whether any postoperative treatment adjustment may prevent the development of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistulae. Recent studies have shown that intraabdominal drains and manipulation using them are of great importance. Although authors of a few retrospective reports have described good results of pancreatic resection without the use of intraabdominal drains, a recent prospective randomized trial showed that routine elimination of drains in pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with poor outcome. An important issue arises as to which type of drain is most suitable for pancreatic resection. Two types of surgical drains exist: open drains and closed drains. Open drains are considered obsolete nowadays because of frequent retrograde infection. Closed drains include two types: passive gravity drains and closed-suction drains. Closed-suction drains are more effective, as they remove fluid from the abdominal cavity under light pressure. However, some surgeons believe that closed-suction drains represent a potential hazard to patients and that negative pressure might increase the risk of pancreatic fistulae. Nobody has yet specifically dealt with the question of which kind of drainage is most appropriate in pancreatic surgery.The aim of the DRAins in PAncreatic surgery (DRAPA) trial is to compare the closed-suction drain versus the closed passive gravity drain in pancreatic resection. DRAPA is a dual-centre, prospective, randomized controlled trial. The primary endpoint is the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula; the secondary endpoint is postoperative morbidity with follow-up of 3 months.No study to date has compared different types of drains in pancreatic surgery. This study is designed to answer the question whether any particular type of drain might lower the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula or other complications.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01988519. Registered 13 November 2013.

SUBMITTER: Cecka F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4470087 | biostudies-literature | 2015 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

DRAPA trial--closed-suction drains versus closed gravity drains in pancreatic surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Čečka Filip F Loveček Martin M Jon Bohumil B Skalický Pavel P Šubrt Zdeněk Z Ferko Alexander A

Trials 20150507

<h4>Background</h4>The morbidity of pancreatic resection remains high, with pancreatic fistula being the most common cause. The important question is whether any postoperative treatment adjustment may prevent the development of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistulae. Recent studies have shown that intraabdominal drains and manipulation using them are of great importance. Although authors of a few retrospective reports have described good results of pancreatic resection without ...[more]

PMID: 25947117

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death. While surgical resection remains the foundation for potentially curative treatment, survival benefit is achieved with adjuvant oncological treatment. Thus, completion of multimodality treatment (surgical resection and (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy) to all patients and early treatment of micrometastatic disease is the ideal goal. NorPACT-1 aims to test the hypothesis that overall mortality at one year after allocation of treatment can be reduced with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in surgically treated patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.Methods/designThe NorPACT- 1 is a multicentre, randomized controlled phase III trial organized by the Norwegian Gastrointestinal Cancer Group for Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary cancer. Patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head are randomized to receive either surgery first (Group 1: SF/control) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Group 2: NT/intervention) with four cycles FOLFIRINOX followed by resection. Both groups receive adjuvant chemotherapy with gemicitabine and capecitabine (six cycles in Group 1, four cycles in Group 2). In total 90 patients will be randomized in all the five Norwegian university hospitals performing pancreatic surgery. Primary endpoint is overall mortality at one year following commencement of treatment for those who ultimately undergo resection. Secondary endpoints are overall survival after date of randomization (intention to treat), overall survival after resection, disease-free survival, histopathological response, complication rates after surgery, feasibility of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, completion rates of all parts of multimodal treatment, and quality-of-life. Bolt-on to the study is a translational research program that aims at identifying factors that are predictive of response to NT, the risk of distant cancer spread, and patient outcome.DiscussionNorPACT- 1 is designed to investigate the additional benefit of NT compared to standard treatment only (surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy) for resectable cancer of the pancreatic head to decrease early mortality (within one year) in resected patients.Trial registrationTrial open for accrual 01.02.2017. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02919787 . Date of registration: September 14, 2016.

