Risk Evaluation and Surveillance of Complications in UppEr GI and HPB Surgery

Risk Evaluation and Surveillance of Complications in UppEr GI and HPB Surgery - RESCUE

Status

Recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00037909

Enrollment

376

Registered

2025-12-02

Start date

2026-03-23

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-03-30

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

postoperative complications

Interventions

Group 1: In the intervention group, patients are admitted to special monitor beds in the normal ward. Vital parameters (RR, HR, AF, SpO2) are continuously recorded via inpatient monitoring (MX450 incl

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: - Consent to participate in the study - Legal capacity of the patient - Elective surgery on the pancreas, liver, or esophagus - Transfer from an anesthesiological monitoring unit (PACU/IMC/IOI) to a normal ward if normal ward criteria are met

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: - Withdrawal of consent - Desire to terminate the study - Refusal by patient - Language barrier - Intensive inpatient therapy due to organ failure prior to randomization - Injury to both ear canals, hearing aids on both sides - Presence of a palliative treatment situation

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The primary endpoint is the recording of the postoperative course using the Comprehensive Complication Index up to the 30th postoperative day. It is calculated based on the grading of postoperative complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
• Exploratory presentation of complications according to CDC in the nine domains of the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) • Necessity of readmission to an anesthesiological monitoring ward (IMC, intensive care) (yes/no) and duration (in days) • Earlier detection of critical conditions through monitor surveillance • Duration of intervention (continuous monitoring in normal ward) • Frequency of MET deployment • Reduction in the severity of complications during the continuous monitoring interval • Quality of continuous monitoring (artifact rates, monitor-free time) • Length of hospital stay (in days) • Rehospitalization rate • Quality of life after 6 months (WHODAS 2.0, EQ-5D-5L) • 6-month mortality • Quality of recovery early postoperatively (QoR-15 (26)) • Cumulative activity and mobility in the postoperative phase • Complication recording according to classifications • Recording of postoperative delirium incidence	—

Measure

Time frame

• Exploratory presentation of complications according to CDC in the nine domains of the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) • Necessity of readmission to an anesthesiological monitoring ward (IMC, intensive care) (yes/no) and duration (in days) • Earlier detection of critical conditions through monitor surveillance • Duration of intervention (continuous monitoring in normal ward) • Frequency of MET deployment • Reduction in the severity of complications during the continuous monitoring interval • Quality of continuous monitoring (artifact rates, monitor-free time) • Length of hospital stay (in days) • Rehospitalization rate • Quality of life after 6 months (WHODAS 2.0, EQ-5D-5L) • 6-month mortality • Quality of recovery early postoperatively (QoR-15 (26)) • Cumulative activity and mobility in the postoperative phase • Complication recording according to classifications • Recording of postoperative delirium incidence

—

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactCatherina Bubb

Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin

catherina.bubb@uniklinik-ulm.de+49 731 500 55421

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Apr 4, 2026