Sealive: the use of technical vessel-sealing devices for recipient hepatectomy in liver transplantation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: The surgical technique used in liver transplantation has undergone constant evolution in an effort to develop a safe, highly standardized procedure. Despite this, the initial step of recipient hepatectomy has not been the focus of clinical research thus far. Due to advanced coagulopathy in liver transplant recipients, this part of the operation still carries the risk of severe hemorrhage. This trial is designed to compare an electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing device (LigaSure™) and an ultrasound dissector (HARMONIC ACE®+7) with standard surgical techniques during the recipients’ hepatectomy in liver transplantation. Methods/design: In a single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel, three-armed, confirmatory, open trial, LigaSure™ and HARMONIC ACE®+7 will be compared with standard surgical techniques that use titanium clips and conventional knot-tying ligations during recipient hepatectomy in liver transplantation. Intraoperative total blood loss is the primary endpoint of the trial. Secondary endpoints include blood loss during hepatectomy, the duration of both the hepatectomy and the entire surgical procedure, and blood transfusion requirements of the procedure. To generate reliable data, intraoperative blood loss will be recorded with respect to all rinse fluids during surgery, ascites, and by weighing used swabs. At 80% power and an alpha of 0.025 for both of the experimental groups, 23 subjects will be analyzed per protocol in each study arm in order to detect clinically relevant reduction of intraoperative blood loss. The intention-to-treat analysis will include 69 patients. The follow-up period for each patient will be 90 days for safety reasons, whereas all clinical outcomes will be measured within the first 10 postoperative days. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective, randomized trial comparing two innovative technical methods of vessel sealing and dissection with standard techniques for recipient hepatectomy. This will be done to detect relevant reduction of intraoperative blood loss during liver transplant. The results of the trial are expected to improve patient outcome and safety after liver transplant and to increase the general safety of this procedure. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT 03323242 . Registered on October 26, 2017

Closed cannulation of subclavian vein vs open cut-down of cephalic vein for totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) implantation: protocol for a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis of perioperative and postoperative complications

Background: Totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) implantation is one of the most often performed operations in general surgery (over 100,000/year in Germany). The two main approaches for TIVAP placement are insertion into the cephalic vein through an open cut-down technique (OCD) or closed cannulation technique of the subclavian vein (CC) with Seldinger technique. Both procedures are performed with high success rates and very low complication frequencies. Because of the low incidence of complications, no single interventional trial is able to report a valid comparison of peri- and postoperative complication frequencies between both techniques. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to summarize evidence for peri- and postoperative complication rates in patients undergoing OCD or CC. Methods/Design: A systematic literature search will be conducted in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational clinical studies (OCS), or case series (CS) reporting peri- and/or postoperative complications of at least one implantation technique. A priori defined data will be extracted from included studies, and methodological quality will be assessed. Event rates with their 95% confidence intervals will be derived taking into account the follow-up time per study by patient-months where appropriate. Pooled estimates of event rates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals will be calculated on the base of the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation within a random effect model framework. Discussion: The findings of this systematic review with proportional meta-analysis will help to identify the procedure with the best benefit/risk ratio for TIVAP implantation. This may have influence on daily practice, and data may be implemented in treatment guidelines. Considering the impact of TIVAP implantation on patients’ well being together with its socioeconomic relevance, patients will benefit from evidence-based treatment and health-care costs may also be reduced. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42013005180

Use of a hydrophilic coating wire reduces significantly the rate of central vein punctures and the incidence of pneumothorax in totally implantable access port (TIAP) surgery

Background: Insertion of a Totally Implantable Access Port (TIAP) can be performed either via Central Vein Puncture (CVP) or Brachiocephalic Vein Cut-down (venous section-VS). The primary success rate of TIAP implantation using VS rarely ever achieves 100%. The objective of this study was to describe a modified VS approach using a hydrophilic coated wire (TVS). Methods: From 01.01.2015 to 31.12.2015, all patients receiving TIAP implantations were screened. During this time, all patients in whom the primary VS procedure was found to be unsuccessful were analysed. Results: In 2015, 1152 patients had TIAP implantations performed by 24 different surgeons. Of these, 277 patients needed a second line rescue strategy either by CVP (n= 69) or TVS (n= 208). There were no statistically significant differences regarding demographics or indication for TIAP implantation between CVP and TVS. The operation time and the qualification of the operating surgeon between CVP and TVS did not differ significantly. After the introduction of the guidewire with a hydrophilic coated wire, the need for CVP decreased significantly from 12.7% to 8.8% (p< 0.0001). In patients receiving CVP as a second line rescue strategy, the incidence of pneumothorax (n= 3 patients (4.3%)) was significantly higher compared to patients with TVS as a second line rescue strategy (n= 1 patient (0.48%),p=0.02). Conclusion: The use of a hydrophilic coated wire significantly decreased the number of CVP and the incidence of pneumothorax. TVS is a safe and successful second-line rescue strategy

