- ICH GCP
- Registro degli studi clinici negli Stati Uniti
- Sperimentazione clinica NCT01581905
Study of Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy at a Teaching Institution
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy With Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy at a Teaching Institution
Approximately 600,000 women undergo hysterectomy each year in the United States, of which 12% are laparoscopic. The most common indications for hysterectomy are: symptomatic uterine leiomyomas (40.7%), endometriosis (17.7%), and prolapse (14.5%). The first total laparoscopic hysterectomy was performed by Reich et al in 1988. Many studies have proven that laparoscopic hysterectomy is associated with lower preoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and shorter recovery times than abdominal hysterectomy. The literature has also shown the complication rates for laparoscopic cases are similar to open procedures in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice state that laparoscopic hysterectomy is an alternative to abdominal hysterectomy for those patients in whom vaginal hysterectomy is not indicated or feasible. The ACOG Committee on Gynecologic Practice site multiple advantages of laparoscopic hysterectomy to abdominal hysterectomy including faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and fewer abdominal wall/wound infections. Despite the recommendations of ACOG for a more minimally invasive approach, 66% of all hysterectomies are performed abdominally. Key reasons for the lag in utilization of laparoscopic techniques are the technical obstacles of performing minimally invasive hysterectomies. Robotic technology has emerged as a means to decrease the learning curve and increase the availability of minimally invasive surgery to patients. A current review of the literature reveals no randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy vs. robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. The investigator's aim is to address this void.
The primary objective of this study is to determine whether Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy is equivalent to Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy with respect to operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. The investigator's secondary objective was to assess the cost, morbidity, and mortality of each procedure.
Panoramica dello studio
Stato
Intervento / Trattamento
Descrizione dettagliata
Tipo di studio
Iscrizione (Effettivo)
Fase
- Non applicabile
Contatti e Sedi
Luoghi di studio
-
-
Pennsylvania
-
Hershey, Pennsylvania, Stati Uniti, 17033
- Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
-
-
Criteri di partecipazione
Criteri di ammissibilità
Età idonea allo studio
Accetta volontari sani
Sessi ammissibili allo studio
Descrizione
Inclusion Criteria:
- Individuals recruited into this study will be patients presenting to the Urogynecology and Minimally Invasive Surgical Group for consultation for hysterectomy.
Exclusion Criteria:Individuals who are not candidates for laparoscopic surgery
- Medical Condition that does not allow pneumoperitoneum
- Medical Condition that does not allow proper ventilation during anesthesia
- Uterine size precluding access to the uterine artery
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse amendable to a vaginal approach
Piano di studio
Come è strutturato lo studio?
Dettagli di progettazione
- Scopo principale: Trattamento
- Assegnazione: Randomizzato
- Modello interventistico: Assegnazione parallela
- Mascheramento: Nessuno (etichetta aperta)
Armi e interventi
Gruppo di partecipanti / Arm |
Intervento / Trattamento |
|---|---|
|
Comparatore attivo: LH Group
The LH Group includes individuals undergoing conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy, total or supracervical.
|
Patients assigned to this intervention will undergo conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy, either total or supracervical.
Altri nomi:
|
|
Comparatore attivo: RH Group
The RH Group includes individuals undergoing Robot-Assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, total or supracervical.
|
Patients assigned to this group will undergo Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy, either total or supracervical.
Altri nomi:
|
Cosa sta misurando lo studio?
