43 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
Primary anastomosis is associated with higher rates of perioperative morbidity/mortality and that fecal diversion improves overall mortality, decreases length of stay, and lowers rates of surgical complications requiring unplanned operative intervention.
This research study is being done to determine the optimal dose of spinal morphine and hydromorphone in patients undergoing minimally-invasive (i.e., surgery performed through small entry sites and using cameras) colorectal surgery.
Laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) has gained wide acceptance in the treatment of various pathology from diverticular disease to colon cancer. In comparison to conventional open surgery LCS has the benefits of shorter hospital stay, reduced postoperative pain, lower wound-related complication rates, better cosmetic results and earlier return to normal activities. Despite the fact that laparoscopic colorectal surgery is done through smaller incisions, there is still a considerable amount of abdominal wall trauma with these procedures. This still can cause a significant amount of postoperative discomfort, which can add to patients' stress, decreased satisfaction, and prolong length of hospital stay. Postoperative pain can be difficult to control and has been mainly managed pharmacologically with the use of narcotics and non-narcotic medications delivered through different routes. The effectiveness of pain control depends on the medication, its dosage, frequency and route of administration. The latter is mainly achieved through the intravenous route in the immediate postoperative period in laparoscopic colorectal surgery patient, as patients are restricted from having anything by mouth until return of bowel function. Another route of delivery is the use of local anesthetics as well as opioids via an epidural catheter. Epidural analgesia (EA) has the potential to offer excellent pain control and decrease the rate of postoperative ileus. Despite the extensive use of epidural anesthesia in obstetrics, to date there has been very few studies looking at the effectiveness of epidural analgesia in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of epidural analgesia as compared to conventional analgesia on the length of hospital stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal procedures. The secondary objectives of the study will be to evaluate patient satisfaction, quality of life, pain control and return of bowel function in patients treated with either epidural analgesia or intravenous narcotics.
The purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of transversus abdominal plane (TAP) block, thoracic epidural or paravertebral block (PVB) for controlling postoperative pain when compared with opioid you self-administer in your vein using a PCA device. The primary outcome will be postoperative opioid consumption within 24 hours after surgery. A total of 120 subjects will be randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive a TAP block, PVB, TEA or no block (PCA alone).Patients in all groups will be cared for using an established enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway incorporating a multimodal analgesic regimen using IV acetaminophen and postoperative PCA fentanyl.
This clinical study is a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgical procedures that receive an abdominal skin incision of at least 6 cm. Treatment with Silverlon® will be compared to standard postoperative dressings of 4x4 Gauze and paper tape. Patients will be randomized with a 1:1 treatment allocation ratio to receive either 1) Silverlon® or 2) standard postsurgical dressing. Neither the Investigators nor the participants will be blinded to the treatment modality after randomization. Silver has long been known to have antimicrobial properties. It interacts with structural proteins and DNA, inhibiting bacterial replication and causing fatal structural changes within the cell wall. It has broad antimicrobial activities and unlike antibiotics, it is rarely associated with microbial resistance. Silverlon® is a silver-nylon dressing specifically designed for surgical wounds to prevent the development of surgical site infections. It is an easy to use product with no known microbial resistance or adverse effects. The efficacy of Silverlon® in preventing surgical site infections has been shown in several retrospective studies but as of yet has not been tested in a prospective fashion. The objective of this study is to perform a prospective, randomized, clinical trial directly comparing the incidence of surgical site infections in patients treated with Silverlon® to standard postoperative dressing following elective colorectal surgery
The purpose of this study is to find out if guided fluid administration with the esophageal monitor is superior to standard fluid administration and whether use of the hetastarch or lactated ringers offers different benefits with respect to length of stay in the hospital after hand-assisted colorectal surgery.
The purpose of this study is to determine the best way to ensure that polyps are completely removed by evaluating the borders of the removed polyp. If a polyp is found that meets the size requirements for the study, the investigators will take extra biopsies of the margin to determine if there is any abnormal tissue or cancer at these borders.
