Skip to content

Mini-laparotomy Versus Mini Lumbotomy

Prospective Randomized Study of Two Aortic Surgical Approaches: Mini-laparotomy Versus Mini Lumbotomy

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02888613
Acronym
RAMini
Enrollment
206
Registered
2016-09-05
Start date
2018-09-30
Completion date
2020-01-31
Last updated
2018-09-18

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

Conditions

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms, Abdominal Aortic Thrombosis

Keywords

mini-lumbotomy, mini-laparotomy, retroperitoneal approach, transperitoneal approach, abdominal aortic surgery

Brief summary

This study aims to compare the results of two mini invasive surgical approaches in abdominal aortic surgery: mini lumbotomy with retroperitoneal approach versus mini laparotomy with transperitoneal approach. Respiratory and renal functions and recovery of intestinal transit will be assessed after 30 days. The secondary purpose of this study is to assess the life quality and morbi-mortality at 30 days, as well as at 6 and 12 months.

Detailed description

Following abdominal aortic surgery, post-operative outcomes are considered favorable with a rapid recovery of respiratory, renal functions and intestinal transit, with limited cardiac events. Complications are still frequent after the classic open abdominal surgery. In abdominal aortic surgery, mini abdominal incision has been proposed as an alternative to the classic large surgical approach. Two mini surgical approaches are possible: mini lumbotomy with retroperitoneal approach, and mini laparatomy with transperitoneal approach. Previous studies have only compared classic versus mini surgical approaches and many are retrospectives studies. Pain control through the mini-incision surgery allowed early mobilization of patients, improved lung function, reduced muscle loss, and favoured intestinal motility. So far, no study has compared the results of two mini invasive aortic approaches. The aim of this prospective randomized study is to compare two mini-invasive surgical approaches and to determine which of them allows the improvement of surgical outcomes with less morbi-mortality.

Interventions

PROCEDUREmini laparotomy

The patient will be positioned supine. After induction of general anesthesia, a median umbilical incision will be performed. The average length of the incision of the laparotomy will be 10 cm (8-12 cm). The small intestine will be then mobilized medially and held by an orthostatic retractor. Arterial dissection and control as well as bypasses will be performed according to the conventional technique. In case of occlusive disease of the iliac arteries, femoral site will be selected to achieve the distal anastomoses of the bifurcated prosthetic graft.

PROCEDUREmini lumbotomy

After induction of general anesthesia, the patient will be positioned in right lateral decubitus at 45° of the table plane. The incision will be performed from the tip of the eleventh rib with a slightly sloping path to the outer edge of the rectus muscle. The average length of the incision of the laparotomy will be 10 cm (8-12 cm). Abdominal aorta will be approached retroperitoneally. Arterial dissection and control as well as bypasses will be performed according to the conventional retroperitoneal technique. In case of occlusive disease of the iliac arteries, femoral site will be selected to achieve the distal anastomoses of the bifurcated prosthetic graft.

Sponsors

Central Hospital, Nancy, France
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Elective abdominal aortic repair. * Abdominal aneurysm or occlusive aortic disease requiring intervention. * Written consent previously provided by the patient. * Affiliation to social security. * Preliminary medical examination.

Exclusion criteria

* Hostile abdomen. * Juxta renal abdominal aortic aneurysm. * Aneurysmal extension to the iliac arteries. * Concomitant visceral arteries lesions. * Urgent surgery. * Contraindication to surgery.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Respiratory recoveryday 30evaluated with respiratory function test (Sniff nasal inspiratory pressure, SNIP test)
Renal recoveryday 30evaluated by blood creatinine level, uremia and kalemia
Intestinal transit recoveryday 30evaluated by reapparition of gas and transit

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Post-operative pain assessmentday 1with VAS scale
Respiratory recoveryday 1evaluated by SNIP test
Morbi-mortalityafter 6 monthsevaluated by EQ-5D questionnaire
Quality of life assessmentafter 6 monthsby using SF-12 questionnaire
Renal recoveryday 1evaluated by creatinine clearance, uremia and kaliemia
Intestinal recoveryday 1assessment of intestinal transit (stool emission)

Contacts

Primary ContactNicla Settembre, MD, PhD
n.settembre@chru-nancy.fr+33(0)383154384
Backup ContactSergueï Malikov, MD, PhD
s.malikov@chru-nancy.fr+33(0)383153860

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026