8 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
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.
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 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.
This study is being done to compare two types of surgery currently used for rectal cancer. The two types of surgery are laparoscopic-assisted rectal resection and open laparotomy rectal resection. Although laparoscopic-assisted rectal resection is being used for rectal cancer in some medical centers, the effectiveness of this type of surgery compared to open surgery is unknown. The study will compare the safety and effectiveness of the surgeries, recovery from surgery in the hospital, overall recovery from surgery and cancer outcome.
The purpose of this trial is to gather information on the postoperative recovery time and hospital length of stay experienced by patients having laparoscopic surgeries. This trial will also collect data on daily surgical pain and pain medication and how it relates to recovery after surgery. In addition, the investigators will collect data on the use of pain medication and laxatives in patients following laparoscopic large bowel resection.