Frequency of pneumothorax and haemothorax after primary open versus closed implantation strategies for insertion of a totally implantable venous access port in oncological patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: The insertion of central venous access devices, such as totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs), is routine in patients who need a safe and permanent venous access. The number of port implantations is increasing due to the development of innovative adjuvant and neo-adjuvant therapies. Currently, two different strategies are being routinely used: surgical cut-down of the cephalic vein (vena section) and direct puncture of the subclavian vein. The aim of this trial is to identify the strategy for the implantation of TIVAPs with the lowest risk of pneumothorax and haemothorax. Methods/Design: The PORTAS-3 trial is designed as a multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare two implantation strategies. A total of 1,154 patients will be randomised after giving written informed consent. Patients must be over 18 years of age and scheduled for primary implantation of a TIVAP on the designated side. The primary endpoint will be the frequency of pneumothorax and haemothorax after insertion of a TIVAP by one of two different strategies. The experimental intervention is as follows: open strategy, defined as surgical cut-down of the cephalic vein, supported by a rescue technique if necessary, and in the case of failure, direct puncture of the subclavian vein. The control intervention is as follows: direct puncture of the subclavian vein using the Seldinger technique guided by sonography, fluoroscopy or landmark technique. The trial duration is approximately 36 months, with a recruitment period of 18 months and a follow-up period of 30 days. Discussion: The PORTAS-3 trial will compare two different TIVAP implantation strategies with regard to their individual risk of postoperative pneumothorax and haemothorax. Since TIVAP implantation is one of the most common procedures in general surgery, the results will be of interest for a large community of surgeons as well as oncologists and general practitioners. The pragmatic trial design ensures that the results will be generalizable to a wide range of patients. Trial registration: The trial protocol was registered on 28 August 2014 with the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00004900). The World Health Organization’s Universal Trial Number is U1111-1142-4420

LigaSure Impact™ versus conventional dissection technique in pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy in clinical suspicion of cancerous tumours on the head of the pancreas: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The pp-Whipple procedure requires extensive preparation. The conventional preparation technique is done with scissors for dissection and ligatures, and with clips and sutures for hemostasis. This procedure is very time-consuming and requires numerous changes of instruments. The LigaSure™ device allows dissection and hemostasis for preparation with one instrument. Up to now there has been no comparison of the two techniques with regard to operating time and the patients' outcome. It is still unclear which technique has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A single-center, randomized, single-blinded, controlled superiority trial to compare two different techniques for dissection in a pp-Whipple procedure. 102 patients will be included and randomized pre-operatively. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for primary elective pp-Whipple procedure who signed the informed consent will be included. The primary endpoint is the operating time of the randomized technique. Control Intervention: Conventional dissection technique; experimental intervention: LigaSureTM dissection technique. Duration of study: Approximately 15 months; follow up time: 3 years. The trial is registered at German ClinicalTrials Register (DRKS00000166).</p

Randomized controlled trial on PRIngle MAneuver to reduce blood Loss during STapler HEPatectomy - PriMal StHep

Background: Extended liver resections still bear the risk of severe haemorrhage. Moreover, the amount of blood loss during liver resection determines the need for perioperative blood transfusions and is of prognostic relevance in oncologic surgery. Even though there is an ongoing debate about its effectiveness and tolerable duration, the Pringle Maneuver (PM) as an occlusion of the hepatic inflow is routinely applied to reduce blood loss during parenchymal dissection. In combination with the stapler resection technique, PM is expected to minimize blood loss during major liver resection safely due to the short parenchymal dissection duration. Methods: In a single center prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel, confirmatory trial the combination of PM and stapler resection technique in patients undergoing right and left hepatectomies will be tested against the control group that applies stapler resection without the use of PM. The primary endpoint of the study is the total intraoperative blood loss. The measurement of the intraoperative blood loss is conducted with respect to all handled rinse fluids during surgery and by weighing used swabs to generate accurate and comparable data. Secondary endpoints include intra- and postoperative blood transfusion requirements, liver function parameters and the 90-day mortality rate. A sample size of fifty-three patients in either group was calculated to detect a clinically significant difference in blood loss of at least 450 ml with an α of 5% at 80% power. The individual follow-up will be 90 days. Discussion: This is the first clinical trial to test the combination of PM and stapler resection technique as a means to reduce intraoperative blood loss in hepatic left or right resection. Given the short parenchymal dissection duration in stapler resection, PM is expected to be applied shortly without compromising liver function postoperatively. Trial registration: The PriMaL StHep trial has been prospectively registered to the German Clinical Trial Registry (WHO ID: DRKS00010427 ) on April 21st. 2016

Immediate tumor resection in patients with locally advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma with nonresponse to chemotherapy after 4 weeks of treatment versus resection after completion of chemotherapy (OPTITREAT trial, DRKS00004668): study protocol for a randomized controlled pilot trial

Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a standard of care for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and stomach in Europe, but still only 20–40 % respond to therapy and the critical issue; how to treat nonresponding patients is still unclear. So far, there is no randomized trial evaluating the impact of early termination of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immediate tumor resection in nonresponding patients with locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer on postoperative outcome. With this exploratory pilot trial, we want to get first estimates about the effect of discontinuation of chemotherapy with the aim to plan and conduct a further definitive trial. Methods/design: OPTITREAT is designed as a single-center, randomized controlled pilot trial with two parallel study groups. Four weeks after starting neoadjuvant chemotherapy in all patients, clinical response will be assessed by endoscopy and endosonographic ultrasound. Then, nonresponding patients (n = 84) will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to intervention group with stopping chemotherapy and immediate tumor resection or control group with completion of chemotherapy before surgery. Outcome measures are overall survival, R0 resection rate, perioperative morbidity and mortality, histopathological response, and quality of life. Statistical analysis will be based on the intention-to-treat population. Due to the study design as an explorative pilot trial, no formal sample size calculation was performed. The planned total sample size of 120 patients is considered ethical and large enough to show the feasibility and safety of the concept. First data on differences between the study groups in the defined endpoints will also be generated. Discussion: Individualized therapy is of utmost interest in the treatment of locally advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma as less than half of the patients show objective response to current chemotherapy regimens. The findings of the OPTITREAT trial will help to get first data about clinical response evaluation followed by immediate tumor resection in nonresponding patients after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Based on the results of this pilot study, a future confirmatory trial will be planned to prove efficacy and evaluate significance. Trial registration: German Clinical Trial Register number: DRKS0000466

Intravenous versus epidural analgesia to reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal complications after elective pancreatoduodenectomy (the PAKMAN trial, DRKS 00007784): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Despite substantial improvements in surgical and anesthesiological practices leading to decreased mortality of less than 5 % at high-volume centers, pancreatic surgery is still associated with high morbidity rates of up to 50 %. Attention is increasingly directed toward the optimization of perioperative management to reduce complications and enhance postoperative recovery. Currently, two different strategies for postoperative pain management after pancreatoduodenectomy are being routinely used: patient-controlled intravenous analgesia and thoracic epidural analgesia. Evidence is lacking to assess which strategy entails fewer postoperative complications. Methods/design: The PAKMAN trial is designed as an adaptive, pragmatic, randomized, controlled, multicenter, open-label, superiority trial with two parallel study groups. A total of 370 patients scheduled for elective pancreatoduodenectomy will be randomized after giving written informed consent, and 278 patients are needed for analysis. Patients with chronic pancreatitis, severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification ≥ IV, or chronic pain syndrome will be excluded. The group A intervention includes intraoperative general anesthesia and postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia; the group B intervention comprises combined intraoperative general anesthesia and epidural analgesia with postoperative epidural analgesia. The primary endpoint of this trial is a composite of the gastrointestinal complications (delayed gastric emptying, pancreatic fistula, biliary leak, gastrointestinal bleeding, and postoperative ileus) up to postoperative day 30. The aim is to investigate whether the frequency of gastrointestinal complications following pancreatoduodenectomy can be reduced by 15 % using postoperative, patient-controlled intravenous analgesia compared with epidural analgesia. Discussion: Several previous studies investigating the two different strategies for postoperative pain management have mainly focused on their effectiveness in pain control. However, the PAKMAN trial is the first to compare them with regard to their impact on the surgical endpoint “postoperative gastrointestinal complications” after pancreatoduodenectomy. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS0000778