Quality improvement project with the aim to use a standardized assessment tool (EMR-STAT) to establish learning curves and competence thresholds for key cognitive and technical colorectal EMR core skills among advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs).
The long-term goal of this research is to develop new tools to guide patients, caregivers, and clinicians in making individualized decisions regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance. As part of a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded contract, investigator will analyze surveillance data to determine the effectiveness of CRC surveillance and recurrence risk taking into account different patient and tumor characteristics; identify key issues about CRC surveillance important to patients, caregivers, and clinicians; and integrate the recurrence risk and patient priorities into a patient-centered, risk stratified surveillance strategy by creating an interactive decision aid for use by patients and clinicians. This protocol addresses a formative step in the creation of the interactive decision aid where patients' information needs and preferences are assessed regarding decisions about surveillance. The specific aims of this protocol are: Phase 1 - To interview patients and their caregivers to determine their concerns, preferences and key priorities regarding surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer, and Phase 2 - To refine the key priorities identified in phase 1 through focus groups and surveys with patients and caregivers.
This protocol describes a prospective cohort study. It addresses an important challenge in the prevention of colorectal cancer and duodenal cancer: how to safely and effectively remove large polyps.
The effectiveness of colonoscopy in reducing colorectal cancer mortality relies on the detection and removal of neoplastic polyps. Because the risk of prevalent cancer and of transition to cancer increases with polyp size, effective and safe resection of large polyps is particularly important. Large polyps ≥20mm are removed by so-called endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) using electrocautery snares. Resection of these large polyps is associated with a risk of severe complications that may require hospitalization and additional interventions. The most common risk is delayed bleeding which is observed in approximately 2-9% of patients. A recent retrospective study suggests that closure of the large mucosal defect after resection may decrease the risk of delayed bleeding. However, significant uncertainty remains about the polypectomy techniques to optimizing resection and minimizing risk. Important aspects that may affect risk include clipping of the mucosal defect and electrocautery setting.
The investigators seek to compare two techniques of removing pre-cancerous lesions from the colon. The investigators also will compare two solutions used during the procedure to determine if either solution allows for an improved removal of the tumors.
Colorectal cancer is the third most common form of cancer found in the United States. To date surgical resection provides the best chance for cure. Unfortunately, despite "curative" surgery, tumor recurrences develop in 30-40% of patients from either unforeseen residual metastases or from viable tumor cells shed into the circulation before or at the time of surgery. There is evidence from both humans and mice suggesting that tumor growth is stimulated after surgery for a period of time. This study calls for the administration of a green tea extract and a milk thistle extract, two orally ingested supplements, during the week immediately before and weeks after your surgery. It is not the current standard of care to give anti-cancer drugs during the perioperative period. The basic idea behind this study is that it should be beneficial to inhibit cancer growth in the days leading up to and following surgery. Why is this the case? It makes sense to limit or inhibit tumor growth before surgery with drugs provided it can be done safely and does not interfere with the surgery. It is also logical to give anti-cancer drugs after surgery because, unfortunately, about 35 percent of colorectal cancer patients, after resection, have hidden tumor cells that remain in the body. There is also strong human evidence that tumor growth is stimulated during the first month after tumor resection as a result of the surgical injuries and the healing process. Therefore, there is good reason to give anti-cancer drugs as soon as possible after surgery in order to offset some of surgery's negative effects. Although both supplements have been given safely to a wide variety of patients with a number of different medical problems, the two supplements together have never been given to cancer patients during the weeks just before and following surgery. The researchers hypothesize that the administration of these two supplements together will be safe in the period surrounding colorectal cancer surgery.
The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of underwater resection (polypectomy) versus conventional polypectomy techniques for small and large colorectal lesions identified during colonoscopy.
This single-center, prospective, randomized clinical trial is designed to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hepatic resection and microwave ablation (MWA) to determine the optimal operative intervention for the local treatment of resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. The primary aim of this study is to test the following hypothesis: 2-year local disease control is equivalent between patients receiving the experimental therapy (MWA) and patients receiving the standard therapy (hepatic resection) as treatment for colorectal cancer liver metastases determined to be resectable by radiographic imaging. Secondarily, the investigators expect that 2-year intrahepatic (regional) and metastatic disease recurrence rates are equivalent between the two treatment arms in this study.
Liver transplantation (LT) has become an accepted treatment for selected patients with unresectable liver metastases due to colorectal cancer (CRLM). The goal of this study is to look at and compare the clinical results of all the different approved methods (living vs. Deceased, whole organ vs. Split, one staged vs. Two staged) used to perform a standard liver transplant procedure for recipients with CRLM. Investigators will look at things like different procedure results, recovery in the hospital, and survival rates one year after the transplant. Investigators will also take blood samples from participants to be used in future research. All the transplant methods the investigators are comparing are standard practices approved by the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS).
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if HRX215 is safe and tolerable in adults who have undergone surgical removal of metastatic tumor(s) due to colorectal carcinoma in the liver. The main question it aims to answer are: 1. to learn about the safety of HRX215 2. to learn about how the body absorbs, distributes, and gets rid of HRX215 . Researchers will compare HRX215 to a placebo (a look-alike substance that contains no drug) to see what medical problems participants have when taking HRX215. Participants will: Take HRX215 or a placebo twice a day for 28 days Daily visits for 7 days for checkups and tests which may either be in the hospital or outpatient after 3 days. Clinic visits every two weeks for the next two visits. The visit at two weeks may be a home visit or clinic visit. Additional clinic visits 3 months and 6 months after the start of treatment
Tumor recurrence significantly affects survival rates following the local resection of submucosal colorectal cancers (T1 CRC). Despite this, there are currently no reliable biomarkers established to predict recurrence in T1 CRC. This study seeks to improve the prediction of recurrence-free survival in individuals who have survived T1 CRC.
The investigators hypothesize that abnormalities in thromboelastography (TEG) parameters in patients with liver, pancreas, biliary, esophageal, colorectal, and lung adenocarcinoma can serve as biomarkers for oncologic disease burden, cancer recurrence and overall survival as well as thrombotic and hemorrhagic post-operative complications. The investigators further hypothesize that there is histologic pathology correlates to pre-operative TEG abnormalities, and that it identifies patients with virulent tumor biology.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LB1148 in subjects undergoing planned bowel resection.
This is an observational study with the goal to improve the robustness of the scientific evidence linking Fusobacterium nucleatum (Fn) and/or other microorganisms to colorectal cancer (CRC) onset and/or progression. This is an approximately three-year study. There are two phases to this study, including: 1) pilot phase, 2) full study. There are also five arms in this study including cancer-free, pre-cancerous, and Colorectal cancer stages (I-III). The pilot study will include the recruitment of 50 participants per group (i.e., total of 250 participants). The full study will have an additional 150 participants per group (total of 1,000 participants). This study will recruit using clinical sites in the United States. There are 5 timepoints in this study. If the participants are found to be medically eligible through diagnosis and medical information, they will provide samples (including: saliva, blood, urine, stool and tumor biopsy) at each timepoint and during the study. They will also answer health and wellness questions during this study. Additional data collection, including medical data, biopsies and other biological samples might happen at interim timepoints in case of adenoma/cancer disease progression (recurrence, metastasis). The participant's healthcare provider will determine if additional biopsies are required as a part of the standard of care. If collected, additional samples will be sent for research purposes.
This study compares the outcomes and safety of two standard treatment options called microwave ablation and surgical wedge resection in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, sarcoma and colorectal cancer that has spread to other parts of the body (metastatic). Microwave ablation is designed to kill tumor cells by heating the tumor until the tumor cells die. A wedge resection is a procedure that involves the surgical removal of a small, wedge-shaped piece of lung tissue to remove a small tumor or to diagnose lung cancer. Comparing these two treatment options may help researchers learn which method works better for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic sarcoma, and metastatic colorectal cancer.
Background: Gastrointestinal tumors have a molecule called carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) in the tumors and blood. The agent MVT-5873 was designed to block this molecule. Researchers want to test how safe it is to give this agent to people before and after surgery to remove a tumor. They want to learn the highest dose tolerated. They want to see if getting the agent at surgery helps slow down the disease. Objective: To test the safety of giving MVT-5873 at surgery to remove cancer and see if it slows the progression of the disease. Eligibility: Adults at least 18 years old with certain cancers and certain blood CA19-9 levels Design: Participants will be screened with: * Medical history * Physical exam * Blood and heart tests * Scans * Review of normal activities * Review of tumor sample * Pregnancy test A few days before surgery, participants will get a dose of the study agent. They will get it through a small plastic tube in a vein over about 2 hours. Participants will sign a separate consent and have the surgery. A sample of the tumor and normal liver will be removed for research. For 1-2 weeks after surgery, participants will recover in intensive care then regular care at the hospital. They will be monitored and treated throughout the stay. After leaving the hospital, participants will get the study agent every week for 1 month. Then they will get it every other week for 2 months. They will repeat screening tests at study visits and at a follow-up visit. That will be about 5 weeks after the last dose.
This prospective clinical study will evaluate the intra-operative performance of the powered circular stapler used in left colectomy procedures in a post-market setting.
LifeSeal™ Kit, surgical sealant designed for staple-line reinforcement that is applied over the anastomotic line to prevent bowel content leakage until full physiological function is restored. RATIONALE : Postoperative anastomotic leakage is one of the most devastating and feared complications in colorectal surgery. The risk of postoperative anastomotic leakage varies widely depending on the level of anastomosis while the risk is higher in low anastomosis. In order to best demonstrate the benefits of LifeSeal™ in providing staple line reinforcement and helping to reduce leaks, the study includes high risk anastomoses, defined as colorectal and coloanal anastomoses performed within 10 cm from the anal verge. STUDY DESIGN: This study is designed as a prospective, multi-center, multinational randomized, single-blind, double armed study PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of LifeSeal™ Kit as measured by the change in overall anastomotic leak rates in subjects undergoing low anterior resection with an anastomosis below 10 cm from the anal verge, over the first 17 weeks after surgery. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: The secondary objective of this study is to assess the incidence of post-operative leaks and additional benefits that could be related to the use of LifeSeal™ Kit such as reducing the severity and improving the outcome of a leak once it has occurred. In addition, the study will allow for collection and analysis of additional safety data and usability assessment of the device, medical resource utilization, and health related quality of life measures.
The purpose of this study is to establish preliminary evidence of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LB1148 for the treatment of post-operative ileus and intra-abdominal adhesions in subjects undergoing elective bowel resection.
This is a randomized, controlled, parallel, multicenter study to determine the difference in post-operative anastomotic leak rate in low anterior resection procedures where colon and rectal tissue perfusion is evaluated using PINPOINT as an adjunct to standard surgical practice compared to surgical procedures performed according to standard surgical practice alone.
