- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT01753518
A Clinical Trial of Subcuticular Staples Versus Subcuticular Suture for Cesarean Section Skin Closure
A Randomized Clinical Trial of Subcuticular Staples Versus Subcuticular Suture for Cesarean Section Skin Closure
Currently, the way doctors close the skin during cesarean section is different between surgeons and there is little evidence to support the use of one kind of closure over the other. At the Mayo Clinic Family Birth Center, skin is currently closed using an absorbable suture (or stitch), placed within the top layer of skin. At other institutions, a metal staple is often used to close the skin.
There is a new technique that uses special absorbable staples just beneath the skin. This technology may be equal to, or possibly better than, current skin closure techniques. However, there is currently little data to show how it compares. The purpose of this study is to compare the absorbable staple to the currently used absorbable suture. The data from this study will then be used to help determine the best technique for skin closure.
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Cesarean section is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures worldwide. In the United States, the proportion of deliveries by cesarean has increased from approximately 21% in 1996 to 32.8% in 2010. Ultimately, the rising incidence of cesarean delivery results in increased surgical morbidity; including pain, blood loss, and surgical site infections, which leads to an increase in overall hospitalization days and healthcare costs. This volume of surgical procedures also carries the risk of blood and body fluid exposures to surgical staff. Suture needles contribute to 43.4% of all sharps injuries in surgical settings and 51.5% of sharp injuries to surgeons alone. Additionally, it was discovered that 20% of blood borne pathogen exposures on the Mayo Clinic Rochester campus in 2011 occurred in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Therefore, any quality improvement measure regarding cesarean sections has the potential to significantly impact overall surgical morbidity, bloodborne pathogen exposure, and healthcare costs at our institution. Reviews of current literature show a lack of evidence for many of the surgical steps during cesarean procedures. Thus, there is an urgent need to define evidence-based surgical techniques for each step, from incision to closure.
The optimal skin closure technique is simple, quick, cost-effective, and provides adequate tissue approximation with a good cosmetic outcome while minimizing the risk of infection, dehiscence, and pain. Ideally, needlestick injuries would also be eliminated. It is currently unknown which skin closure method is superior with regard to these outcomes.
The INSORB 20 (Incisive Surgical) is a new, single-use device for skin closure that aims to combine the speed of a staple with the cosmetic outcome of a subcuticular suture, while eliminating the need for staple removal. Additionally, it should reduce the incidence of needlestick injury. INSORB also claims to result in a "low maintenance wound" with less surgical site infection, lower inflammation, and increased patient comfort and satisfaction. However, data is limited comparing INSORB to the current standards of care (either staples or suture).
The purpose of this study is to determine if the new absorbable subcuticular staples (INSORB) improves outcomes compared to the current standard absorbable subcuticular suture for skin closure in cesarean sections.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Minnesota
-
Rochester, Minnesota, United States, 55905
- Mayo Clinic in Rochester
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion criteria:
- Gestational age ≥ 24 weeks
- Scheduled cesarean section for any indication
- Pfannenstiel incision
- Singleton gestation
Exclusion criteria:
- Failure to consent
- Gestational age < 24 weeks
- Vaginal delivery
- Intrauterine fetal death
- Multifetal gestation
- Suspected infection, i.e. chorioamnionitis
- BMI > 50
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: TREATMENT
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: PARALLEL
- Masking: SINGLE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Subcuticular suture
Subcuticular suture has been used for many years to close skin incisions.
|
subcuticular Monocryl suture closure
Other Names:
|
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Subcuticular staple
Subcuticular staples are a newer modality than suture, but are currently an accepted and widely used skin closure technique.
|
subcuticular staple wound closure with INSORB 20 device
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Total Surgical Time, All Resident Levels
Time Frame: Measured at the time of the procedure (day 1), approximately 1 hour after incision start
|
Total surgical time was defined as the time from incision start to incision completion.
Measured for all resident education levels (1 to 4 years postgraduate).
|
Measured at the time of the procedure (day 1), approximately 1 hour after incision start
|
|
Skin Closure Time, All Resident Levels
Time Frame: Measured at the time of the procedure (day 1), approximately 1 hour after incision start
|
Measured for all resident education levels (1 to 4 years postgraduate).
|
Measured at the time of the procedure (day 1), approximately 1 hour after incision start
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Total Number of Participants With Postoperative Complications
Time Frame: From the day of the procedure (Day 1) for 6 weeks
|
Postoperative complications were assessed by chart review.
|
From the day of the procedure (Day 1) for 6 weeks
|
|
Participants With Postoperative Complications, by Type
Time Frame: From the day of the procedure (Day 1) for 6 weeks
|
Postoperative complications were assessed by chart review.
|
From the day of the procedure (Day 1) for 6 weeks
|
|
Postoperative Pain
Time Frame: From day of procedure until end of hospital stay (typical dismissal on day 4)
|
Post-operative pain was assessed by pain medication use through chart review.
|
From day of procedure until end of hospital stay (typical dismissal on day 4)
|
|
Number of Subjects Requiring Patient-controlled, Alternative Oral, or Single Dose IV/IM Analgesic
Time Frame: From day of procedure until end of hospital stay (typical dismissal on day 4)
|
Post-operative pain was assessed by pain medication use through chart review.
These subjects required patient-controlled analgesia, or alternative oral analgesic, or a single dose of intravenous (IV) or intramuscular (IM) analgesic.
Alternative oral analgesics included hydromorphone, hydrocodone/acetaminophen, or oxycodone/acetaminophen .
|
From day of procedure until end of hospital stay (typical dismissal on day 4)
|
|
Patient Satisfaction
Time Frame: At the time of dismissal (typically day 3 or 4) and at 6 weeks postoperative appointment
|
Patient satisfaction was measured by questionnaire at the time of dismissal from the hospital and at their 6 week postpartum/postoperative exam.
There were 4 questions: How satisfied are you with the appearance of your skin incision?
How willing are you to recommend this same skin closure to a friend?
How willing are you to have this same skin closure for your next cesarean section?
What is your overall satisfaction with your surgical procedure, including the skin incision?
For reporting purposes, possible answers for each item were grouped into negative (not at all, not very, or no opinion), or positive (somewhat or extremely).
|
At the time of dismissal (typically day 3 or 4) and at 6 weeks postoperative appointment
|
|
Surgeon Satisfaction (Per Procedure)
Time Frame: Immediately after the procedure (day 1)
|
Surgeon satisfaction was assessed by a 3-question questionnaire immediately after performing the procedure.
The questions were: How satisfied are you with the appearance of the skin incision?"
"How willing are you to recommend this skin closure (whether it was staples or suture) to a patient?" "How willing are you to use this skin closure (whether it was staples or suture) for your next cesarean section?"
There were 5 possible responses to each question (not at all, not very, no opinion, somewhat, extremely), with "not at all,' "not very," and "no opinion" being a negative response, and "somewhat" and "extremely " being a positive response.
Categories reported were negative, (including no opinion), and positive.
|
Immediately after the procedure (day 1)
|
|
Cosmetic Outcome
Time Frame: Measured at 6 week postoperative appointment
|
The cosmetic outcome will be assessed by patients and a blinded observer at the 6 week postpartum/postoperative exam using the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS).
The POSAS consists of two parts: a Patient Scale and an Observer Scale.
Both scales contain six items that are scored numerically.
Each item of both scales has a 10-point score, with 10 indicating the worst imaginable scar or sensation.
The lowest score is '1', and corresponds to the situation of normal skin (normal pigmentation, no itching etc), and goes up to the worst imaginable.
Besides the six items the 'Overall Opinion' of the scar quality is scored separately of both patients and observers.
Again, a 10-point scale is used in which 10 corresponds to the worst imaginable scar.
|
Measured at 6 week postoperative appointment
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Jennifer Tessmer-Tuck, MD, Mayo Clinic
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Tuuli MG, Rampersad RM, Carbone JF, Stamilio D, Macones GA, Odibo AO. Staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;117(3):682-690. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820ad61e. Erratum In: Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jun;117(6):1440.
- Jagger J, Bentley M, Tereskerz P. A study of patterns and prevention of blood exposures in OR personnel. AORN J. 1998 May;67(5):979-81, 983-4, 986-7 passim. doi: 10.1016/s0001-2092(06)62623-9.
- Jenkins TR. It's time to challenge surgical dogma with evidence-based data. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Aug;189(2):423-7. doi: 10.1067/s0002-9378(03)00587-8.
- Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Nov;193(5):1607-17. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.03.063.
- Walsh CA. Evidence-based cesarean technique. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Apr;22(2):110-5. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283372327.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ESTIMATE)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 12-003183
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 Surgical Wound
-
St. Borbala HospitalSemmelweis University; Department of Surgery, Jahn Ferend Dél-Pesti Kórház... and other collaboratorsTerminatedSurgical Wound | Surgical Site Infection | Wound Dehiscence, Surgical | Dehiscence of Internal Surgical WoundHungary
-
ConvaTec Inc.WithdrawnSurgical Wound, Recent | Trauma-related Wound | Dehiscence Wound | Surgical Wound LeakUnited States
-
Centro Hospitalar do Tâmega e SousaActive, not recruitingSurgical Wound | Surgical Wound Infection | Surgical Site Infection | Surgical Wound, Healed | Surgical Complication | Surgical Wound Dehiscence | Surgical Wound HaemorrhagePortugal
-
Molnlycke Health Care ABSyntactxNot yet recruitingSurgical Wound | Surgical Incision | Surgical Wound Dehiscence | Incision, Surgical | Surgical Wound, Recent
-
Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, BellinzonaRecruitingWound SurgicalSwitzerland
-
Associazione Infermieristica per lo studio delle...Unknown
-
Brock Liden, DPMWithdrawnSurgical Wound, HealedUnited States
-
Biointelligent Technology Systems SLUniversidad Pública de Navarra; Dasman Diabetes InstituteCompletedWounds and Injuries | Wound Surgical | Wound Healing DisorderSpain
-
Abouqir General HospitalAlexandria UniversityCompletedSurgical Wound Closure TechniqueEgypt
-
University of California, DavisCompletedSurgical Wound Cosmesis
Clinical Trials on Subcuticular suture
-
University of Puerto RicoNot yet recruiting
-
Holbaek SygehusUniversity of Copenhagen; Region ZealandCompletedCicatrix | Cesarean SectionDenmark
-
Inova Health Care ServicesNot yet recruitingPregnancyUnited States
-
St. Joseph's Healthcare HamiltonCompletedComparison of Subcuticular Suture Versus Surgical Staples for Closure of Pfannenstiel Skin IncisionsPain, Postoperative | Obstetric Surgical Procedures | Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresCanada
-
The University of Texas Medical Branch, GalvestonCooper CompaniesTerminatedWound Heal | Operative TimeUnited States
-
Assiut UniversityNot yet recruiting
-
Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City HospitalRecruitingBody Image | Gynecologic Cancers | Surgical Wound Closure TechniquesTurkey (Türkiye)
-
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di ModenaCompletedGoiter | Thyroid Neoplasms | Parathyroid PathologiesItaly
-
Rubino Ob-Gyn GroupUnknown
-
Wake Forest University Health SciencesRecruiting