Project description:Pancreatic cancer is the fourth largest cause of cancer death in the United States and Europe with over 100,000 deaths per year in Europe alone. The overall 5-year survival ranges from 2-7 % and has hardly improved over the last two decades. Approximately 15 % of all patients have resectable disease at diagnosis, and of those, only a subgroup has a resectable tumour at surgical exploration. Data from cohort studies have suggested that outcome can be improved by preoperative radiochemotherapy, but data from well-designed randomized studies are lacking. Our PREOPANC phase III trial aims to test the hypothesis that median overall survival of patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer can be improved with preoperative radiochemotherapy.The PREOPANC trial is a randomized, controlled, multicentric superiority trial, initiated by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Patients with (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer are randomized to A: direct explorative laparotomy or B: after negative diagnostic laparoscopy, preoperative radiochemotherapy, followed by explorative laparotomy. A hypofractionated radiation scheme of 15 fractions of 2.4 gray (Gy) is combined with a course of gemcitabine, 1,000 mg/m(2)/dose on days 1, 8 and 15, preceded and followed by a modified course of gemcitabine. The target volumes of radiation are delineated on a 4D CT scan, where at least 95 % of the prescribed dose of 36 Gy in 15 fractions should cover 98 % of the planning target volume. Standard adjuvant chemotherapy is administered in both treatment arms after resection (six cycles in arm A and four in arm B). In total, 244 patients will be randomized in 17 hospitals in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint is overall survival by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints are (R0) resection rate, disease-free survival, time to locoregional recurrence or distant metastases and perioperative complications. Secondary endpoints for the experimental arm are toxicity and radiologic and pathologic response.The PREOPANC trial is designed to investigate whether preoperative radiochemotherapy improves overall survival by means of increased (R0) resection rates in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.Trial open for accrual: 3 April 2013 The Netherlands National Trial Register - NTR3709 (8 November 2012) EU Clinical Trials Register - 2012-003181-40 (11 December 2012).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH) is a common neurological disease with a rapidly rising incidence due to increasing age and widespread use of anticoagulants. Surgical intervention by burr-hole craniotomy (BHC) is the current standard practice for symptomatic patients, but associated with complications, a recurrence rate of up to 30% and increased mortality. Dexamethasone (DXM) therapy is, therefore, used as a non-surgical alternative but considered to achieve a lower success rate. Furthermore, the benefit of DXM therapy appears much more deliberate than the immediate relief from BHC. Lack of evidence and clinical equipoise among caregivers prompts the need for a head-to-head randomised controlled trial. The objective of this study is to compare the effect of primary DXM therapy versus primary BHC on functional outcome and cost-effectiveness in symptomatic patients with CSDH. METHODS/DESIGN:This study is a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Consecutive patients with a CSDH with a Markwalder Grading Scale (MGS) grade 1 to 3 will be randomised to treatment with DXM or BHC. The DXM treatment scheme will be 16 mg DXM per day (8 mg twice daily, days 1 to 4) which is then halved every 3 days until a dosage of 0.5 mg a day on day 19 and stopped on day 20. If the treatment response is insufficient (i.e. persistent or progressive symptomatology due to insufficient haematoma resolution), additional surgery can be performed. The primary outcomes are the functional outcome by means of the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months and cost-effectiveness at 12 months. Secondary outcomes are quality of life at 3 and 12 months using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Quality of Life after Brain Injury Overall Scale (QOLIBRI), haematoma thickness after 2 weeks on follow-up computed tomography (CT), haematoma recurrence during the first 12 months, complications and drug-related adverse events, failure of therapy within 12 months after randomisation and requiring intervention, mortality during the first 3 and 12 months, duration of hospital stay and overall healthcare and productivity costs. To test non-inferiority of DXM therapy compared to BHC, 210 patients in each treatment arm are required (assumed adjusted common odds ratio DXM compared to BHC 1.15, limit for inferiority <?0.9). The aim is to include a total of 420 patients in 3 years with an enrolment rate of 60%. DISCUSSION:The present study should demonstrate whether treatment with DXM is as effective as BHC on functional outcome, at lower costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EUCTR 2015-001563-39 . Date of registration: 29 March 2015.