The purpose of this study is to compare two different surgical procedures for the treatment of Rectal Cancer: Laparoscopic Surgery and Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery. The ROLARR study is for participants with cancer of the rectum for whom a laparoscopic operation (sometimes called "keyhole surgery") has been recommended by their surgeon. In the past most rectal cancers were removed using "open" surgery. Open surgery involves a large cut down the middle of the patient's abdomen to allow the surgeon to see and take out the cancer. On a previous study showed that using laparoscopic surgery to remove colorectal cancers was as good as open surgery for curing cancer. There is now another option to remove rectal cancers, which involves using a robotic system with laparoscopic surgery. This type of surgery is called "robotic-assisted" laparoscopic surgery and is now becoming widely used by surgeons to remove cancers including the rectum, as well as for other non-cancer operations. In order to perform robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, the surgeon sits at a robotic control unit a few feet away from the patient. Using the robotic control unit, the surgeon can see a clear video image of the patient's abdomen and the operation site. The surgeon can perform the operation from the robotic control unit by controlling the movement of a set of robotic surgical instruments, guided by the video camera. Like standard laparoscopic surgery, the surgeon is able to carry out the entire operation through a few small cuts in the abdomen. The camera of the robotic system provides a 3D high-definition magnified view of the operation site and the robotic system is also able to translate the movements of the surgeon's hands into small precise movements inside the patient's body. We want to test whether robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery is as good, or even better, at removing rectal cancers as standard laparoscopic surgery (actually Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery is used as standard of care in rectal cancer patients at University of California, Irvine Medical Center). We also want to investigate whether using robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery reduces the number of times a laparoscopic operation needs to be converted to an open operation, and see whether using a robotic system can also shorten the length of time patients need to stay in hospital and if it reduces the number of complications patients may have during and after their operation.
Background: Rectal prolapse (RP) is the descent of the upper rectum and is a common problem in the western world. Surgery is the only definite treatment and is preferably performed minimally invasive. High-level prospective studies on treatment strategies for RP currently are lacking and, thus, no consensus exist regarding the optimal treatment for patients with RP. Furthermore, remarkable transatlantic differences exist, as in Europe, laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) is regarded the treatment of choice, while in the USA Laparoscopic Resection Rectopexy (LRR) remains the golden standard. Objective: To determine the optimal minimally invasive surgical treatment for patients with RP. Design: International, prospective, comparative double cohort study. The first cohort will consist of 120 European patients with a RP and will be treated with LVR. Centres in The Netherlands, Belgium and the UK are enlisted for participation. The second cohort will consist of 120 American patients with a RP, treated with LRR. Several US centres are enlisted. Preoperative work-up consists of radiological imaging and standardised questionnaires. Follow-up (FU) is set on two years. During FU, pre-operative imaging and questionnaires will be repeated. Primary \& secondary outcomes: Primary endpoint will be improvement on the Gastro-Intestinal-Quality-of-Life-Index (GIQLI). Secondary endpoints will be generic Quality-of-Life, functional results, morbidity, mortality, recurrences and cost-effectiveness. Time frame: Study and inclusion start will be on January the 1st, 2011 and will take approximately 18-24 months. Therefore, total study duration will be 42-48 months.
The control of postoperative pain has become a major issue in surgery awareness and it is considered an important measurement of patient satisfaction. Improvements in pain relief, including stopping pain before it starts (i.e. preemptive treatment) is of great benefit to the surgical patient. When pain is aggressively addressed, patients respond by recovering faster. The use of opioids remains the mainstay to minimize postoperative pain. Lately, long acting local anesthetic wound infiltration has been widely recognized as a useful adjunct to multimodal postoperative pain management. On that basis, a system that delivers a continuous local anesthetic to the surgical wound was developed, and better pain control has been achieved after several surgical procedures. In patients undergoing abdominal procedures, such as colon resection, adequate pain control remains an issue. It is known that innervation to the antero-lateral abdomen is provided by sensory nerves T7-L1, ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerves, which travel through the transverse abdominis muscle plane (TAP). Local anesthetic block of these nerves has been described and has shown to be effective for immediate postoperative pain control. Recently, the use of the On-Q pain relief system with catheters placed within the TAP has been evaluated. Published results have shown significant improvement of pain control (Forastiere). The idea of placing the pain catheters at the TAP plane seems to be more coherent with the anatomical distribution of the sensory nerves trunks. Due to the lack of prospective trials investigating the effectiveness of a continuous wound infusion with local anesthetics after general surgery procedures the investigators sought to determine the efficacy of this technique after laparoscopic colon resection procedures.