Drainage of Tubo - Ovarian Abscess: DTOA (DTOA)

May 23, 2017 updated by: University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

Comparative Effectiveness Clinical Early of Transvaginal and Laparoscopic Approaches for Drainage of Tubo -Ovarian Abscess. Randomized Noninferiority

The treatment of the acute phase of the complicated abscess tubo-ovarian relies on antibiotics more or less associated with surgical management in case of visible abscess, poor clinical tolerance (sepsis) and resistance to medical treatment. The CNGOF recommended in 2012 that the tubo-ovarian abscess are not within one antibiotic, and should be drained by interventional radiology, preferably by transvaginal or laparoscopic.

Furthermore the efficiency of drainage by ultrasound puncture performed vaginally was demonstrated. This approach tends to replace the first laparoscopy because of its less invasive, fast, easy to access, more acceptable and less cost compared to laparoscopy. This approach is recommended by the French and English colleges.

In total, the surgery in case of ATO is necessary, it is always coupled with antibiotics. Several surgical approaches are possible, laparotomy, laparoscopy and ultrasound-guided puncture. No prospective comparative study has been done, for which we want to develop this study.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Retrospective studies evaluating the efficacy of these two supported relate the same cure rates between the two techniques. According to the literature of Garbin O.and al in 2012, the success rate of transvaginal puncture is generally 93.6%. The largest series of Gjelland al in 2005 and covers 302 consecutive patients with ATO who underwent triple antibiotic therapy and transvaginal puncture, the success rate was 93.4%. The failures that required surgical management have frequently revealed endometriosis or cancer. To support laparoscopic, Raiga and al in 1996 studied the support of 36 retrospectively patients who underwent laparoscopic incisional and wash the abscess with a success rate of 100%. Moreover Reich and al in 1987 found 90% success on a review of 25 patients.

The transvaginal echo guided puncture to replace the first laparoscopy because of its less invasive nature, this is a simple act, fast, possible under mild sedation, the cost is still lower than laparoscopy. Some uncontrolled retrospective studies suggest that laparoscopy remains associated with prolongation of hospitalization time, it is also mentioned that the transvaginal puncture is better tolerated by the patient.

No study has compared these two techniques, which is why we propose this study.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

80

Phase

  • 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

      • Clermont-Ferrand, France, 63003
        • Recruiting
        • CHU Clermont-Ferrand
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Michel CANIS, PUPH
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Jean-Luc POULY, PUPH
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Benoit RABISCHONG, PUPH
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Nicolas BOURDEL, PH
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Sandra CURINIER, PH
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Martine BONIN, PH
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Candice CHAUFFOUR, CCA
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Adrien TRAN MAU THEM, CCA
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Nicolas AGAR, CCA

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

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 43 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with a IGH with tubo-ovarian abscess visible on ultrasound or CT
  • Ultrasound abscess> or equal to 2cm
  • Abdominal pain syndrome
  • Age 18 to 43 years
  • understand french language
  • No complicated: good hemodynamic tolerance, not broken
  • These patients should be affiliated to the French Social Security and must have given informed participation agreement

Exclusion Criteria:

Patients with HIV (CD4 <200) or co-infections: immunosuppression

  • Multi-Abdomen surgery
  • Suspected malignant or borderline tumor
  • Complicated abscess: rupture of the abscess, peritonitis, septic shock
  • Postoperative pelvic abscess
  • Patient minor
  • During Pregnancy
  • Patient having already been accounted for tubo-ovarian abscess in progress
  • Not accessible abscess transvaginal puncture
  • Patients unable major, patients suffering from mental pathology incompatible with informed consent, refusal to participate

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: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: laparoscopy
the tubo-ovarian abscess should be drained by interventional radiology, preferably by transvaginal or laparoscopic
Experimental: ultrasound-guided puncture
The transvaginal echo guided puncture to replace the first laparoscopy because of its less invasive nature, this is a simple act, fast, possible under mild sedation, the cost is still lower than laparoscopy

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Clinical cure rate defined by a composite score as defined by O'Brien PC (Procedures for Comparing samples with multiple endpoints Biometrics 1984; 40: 1079-1087.)
Time Frame: at 72 hour
at 72 hour
Clinical cure rate defined by a composite score as defined by O'Brien PC (Procedures for Comparing samples with multiple endpoints Biometrics 1984; 40: 1079-1087.)
Time Frame: at 1 month
at 1 month
Clinical improvement
Time Frame: at 72 hours and at 1 month
apyrexia to 72 hours and 1 month and EVA to 72 hours and 1 month
at 72 hours and at 1 month
Organic improvement
Time Frame: at 72 hours and at 1 month
CRP Standards and GB to 72 hours and 1 month if initially high
at 72 hours and at 1 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Duration of hospital stay
Time Frame: at day 0
at day 0
Analgesia Type: general anesthesia versus sedation
Time Frame: at day 1
at day 1
recurrent complications
Time Frame: at day 1
Per Statement of complications and postoperative and rehospitalization
at day 1
Operating Time
Time Frame: at day 1
at day 1
Fertility prognosis by Mage score
Time Frame: at 3 months
at 3 months
prognosis of chronic pelvic pain score by adhesions at second look laparoscopy
Time Frame: at 3 months
at 3 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Anne-Sophie GREMEAU, University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

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)

October 26, 2016

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

December 1, 2018

Study Completion (Anticipated)

December 1, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 10, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 23, 2017

First Posted (Actual)

May 25, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

May 25, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 23, 2017

Last Verified

October 1, 2016

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • CHU-0283
  • 2016-A00961-50 (Other Identifier: 2016-A00961-50)

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 Tubo-ovarian Abscess

Clinical Trials on laparoscopic approach

Subscribe