Project description:BackgroundUK deaths due to chronic liver diseases such as cirrhosis have quadrupled over the last 40 years, making this condition now the third most common cause of premature death. Most patients with advanced cirrhosis (end-stage liver disease [ESLD]) develop ascites. This is often managed with diuretics, but if refractory, then the fluid is drained from the peritoneal cavity every 10-14 days by large volume paracentesis (LVP), a procedure requiring hospital admissions. As the life expectancy of patients with ESLD and refractory ascites (if ineligible for liver transplantation) is on average ≤ 6 months, frequent hospital visits are inappropriate from a palliative perspective. One alternative is long-term abdominal drains (LTADs), used successfully in patients whose ascites is due to malignancy. Although inserted in hospital, these drains allow ascites management outside of a hospital setting. LTADs have not been formally evaluated in patients with refractory ascites due to ESLD.Methods/designDue to uncertainty about appropriate outcome measures and whether patients with ESLD would wish or be able to participate in a study, a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) was designed. Patients were consulted on trial design. We plan to recruit 48 patients with refractory ascites and randomise them (1:1) to either (1) LTAD or (2) current standard of care (LVP) for 12 weeks. Outcomes of interest include acceptability of the LTAD to patients, carers and healthcare professionals as well as recruitment and retention rates. The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale, the Short Form Liver Disease Quality of Life questionnaire, the EuroQol 5 dimensions instrument and carer-reported (Zarit Burden Interview) outcomes will also be assessed. Preliminary data on cost-effectiveness will be collected, and patients and healthcare professionals will be interviewed about their experience of the trial with a view to identifying barriers to recruitment.DiscussionLTADs could potentially improve end-of-life care in patients with refractory ascites due to ESLD by improving symptom control, reducing hospital visits and enabling some self-management. Our trial is designed to see if such patients can be recruited, as well as to inform the design of a subsequent definitive trial.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN30697116 . Registered on 7 October 2015.

Project description:Postoperative pain and, in a more extended perspective, quality of recovery (QOR) should be considered the principal endpoints after day surgery. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and paracetamol are a cornerstone of pain treatment after painful day surgery. Nevertheless, NSAIDs are not always sufficiently effective, have numerous contraindications, and consequently are not suitable in up to 25 % of all patients. Metamizole is a non-opioid compound with a favourable gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular profile compared to NSAIDs. The aim of this study is to assess if a combination of metamizole and paracetamol is non-inferior to a combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol in the treatment of acute postoperative pain at home after painful day case surgery. In addition, we aim to assess and compare quality of recovery (QOR) profiles of both groups.This is an investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing elective haemorrhoid surgery, arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery, or inguinal hernia repair in a day care setting will be randomised to receive either a combination of metamizole and paracetamol (MP) or a combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol (IP). Participants will take study medication orally for 4 days. Primary endpoints are average postoperative pain intensity measured by an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale at postoperative day 1 and QOR profile measured by the Functional Recovery Index (FRI), the 1-item Global Surgical Recovery (GSR) index and the EuroQol (EQ-5D) questionnaire at days 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 14 and 28 postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include compliance with study medication, adverse effects of study medication, use of rescue medication and satisfaction with study medication, surgery and hospital care and telephone follow-up.This study will provide clinical evidence on the analgesic efficacy and safety of a combination of metamizole and paracetamol in treating postoperative pain at home after painful day surgery. This study may also provide an insight into QOR profile after four different types of surgery and into the interrelationship between three different instruments used to assess QOR.Recruitment is currently ongoing.European Union Clinical Trials Register 2015-003987-35 . Registered 10 November 2015.

Dataset Information

DRAPA trial--closed-suction drains versus closed gravity drains in pancreatic surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

DRAPA trial--closed-suction drains versus closed gravity drains in pancreatic surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets