18 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
The purpose of this study to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of povidone-iodine (PVI) irrigation in perforated appendicitis, to investigate barriers and facilitators to future implementation of PVI irrigation, and to collect costs and clinical and patient-reported outcomes among patients with non-perforated appendicitis.
Patients admitted at Marshall Health - Cabell Huntington Hospital with the diagnosis of acute perforated appendicitis or appendicular abscess larger than 3cm will be admitted and treated with percutaneous drainage and the IV antibiotics for 3 days. If the patient becomes afebrile and has a normal WBC, the patient will stay in the hospital for a single day with oral antibiotics and then will be discharged to continue oral antibiotics for seven more days. If the patient is febrile or has elevated WBC either after the 3 days of IV antibiotics or the single day of oral antibiotics, the patient will complete a course of IV antibiotics for a total of seven days. If still febrile, the patient will undergo further assessment. A follow up will be conducted \~10 days after discharge from the hospital to determine if the patient is still symptomatic or asymptomatic. Asymptomatic patients will be followed up every month for 3 months, while symptomatic patients will be treated as needed. After 12 weeks, subjects will be randomized to interval appendectomy vs observation. Follow-ups will occur every 3 months for 12 months, when the study will be concluded.
The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of intra-abdominal irrigation with povidone-iodine (PVI) versus usual care on the rate of 30-day postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses (IAA) and to determine the effect of PVI irrigation versus usual care on 30-day hospital length of stay(LOS) and 30-day readmissions.
The proposed study will investigate whether antibiotic irrigation using a gentamicin/clindamycin solution during laparoscopic appendectomy is superior in preventing postoperative wound infections and IAA in perforated appendicitis compared to suction without irrigation. This will be the first prospective study to compare these two options in pediatric PA.
After appendix has been removed for perforated appendicitis, patients will receive postoperative antibiotics. In the last 5 years, the literature has transitioned from a 3 -drug therapy to 2-drug therapy. Now there is a recent literature suggesting a single-drug therapy may be safe and adequate. In fact, using zosyn (piperacillin-tazobactam) as a single-drug therapy, there are additional benefits of simplicity, compliance, and lower infectious complications. Currently surgeons are already using both 2-drug regimen (ceftriaxone/metronidazole) and single-drug regimen (zosyn) interchangeable as both are FDA approved and regulated antibiotics for intra-abdominal infection. There is a clear need to compare outcomes between these two options.
The objective of this study is to evaluate two standard post-operative pain regimens routinely used after laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. The investigators hypothesize that the use of intravenous (IV) acetaminophen in addition to IV ketorolac with narcotic pain pump will decrease time to transition off patient/nurse controlled analgesia (PCA) to oral pain medications.
Rationale and Aim: The standard treatment for acute appendicitis in children is appendectomy. An increasing body of evidence from the adult literature suggests that acute appendicitis may be treated effectively with antibiotics alone, avoiding the need for surgery. The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of non-operative treatment of acute appendicitis in children. Study design: Pragmatic, parallel-group, unmasked, non-inferiority multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT). Patient allocation: Children will be randomly allocated (age 5-16 years) with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis to either laparoscopic appendectomy or treatment with antibiotics. Randomization will be performed using stratification to ensure equal distribution between groups of presenting clinical and demographic features that may influence outcome including gender, duration of symptoms and center. Interventions: One group of children will undergo laparoscopic appendectomy that is the current standard treatment for children with acute appendicitis. The other group will be treated with intravenous antibiotics. A treatment pathway specifically designed for this study will be used. Primary Outcome: To be meaningful to parents of, and clinicians treating, children with acute appendicitis, the primary outcome is treatment failure defined as: (i) any additional intervention related to appendicitis requiring general anesthesia within 1 year of randomization (including recurrence of appendicitis after non-operative treatment, which we will treat with appendectomy) or (ii) negative appendectomy. Secondary outcomes are: (i) complications; (ii) time to discharge following randomization; (iii) number and duration of hospital admissions. Sample size and data analysis: The proposed RCT has a 20% non-inferiority margin to test the null hypothesis that treatment with antibiotics is inferior to appendectomy. Based on data from collaborating centers and a pilot study that we have performed, we expect recruitment of 978 children in total (90% power) over 19 months allowing for drop out. Follow-up will be for 12 months.
The goal of this study is to compare the efficacy of PVI irrigation to no irrigation for decreasing postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses in children with perforated appendicitis. Additionally, this study aims to verify the safety profile of dilute PVI for intra-abdominal irrigation.
The purpose is to quantify the effect of irrigation during laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis.
The objective of this study is to scientifically evaluate two different management strategies for perforated appendicitis. The hypothesis is that early discharge with oral antibiotic therapy may result in a dramatic decrease in medical care expenses for the patient. The primary outcome variable between the two strategies is abscess rate.
The objective of this study is to scientifically evaluate two different operative strategies for perforated appendicitis with abscess. The hypothesis is that the increased difficulty of early operation is balanced by the immense patient investment with delayed operation.
The purpose of this study is to compare traditional triple antibiotic therapy against dual single day dosing antibiotic therapy in the management of perforated appendicitis in children.
The purpose of this study is to see if chewing gum after surgery for perforated appendicitis will shorten the time of intestinal dysfunction.
To determine the most cost effective way to treat children with perforated appendicitis we will randomize all children presenting with perforated appendicitis to initial operation, with in 24 hours of admission, or to initial antibiotics, with or without percutaneous drainage, and subsequent interval appendectomy after 8 weeks. Our outcomes will include cost, complications, length of stay, and quality of life measures.
This is a randomized study of patients 2-17 years old who are diagnosed with perforated appendicitis and develop an abscess after laparoscopy that is subsequently drained. Patients will be randomized to either receive an 8-day or a 4-day course of antibiotics. The aim of this study is to determine whether duration of antibiotic treatment at discharge demonstrates significant differences in clinical outcomes.
When the appendix becomes infected and inflamed, it is called appendicitis. Sometimes, if the infection and inflammation get worse, the appendix can die or burst, leading to a larger infection or even pus pockets around the appendix. This is called complicated, or perforated, appendicitis. Three common treatments for complicated appendicitis are * appendectomy (removal of the appendix) right away * appendectomy several weeks after the diagnosis * treating the appendicitis without performing an appendectomy This study seeks to determine which of these three approaches is most cost-effective in children with complicated appendicitis.
The exploratory objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of an enhanced recovery protocol that will allow adult patients to be discharged to home on an oral antibiotic regimen for three days following a laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Feasibility will be determined by high compliance and adherence of patients to the postoperative instructions, while safety will be assessed by the incidence of postoperative infectious complications and requirement for re-admission.
This is a phase 3b/4 randomized, open-label, comparative, multicenter study of the safety and efficacy of tigecycline to ceftriaxone sodium plus metronidazole in hospitalized subjects with cIAI (Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infection). Subjects with clinical signs and symptoms of cIAI will be included for enrollment. Subjects will be stratified at randomization for Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation scale (APACHE II) score \< 10 and \> 10. Subjects will be followed for efficacy through the test-of-cure assessment. Safety evaluations will occur through the treatment and post-treatment periods and continue through resolution or stability of the adverse event(s).