Laparoscopic Lens Defogging Using Anti-fog Solution, waRm Saline, and Chlorhexidine Solution (CLEAR)

August 25, 2019 updated by: Taejong Song, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital

Randomized Comparison of Laparoscopic LEns Defogging Using Anti-fog Solution, waRm Saline, and Chlorhexidine Solution (CLEAR)

The aim of this study is to compare three popular methods of minimizing or reducing laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF) by heating lens using warm saline, applying anti-fog agent to lens, and rubbing lens with chlorhexidine in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

The physiology behind laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF) is well understood based on meticulous experiments outlining the role of temperature and humidity. Despite many efforts, including uses of warm saline, various anti-fog agents, chlorhexidine, betadine, and rubbing the lens on serosal surfaces, to reduce LLF, there remains no consensus as to which method is superior to prevent LLF. Furthermore, most previous studies were experimental trials conducted in a simulation model or a non-human in vivo model or an expert's commentary based on their clinical experiences , and there was no randomized controlled trial focusing LLF in human model. Therefore, this randomized trial aimed to compare three popular methods of minimizing or reducing LLF by heating lens using warm saline, applying anti-fog agent to lens, and rubbing lens with chlorhexidine in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
96

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • age between 18 and 65 years
  • American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASAPS) classification I-II
  • the absence of pregnancy at the time of surgery

Exclusion Criteria:

  • allergy to chlorhexidine or anti-fog solution
  • anticipating cases of abrupt change in intra-abdominal humidity such as hemoperitoneum and profuse ascites
  • extremely short or long operative time (<20 min or > 180 min) affecting the frequency of LLF
  • unavailability of the surgical recording equipment for laparoscopic procedure.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Warm saline group
In subjects allocated to the warm saline group, a thermos flask, which was filled with heated sterile water, was used. A 1000 ml bottle of sterile water was heated to 60 ˚C in a stove for an hour at minimum. Just before introducing into the abdominal cavity, the laparoscope was placed into the thermos flask for 30 seconds at minimum . After each incidence of laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF), the scope was briefly inserted into the thermos flask about 10 seconds, and was then wrapped gauze around the lens before abdominal reinsertion.
Device: Warm saline
In subjects allocated to the warm saline group, a thermos flask, which was filled with heated sterile water, was used. A 1000 ml bottle of sterile water was heated to 60 ˚C in a stove for an hour at minimum. Just before introducing into the abdominal cavity, the laparoscope was placed into the thermos flask for 30 seconds at minimum . After each incidence of laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF), the scope was briefly inserted into the thermos flask about 10 seconds, and was then wrapped gauze around the lens before abdominal reinsertion.
Experimental: anti-fog agent group
In the anti-fog agent group, Ultra-Stop TM (Sigmaphrarm, Vienna, Austria), which is a commercial anti-fogging solution containing alcohol, surfactant, and water for medical optical devices, was used. Wiping the lens with gauze soaked in Ultra-Stop TM and allowing the surfactant to act for 5 seconds, the laparoscope was introduced into the abdominal cavity. After each laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF), the scope was removed from the abdomen and cleaned using the same corresponding method.
Device: anti-fog agent
In the anti-fog agent group, Ultra-Stop TM (Sigmaphrarm, Vienna, Austria), which is a commercial anti-fogging solution containing alcohol, surfactant, and water for medical optical devices, was used. Wiping the lens with gauze soaked in Ultra-Stop TM and allowing the surfactant to act for 5 seconds, the laparoscope was introduced into the abdominal cavity. After each laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF), the scope was removed from the abdomen and cleaned using the same corresponding method.
Experimental: chlorhexidine group
In the chlorhexidine group, the lens was wiped with gauze soaked in 4% chlorhexidine detergent solution (Firson, Cheonan, Korea) for 5 seconds before introducing into the abdominal cavity, and chlorhexidine was reapplied on the lens at the occurrence of laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF).
Device: chlorhexidine
In the chlorhexidine group, the lens was wiped with gauze soaked in 4% chlorhexidine detergent solution (Firson, Cheonan, Korea) for 5 seconds before introducing into the abdominal cavity, and chlorhexidine was reapplied on the lens at the occurrence of laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF).
No Intervention: control group
In the control group, the lens was not wiped gauze or applied any solution before use of the laparoscope. When occurred the event of each laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF) that splatter of irrigation fluid, blood, and body fluids affected visual clearance, the laparoscopic lens was manually rubbed with clean gauze by a scrub nurse.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
the severity of LLF during the first 3-min operation
Time Frame: At the time of surgery
The severity of LLF was rated on a scale of 0 (the clearest) to 10 (the foggiest).
At the time of surgery

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
the severity of LLF occurred during the remaining operative time except the first 3-min
Time Frame: At the time of surgery
The severity of LLF was rated on a scale of 0 (the clearest) to 10 (the foggiest).
At the time of surgery
the number of lens cleansing
Time Frame: At the time of surgery
We will assess the number of lens cleansing at the time of surgery.
At the time of surgery
total time to spend for lens cleaning
Time Frame: At the time of surgery
We will assess the total time to spend for lens cleansing at the time of surgery.
At the time of surgery

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Kangbuk Samsung Hospital

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
April 23, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
October 11, 2018

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
November 1, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 13, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 13, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 20, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
August 28, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 25, 2019

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
August 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 2018-03-005

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Gynecologic Disease

Clinical Trials on Warm saline

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings