Skip to content

Short Stitch Versus Traditional Suture for the Prevention of Incisional Hernia After Open Hepatectomy

Incisional Hernia Prevention After Open Hepatectomy by Small Tissue Bite Fascial Closure: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04982653
Enrollment
140
Registered
2021-07-29
Start date
2022-01-04
Completion date
2027-02-02
Last updated
2026-05-26

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

Conditions

Liver and Intrahepatic Bile Duct Neoplasm, Metastatic Malignant Neoplasm in the Liver, Primary Malignant Liver Neoplasm

Brief summary

This clinical trial compares two different kinds of surgical closing techniques, short stitch suture or traditional suture, in patients who are having liver tumor surgery. This study may help researchers learn if one technique can lower the chances of developing a hole in the wall of the abdomen (an abdominal hernia) at the incision site better than the other.

Detailed description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To assess whether small bites abdominal wall closure reduces the risk of developing incisional hernia following liver surgery. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare short-term perioperative outcomes between small bites and typical fascial closure technique. II. To assess the hernia incidence rate of short stich versus (vs.) standard closure in subgroups of patients with inverted-L or midline incisions. III. To assess the hernia incidence rate of Kawaguchi-Gayet hepatectomy complexity classifications I/II vs. III (hernia rate by extent of hepatectomy). IV. To assess the hernia incidence rate of preoperative chemotherapy or no preoperative chemotherapy (hernia rate by exposure to preoperative chemotherapy). V. To assess impact of small bites abdominal wall closure on health care quality of life following liver surgery. VI. To assess safety of small tissue bites fascial closure suture technique versus conventional fascial closure following hepatectomy. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I (INTERVENTION): Patients undergo hepatectomy as planned using small bites fascial method for abdominal wall closure. ARM II (CONTROL): Patients undergo hepatectomy as planned using conventional fascial method for abdominal wall closure. After completion of study, patients are followed up at 1-4 weeks, and then at 3, 6, and 12 months.

Interventions

OTHERQuality-of-Life Assessment

Ancillary studies

PROCEDURESurgical Procedure

Undergo hepatectomy using small bites fascial method for abdominal wall closure

Sponsors

M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Patients undergoing hepatectomy for malignant diagnosis (primary or secondary) from 5/1/2021 through 11/1/2024 will be eligible for inclusion in this study * Elective surgery * Age \>= 18 * Planned midline laparotomy incision or inverted-L incision

Exclusion criteria

* Pre-existing abdominal hernia * History of mesh placement at prior laparotomy * Pregnant women

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Radiographic incidence rate of incisional herniaUp to 12 months after surgeryDefinition of incisional hernia will be based on the European Hernia Society: Any abdominal wall gap with or without a bulge in the area of a postoperative scar perceptible or palpable by clinical examination or imaging. Assessment of the primary outcome will occur at 3, 6, and 12 months with a computed tomography scan/magnetic resonance imaging. Scans will be read and assessed for incisional hernia by 3 independent assessors blinded to the allocation. A correlation coefficient will be determined for their assessments. The cumulative incidence rate of incisional hernia at 12 months will be estimated, along with the 95% confidence interval.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Surgical site infectionUp to 90 days after surgery
Surgical site occurrenceUp to 90 days after surgery
Surgical site occurrence requiring procedural interventionUp to 90 days after surgery
Postoperative complicationsUp to 90 days after surgeryPost-operative infection, complication or pain will be assessed using Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test.
Need for reoperationUp to 90 days after surgery
Need for reoperation secondary to complication of abdominal closureUp to 90 days after surgery
Length of hospital stay (postoperatively)Up to 90 days after surgeryWill be compared between the two arms using two-sample t-test or Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Any readmission related to hernia repairUp to 30 days after surgery
Health-related quality of life assessmentUp to 12 months after surgeryWill use linear mixed effect modeling to assess the effects of time, arm as well as the interaction between arm and time.
Incidence of adverse events (AEs)Up to 90 days after surgeryWill be summarized using descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage) by arm, AE type, severity and attribution.

Countries

United States

Contacts

CONTACTTimothy E Newhook, MD
TNewhook@mdanderson.org713-792-6940
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORTimothy E Newhook, MD

M.D. Anderson Cancer Center

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: May 27, 2026