Misure di risultato primarie
Misura del risultato |
Lasso di tempo |
|---|---|
|
Operating Time
Lasso di tempo: Operating time is measured on the day of surgery after completing the procedure.
|
Operating time is measured on the day of surgery after completing the procedure.
|
Misure di risultato secondarie
Misura del risultato |
Misura Descrizione |
Lasso di tempo |
|---|---|---|
|
Estimated Blood Loss
Lasso di tempo: Estimated blood loss will be measured on the day of surgery after completing the procedure.
|
Estimated blood loss will be measured on the day of surgery after completing the procedure.
|
|
|
Intraoperative Complications
Lasso di tempo: Intraoperative complications will be measured on the day of surgery after completing the procedure.
|
Intraoperative complications include: injury to bladder, ureters, bowel, blood vessels,and nerves AND hemorrhage
|
Intraoperative complications will be measured on the day of surgery after completing the procedure.
|
|
Perioperative Complications
Lasso di tempo: Perioperative complications will be measured on the date of discharge from the hospital.
|
Perioperative complications include: urinary tract infections, urinary retention, ileus, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary edema, atelectasis, pneumonia, renal and cerebrovascular morbidity, thromboembolic complications (DVT and PE)
|
Perioperative complications will be measured on the date of discharge from the hospital.
|
|
Early Postoperative Complications
Lasso di tempo: Early postoperative complications will be measured on the date of discharge from the hospital until two weeks after surgery, assessed up to 14 days post-operativley.
|
Early postoperative complications include: pulmonary, renal, and cerebrovascular morbidity, wound and vault complications (infection, breakdown, and dehiscence); septicemia, and thromboembolic complications (DVT, PE)
|
Early postoperative complications will be measured on the date of discharge from the hospital until two weeks after surgery, assessed up to 14 days post-operativley.
|
|
Delayed Post-Operative Complications
Lasso di tempo: Delayed post-operative complications will be measured from 2 weeks until 8 weeks after surgery, up to 56 days post-operatively.
|
Delayed post-operative complications include: incisional hernia formation, re-operation, vaginal evisceration
|
Delayed post-operative complications will be measured from 2 weeks until 8 weeks after surgery, up to 56 days post-operatively.
|
|
Costs
Lasso di tempo: Cost will be assessed 8 weeks after completion of the surgery, up to 56 days post-operatively.
|
Costs will include the costs of pre-operative care, surgery, post-operative care, and any post-operative complications.
|
Cost will be assessed 8 weeks after completion of the surgery, up to 56 days post-operatively.
|
Collaboratori e investigatori
Sponsor
Investigatori
- Investigatore principale: Janis L Green, MD, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
- Direttore dello studio: Gerald J Harkins, MD, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
- Cattedra di studio: Matthew Davies, MD, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
Pubblicazioni e link utili
Pubblicazioni generali
- Sarlos D, Kots LA. Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy: a review of recent comparative studies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Aug;23(4):283-8. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e328348a26e.
- Pasic RP, Rizzo JA, Fang H, Ross S, Moore M, Gunnarsson C. Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Nov-Dec;17(6):730-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.06.009. Epub 2010 Sep 17.
- Payne TN, Dauterive FR. A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 May-Jun;15(3):286-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2008.01.008. Epub 2008 Mar 6.
- Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, Schaer G. Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010 May;150(1):92-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.02.012. Epub 2010 Mar 5.
- Shashoua AR, Gill D, Locher SR. Robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy. JSLS. 2009 Jul-Sep;13(3):364-9.
Studiare le date dei record
Studia le date principali
Inizio studio
Completamento primario (Effettivo)
Completamento dello studio (Effettivo)
Date di iscrizione allo studio
Primo inviato
Primo inviato che soddisfa i criteri di controllo qualità
Primo Inserito (Stima)
Aggiornamenti dei record di studio
Ultimo aggiornamento pubblicato (Stima)
Ultimo aggiornamento inviato che soddisfa i criteri QC
Ultimo verificato
Maggiori informazioni
Termini relativi a questo studio
Parole chiave
Termini MeSH pertinenti aggiuntivi
Altri numeri di identificazione dello studio
- 38824
Queste informazioni sono state recuperate direttamente dal sito web clinicaltrials.gov senza alcuna modifica. In caso di richieste di modifica, rimozione o aggiornamento dei dettagli dello studio, contattare register@clinicaltrials.gov. Non appena verrà implementata una modifica su clinicaltrials.gov, questa verrà aggiornata automaticamente anche sul nostro sito web .