Now Available for Public Comment: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for FDAAA 801 and NIH Draft Reporting Policy for NIH-Funded Trials

Ultrasound-guided Subclavian Vein Puncture Versus Cephalic Vein Dissection for Venous Access Port Implantation

The recruitment status of this study is unknown because the information has not been verified recently.
Verified May 2012 by University of Lausanne Hospitals.
Recruitment status was  Not yet recruiting
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Nicolas DEMARTINES, University of Lausanne Hospitals
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01584193
First received: April 21, 2012
Last updated: May 7, 2012
Last verified: May 2012
  Purpose

The purpose of this study is to compare two different surgical techniques for implementation of totally implantable central venous access ports. Ultrasound-guided suclavian vein puncture is compared to cephalic vein dissection.


Condition Intervention
Vascular Surgical Procedures
Procedure: Ultrasound-guided subclavian vein puncture
Procedure: Cephalic vein dissection

Study Type: Interventional
Study Design: Allocation: Randomized
Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Official Title: Ultrasound-guided Subclavian Vein Puncture Versus Cephalic Vein Dissection for Totally Implantable Venous Access Port Implementation: a Single-center Controlled Randomized Superiority Trial

Resource links provided by NLM:


Further study details as provided by University of Lausanne Hospitals:

Primary Outcome Measures:
  • surgical procedure time [ Time Frame: during surgical procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

Secondary Outcome Measures:
  • primary implementation success rate [ Time Frame: during surgical procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  • overall implementation success rate [ Time Frame: during surgical procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  • technique conversion rate and causes [ Time Frame: during surgical procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  • pain during surgical procedure [ Time Frame: during surgical procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  • pain at 5 days [ Time Frame: 5 days post-procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  • Pain at 30 days [ Time Frame: 30 days post-procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  • Complications rate during surgical procedure [ Time Frame: during surgical procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    catheter malposition, hemorrhage, hemotoma, hemothorax, pneumothorax

  • Complications rate at 5 days [ Time Frame: 5 days post-procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    hematoma, infection, symptomatic venous thrombosis, pneumothorax

  • Complications rate at 30 days [ Time Frame: 30 days post-procedure ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    infection, symptomatic venous thrombosis, pneumothorax, venous access port dysfunction


Estimated Enrollment: 172
Study Start Date: May 2012
Estimated Primary Completion Date: February 2014 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Arms Assigned Interventions
Experimental: US-guided subclavian vein puncture Procedure: Ultrasound-guided subclavian vein puncture
Central venous access port implementation through ultrasound-guided subclavian vein puncture and Seldinger technique
Other Names:
  • US-guided
  • Seldinger technique
Active Comparator: Cephalic vein dissection Procedure: Cephalic vein dissection
Central venous access port implementation through cephalic vein dissection and cutdown
Other Name: Venous cutdown

  Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:   18 Years and older
Genders Eligible for Study:   Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   No
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age > 18
  • Informed consent
  • Need for central venous access port implementation under local anesthesia

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Impaired blood clotting
  • Ongoing antiplatelet drugs therapy, except acetylsalicylic acid
  • Trauma or surgical past history on both shoulder girdles
  • Known central venous thrombosis (subclavian vein, upper vena cava)
  • Known pneumothorax
  • Septic state
  • Agranulocytosis
  Contacts and Locations
Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the Contacts provided below. For general information, see Learn About Clinical Studies.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01584193

Contacts
Contact: Marc Dufour +41795567489 Marc.Dufour@chuv.ch
Contact: Martin Hubner +41795561506 Martin.Hubner@chuv.ch

Locations
Switzerland
University Hospital Lausanne, Department of Visceral Surgery Not yet recruiting
Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland, 1011
Contact: Marc Dufour    +41795567489    marc.dufour@gmail.com   
Sponsors and Collaborators
University of Lausanne Hospitals
Investigators
Study Chair: Nicolas Demartines University Hospital Lausanne, Department of Visceral Surgery
  More Information

No publications provided

Responsible Party: Nicolas DEMARTINES, Professor, University of Lausanne Hospitals
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01584193     History of Changes
Other Study ID Numbers: CHV 46/11
Study First Received: April 21, 2012
Last Updated: May 7, 2012
Health Authority: Switzerland: Ethikkommission

Keywords provided by University of Lausanne Hospitals:
central venous access port
ultrasound-guided venous puncture
suclavian vein
cephalic vein

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on November 25, 2014