Pylorus Resection Does Not Reduce Delayed Gastric Emptying After Partial Pancreatoduodenectomy A Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial (PROPP Study, DRKS00004191)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of pylorus resection on postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after partial pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Background: PD is the standard treatment for tumors of the pancreatic head. Preservation of the pylorus has been widely accepted as standard procedure. DGE is a common complication causing impaired oral intake, prolonged hospital stay, and postponed further treatment. Recently, pylorus resection has been shown to reduce DGE. Methods:Patients undergoing PD for any indication at the University of Heidelberg were randomized to either PD with pylorus preservation (PP) or PD with pylorus resection and complete stomach preservation (PR). The primary endpoint was DGE within 30 days according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition. Results: Ninety-five patients were randomized to PP and 93 patients to PR. There were no baseline imbalances between the groups. Overall, 53 of 188 patients (28.2%) developed a DGE (grade: A 15.5%;B 8.8%;C 3.3%). In the PP group 24 of 95 patients (25.3%) and in the PR group 29 of 93 patients (31.2%) developed DGE (odds ratio 1.534, 95% confidence interval 0.788 to 2.987;P = 0.208). Higher BMI, indigestion, and intraabdominal major complications were significant risk factors for DGE. Conclusions: In this randomized controlled trial, pylorus resection during PD did not reduce the incidence or severity of DGE. The development of DGE seems to be multifactorial rather than attributable to pyloric dysfunction alone. Pylorus preservation should therefore remain the standard of care in PD.Trial Registration:German Clinical Trials Register DRKS0000419

Acupuncture to improve tolerance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy in patients without systemic sedation: results of a single-center, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial (DRKS00000164)

Background: Sedation prior to esophagogastroduodenoscopy is widespread and increases patient comfort. However, it demands additional trained personnel, accounts for up to 40% of total endoscopy costs and impedes rapid hospital discharge. Most patients lose at least one day of work. 98% of all serious adverse events occurring during esophagogastroduodenoscopy are ascribed to sedation. Acupuncture is reported to be effective as a supportive intervention for gastrointestinal endoscopy, similar to conventional premedication. We investigated whether acupuncture during elective diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy could increase the comfort of patients refusing systemic sedation. Methods: We performed a single-center, double-blinded, placebo-controlled superiority trial to compare the success rates of elective diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopies using real and placebo acupuncture. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for elective, diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy who refused systemic sedation were eligible; 354 patients were randomized. The primary endpoint measure was the rate of successful esophagogastroduodenoscopies. The intervention was real or placebo acupuncture before and during esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Successful esophagogastroduodenoscopy was based on a composite score of patient satisfaction with the procedure on a Likert scale as well as quality of examination, as assessed by the examiner. Results: From February 2010 to July 2012, 678 patients were screened; 354 were included in the study. Baseline characteristics of the two groups showed a similar distribution in all but one parameter: more current smokers were allocated to the placebo group. The intention-to-treat analysis included 177 randomized patients in each group. Endoscopy could successfully be performed in 130 patients (73.5%) in the real acupuncture group and 129 patients (72.9%) in the placebo group. Willingness to repeat the procedure under the same conditions was 86.9% in the real acupuncture group and 87.6% in the placebo acupuncture group. Conclusions: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy without sedation is safe and can successfully be performed in two-thirds of patients. Patients planned for elective esophagogastroduodenoscopy without sedation do not benefit from acupuncture of the Sinarteria respondens (Rs) 24 Chengjiang middle line, Pericard (Pc) 6 Neiguan bilateral, or Dickdarm (IC) 4 Hegu bilateral, according to traditional Chinese medicine meridian theory. Trial registration DRKS00000164. Registered on 10 December 2009