Esta página foi traduzida automaticamente e a precisão da tradução não é garantida. Por favor, consulte o versão em inglês para um texto fonte.

Medical Economic Evaluation and of Quality of Life of the Kidney Living Donors. (DOVIREIN)

8 de julho de 2016 atualizado por: Central Hospital, Nancy, France

Medical Economic Evaluation and of Quality of Life of the Kidney Living Donors. Comparison of the Taking of Kidney by cœliosurgery (Pure or " Hand-assisted "), by cœliosurgery Assisted by Robot and by the Classic Technique of Open Donor Nephrectomy.

The main objective of this multicentre study is to conduct the evaluation of cost-efficiency of various techniques of kidney taking with regard the quality of life of the kidney living donors.

It will allow to compare three techniques of taking (open donor nephrectomy, cœliosurgery pure or " hand-assisted " and cœliosurgery assisted by robot) and to determine their respective advantages in quality of life, then their medico-economic consequences in a cost-efficiency approach from the point of view of the society.

The evaluation will concern the donor and the receiver followed three months after the taking.

The open donor nephrectomy will be the technique of reference with which will be compared the two others.

Visão geral do estudo

Descrição detalhada

Context : The most efficient treatment of the terminal chronic renal insufficiency is the renal transplantation, but in spite of the realization of more than 2000 transplants a year in France, the waiting list increases every year in a important way. The decrease of the offer of transplants from deathly donors led numerous countries to develop the renal transplant from alive donors. This type of transplantation represents in 2007 only 8,1 % of transplants in France (report of ABM on 2007), but the deficit in renal transplants and the new laws of bioethics should increase this donation (it represents until 70 % of the renal transplantations in certain centres of North America or the Northern Europe).

Although the French urology is at the top of the laparoscopic technique, the classic surgical taking by lombotomie stays the reference technique, practised by 58 % of the centres, with for the patient its consequences in terms of pain, of duration of hospitalization, convalescence and possible side effects. The development of the taking by cœliosurgery, mini-invasive technique, allowed to increase the number of wishes of organ donation in the centres which developed it. It is however a difficult technical gesture, requiring an important experience. This technique has the inconvenience of a more painful scar and more subject to complications than the section known pubic of "Pfannenstiel" used for the taking by pure cœliosurgery.

The surgical robot Da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, California), with a 3D mink, the joints of the instruments inside the body, the reduction of the movements, the best ergonomics, improves the precision of the cœlioscopic gesture, but has a sharply upper cost. The CHU of Nancy was the pioneer in Europe to develop this technique from 2002, with very encouraging results on a series from now on more than 80 patients.

Only retrospective studies compared the quality of life between these techniques, and in spite of the major financial impacts (10 years of dialysis represent 100 K€; the price of the robot is of 1700 K€) and the important differences of quality of life according to these various surgical approaches, no prospective comparative medico-economic study was realized up to now. In France, where the hospital bears the load of all the expenses concerning the donor, including its daily allowances during its medical certificate, the shortening of the hospitalization and of the convalescence of the donor as well as the results improved by the transplantation at the receiver of a kidney living donor would allow a fast amortization of these expensive technologies.

Main objective : To compare the cost and the efficiency of the three techniques of taking of kidney living donor.

Main assessment criterion : The quality of life of the donor tested by generic measuring instruments EUROQOL and SF-36 (both to D-1 (the day before the renal transplantation), D4 (4 days after) and D90 (3 months after) and SF-36 to D-1 and D90). It will be realized at the donor's in preoperative (D-1), in postoperative (D4) and in the visit of follow-up in 3 months (D90). It will be also collected at the receiver's in preoperative (D-1), postoperative immediate (D4) and in the visit of follow-up in 3 months (D90).

The combination with the cost estimate will allow to build the marginal cost-efficiency ratio.

Secondary objectives envisaged:

  • The evaluation of the quality of life of the receiver by measuring instrument becomes generic EUROQOL and SF-36 to D-1, D4 (only Euroqol) and D90.
  • The comparison of the comfort of the surgeon and his physical and psychic investment by index card(form) of specific evaluation (Borg and NASA-TLX).
  • The comparison of the coelio-surgical techniques : pure coelioscopy, coelioscopy " hand-assisted " and coelioscopy assisted by robot will concern the quality of life and the marginal cost-efficiency ratio.

Tipo de estudo

Observacional

Inscrição (Real)

268

Contactos e Locais

Esta seção fornece os detalhes de contato para aqueles que conduzem o estudo e informações sobre onde este estudo está sendo realizado.

Locais de estudo

      • Besancon, França, 25030
        • CHU Saint Jacques de Besançon
      • Caen, França, 14000
        • CHU Côte de Nacre de CAEN
      • Clermont-ferrand, França, 63003
        • CHU Montpied de Clermont-Ferrand
      • Creteil, França, 94010
        • CHU Henri Mondor
      • Grenoble, França, 38043
        • CHU Hôpital Michallon de Grenoble
      • Le Kremlin Bicetre, França, 94275
        • Chu Bicetre
      • Lille, França, 59000
        • Hôpital Claude Huriez
      • Lyon, França, 69000
        • CHU Lyon Sud
      • Lyon, França, 69437
        • Hôpital Edouard Herriot de Lyon
      • Marseille, França, 13274
        • CHU Hôpital de la Conception
      • Montpellier, França, 34295
        • CHU Lapeyronie
      • Nancy, França, 54000
        • CHU Brabois
      • Nantes, França, 44093
        • Chu Hotel Dieu
      • Nice, França, 06002
        • CHU Pasteur
      • Paris, França, 75970
        • Hôpital Tenon
      • Paris, França, 75651
        • Hôpital Pitie Salpétrière
      • Paris, França, 75015
        • Hopital Necker
      • Paris, França, 75970
        • Hôpital Saint-Louis
      • Rouen, França, 76038
        • Hôpital Charles Nicolle
      • Saint Etienne, França, 42000
        • CHU Saint Etienne
      • Strasbourg, França, 67091
        • CHU Hautepierre
      • Suresnes, França, 92151
        • CMC Foch
      • Toulouse, França, 31059
        • Hôpital de Rangueil
      • Tours, França, 37000
        • CHU Bretonneau

Critérios de participação

Os pesquisadores procuram pessoas que se encaixem em uma determinada descrição, chamada de critérios de elegibilidade. Alguns exemplos desses critérios são a condição geral de saúde de uma pessoa ou tratamentos anteriores.

Critérios de elegibilidade

Idades elegíveis para estudo

  • Filho
  • Adulto
  • Adulto mais velho

Aceita Voluntários Saudáveis

Não

Gêneros Elegíveis para o Estudo

Tudo

Método de amostragem

Amostra Não Probabilística

População do estudo

Couples living donor - receiver of the services of urology and nephrology of 24 CHU in France practicing one of three techniques :

  • Classic surgical taking by lombotomie : Besançon, Bicêtre, Caen, Lille, Marseille, Strasbourg, Tenon;
  • Taking by coeliosurgery pure or hand-assisted : Clermont-Ferrand, Créteil, Foch, Grenoble, La Pitié Salpêtrière, Lyon Sud, Montpellier, Nantes, Necker,Saint-Etienne,Saint-Louis,Toulouse, Rouen;
  • Coeliosurgical taking assisted by robot : Nancy, Nice, Lyon, Tours.

Descrição

Inclusion Criteria:

  • The receiver is registered on the ABM list;
  • The receiver is on dialysis or in preterminal renal insufficiency;
  • The donor is a member of the circle of acquaintances of the receiver.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Risk of difficulties of follow-up during 3 months following the transplant (ex: patient not living in France);
  • Refusal of participation of the donor.

Plano de estudo

Esta seção fornece detalhes do plano de estudo, incluindo como o estudo é projetado e o que o estudo está medindo.

Como o estudo é projetado?

Detalhes do projeto

Coortes e Intervenções

Grupo / Coorte
Intervenção / Tratamento
couples kidney living donor - receiver

Three groups for each technique of taking of kidney :

  1. open donor nephrectomy
  2. standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy
  3. laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy
open donor nephrectomy
standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy
laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy

O que o estudo está medindo?

Medidas de resultados primários

Medida de resultado
Descrição da medida
Prazo
Quality of life of the donor
Prazo: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)

Quality of life of the donor as measured by EUROQOL (score 0 to 1) and SF 36 self-administered questionnaires (score 0 to 100 in each of 8 dimensions , at D-1 (the day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy).

biological values of the donor and the receiver

D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)

Medidas de resultados secundários

Medida de resultado
Descrição da medida
Prazo
Sociodemographic data
Prazo: D-1, the day before nephrectomy
At D-1 (the day before nephrectomy), sociodemographic data are collected
D-1, the day before nephrectomy
Comfort, physical and mental investment of the surgeon measured by the Borg and the NASA-TLX scale
Prazo: Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
The Borg scale consists of 7 questions corresponding to the level of discomfort in 7 body segments of the surgeon with responses ranging from 0 (no discomfort) to 10 (very very strong discomfort). The surgeon is questioned every 30 minutes during the surgery. The NASA-TLX scale consists in 8 questions about physical and mental investment with responses ranging from 0 (low) to 100 (high). The surgeon completes this scale immediately at the end of the surgical procedure.
Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
Biological values of the donor and the receiver
Prazo: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Blood count and serum electrolyte levels are collected. biological values of the donor and the receiver
D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Treatments administered to the donor
Prazo: D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Treatments administered to the donor from D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor) to D90 (90 days after nephrectomy).
D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Medical exams performed on the donor
Prazo: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Medical exams performed on the donor from D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor) to D90 (90 days after nephrectomy).
D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Information on surgical technique employed to achieve nephrectomy and description of the graft.
Prazo: Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
Type of surgery (open donor nephrectomy, standard or hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomyor laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy), Duration of surgery and of ischemia and description of the graft.
Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor

Colaboradores e Investigadores

É aqui que você encontrará pessoas e organizações envolvidas com este estudo.

Publicações e links úteis

A pessoa responsável por inserir informações sobre o estudo fornece voluntariamente essas publicações. Estes podem ser sobre qualquer coisa relacionada ao estudo.

Datas de registro do estudo

Essas datas acompanham o progresso do registro do estudo e os envios de resumo dos resultados para ClinicalTrials.gov. Os registros do estudo e os resultados relatados são revisados ​​pela National Library of Medicine (NLM) para garantir que atendam aos padrões específicos de controle de qualidade antes de serem publicados no site público.

Datas Principais do Estudo

Início do estudo

1 de junho de 2010

Conclusão Primária (Real)

1 de julho de 2013

Conclusão do estudo (Real)

1 de julho de 2013

Datas de inscrição no estudo

Enviado pela primeira vez

7 de junho de 2010

Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ

8 de julho de 2016

Primeira postagem (Estimativa)

13 de julho de 2016

Atualizações de registro de estudo

Última Atualização Postada (Estimativa)

13 de julho de 2016

Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade

8 de julho de 2016

Última verificação

1 de maio de 2010

Mais Informações

Termos relacionados a este estudo

Outros números de identificação do estudo

  • 10.039

Essas informações foram obtidas diretamente do site clinicaltrials.gov sem nenhuma alteração. Se você tiver alguma solicitação para alterar, remover ou atualizar os detalhes do seu estudo, entre em contato com register@clinicaltrials.gov. Assim que uma alteração for implementada em clinicaltrials.gov, ela também será atualizada automaticamente em nosso site .

Se inscrever