300,000+ clinical trials. Find the right one.

401 active trials for Surgery

Pre- vs Postoperative Thromboprophylaxis for Liver Resection

Thromboprophylaxis for liver surgery can be commenced either preoperatively or postoperatively. Despite a clear trade-off between thrombosis and bleeding in liver surgery patients, there is no international consensus when thrombosis prophylaxis should be commenced in patients undergoing liver surgery. As far as we know, there are no prospective randomized trials in this field, and current guidelines are unfortunately based on very low quality evidence, that is, a few retrospective studies and expert opinion. Both American and European thromboprophylaxis guidelines for abdominal cancer surgery support the preoperative initiation of thromboprophylaxis, but these guidelines do not specifically address the increased bleeding risk associated with liver surgery. On the contrary, Dutch guidelines recommend postoperative thromboprophylaxis only, because of lack of evidence for preoperative thromboprophylaxis. Traditionally, many liver surgery units have been reluctant in using preoperative thromboprophylaxis due to the potentially increased risk of bleeding complications. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Guidelines recommend preoperative thromboprophylaxis in liver surgery, but the guidelines provide no supporting evidence for this recommendation. Overall, the amount of evidence is scarce and somewhat contradictory in this clinically relevant field of thromboprophylaxis in liver surgery. The aim of this study is to compare pre- and postoperatively initiated thromboprophylaxis regimens in liver surgery in a randomized controlled trial.

Start: February 2021
Quality of Life and High-Risk Abdominal Cancer Surgery

The investigators plan to measure the changes of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 6 months after the following high-risk oncological abdominal surgery: gastrectomy, esophagectomy, pancreatectomy and hepatectomy. The investigators will measure the HRQoL using the validated EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire before and at 6 months after the surgery. The investigators will identify phenotypes of HRQoL changes (improvement, stability and deterioration) at 6 months after surgery. The second aim is to assess the regret of the patient at 6 months regarding his/her decision to undergo surgery. The investigators will also assess the regret of the next of kin at 6 months regarding the decision to undergo surgery. This descriptive, prospective, observational, single-centre cohort study aims to: identify phenotypes of HRQoL changes after abdominal surgical oncology (improvement, stability and deterioration); assess the regret of patients regarding their decision to undergo surgical oncology at 6 months; assess the regret of the next of kin regarding the decision of the patient to undergo surgical oncology at 6 months. The investigators will include patients scheduled for the following elective abdominal cancer surgery: gastrectomy; esophagectomy; pancreas resection and hepatectomy. The investigators will assess HRQoL using the validated EORTC QLQ-C30 Summary Score before and 6 months after surgery. The cut-offs for the three phenotypes of HRQoL changes will be defined using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 10 points. The investigators will assess regret using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS) at 6 months after surgery. The expected results are: The investigators can identify phenotypes of HRQoL changes after surgical oncology using the EORTC QLQ-C30 Summary Score; the investigators will describe the distribution of these phenotypes and will find an association with the pre-existing frailty. The investigators can describe the extent of the regret of the patient and of the next of kin at 6 months using the DRS. The investigators will observe an association between the DRS score at 6 months and the HRQoL Summary Score change. The investigators will not observe a relationship between the DRS score of patients and next-of-kins.

Start: November 2020
Efficacy of Preoperative Prehabilitation With a Home-based Supervised Exercise Program Against an Unsupervised Exercise Program for Frail Elderly Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery

Singapore's population is ageing, and more elderly people are undergoing elective major surgeries. Frail elderly experience greater functional decline and slower recovery in physical function after surgery compared to non-frail elderly. Preoperative prehabilitation aims to enhance both aerobic capacity and physical strength of elderly to attenuate the post-operative decline in physical function. Singapore General Hospital has a bespoke preoperative program - Prehabilitation for Elderly Frail Patients Undergoing Elective Surgeries (PREPARE), where patients receive physiotherapy education and instructions for home-based unsupervised exercise program (uSEP). A hospital-based supervised exercise program had also been established but the take-up rate was low (7.6%) due to barriers such as cost and accessibility. Perioperative supervised exercise training can effect greater gains in functional capacity and muscle strength compared to no supervision. For the elderly with limited transport options to the hospital, home-based supervised programmes may be more convenient compared to hospital-based supervised programmes, but the former is costlier too. Home-interventions may also empower patients with the skills and confidence to maintain their physical fitness at home, which increases their likelihood of exercising after surgery. The investigators propose a prospective single-center randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative prehabilitation with a home-based supervised exercise program (SEP) for frail elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, compared to the mainstay of clinical practice, which is a home-based uSEP.

Start: April 2021
Transanal Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision For Rectal Cancer

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been successfully proven to be a non-inferior alternative regarding resection quality, and oncological outcomes of patients as compared to open surgery in mangy clinical trails. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery is advantageous over open surgery with regard to operative invasiveness, patient's recovery, and wound related complications. Thus, laparoscopic surgery has gained great popularity over the past decades. However, specifically for mid and low rectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery is technically demanding, which sometimes leads to high morbidity and unsatisfactory resection quality, especially in challenging cases such as bulky mesorectum, enlarged prostate, irradiated pelvis, etc. Under this circumstance, transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) , the so called "down-to-up" alternative, has emerged as a promising solution to these problems in recent years and more and more small studies have proven the feasibility and advantages of this technique, making it become a hot topic among both literature and conferences. However, TaTME is still at early birth, higher-level evidences, either multicentric, or comparative study with conventional surgery is strikingly lacking. Thus the investigators conduct this multicentre randomised clinical trial, comparing transanal TME versus laparoscopic TME for mid and low rectal cancer, aiming to prove the hypothesis that TaTME may achieve better resection quality and result in non-inferior oncological outcome, as well as short term operative morbidity and mortality.

Start: April 2016
The Perioperative Management of Anti-thrombotic Drug Registry

The purpose of the study is to investigate contemporary antiplatelet therapy management of patients referred for non-cardiac and cardiac surgical procedures while on chronic therapy with antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant drugs. These medications are routinely prescribed to patients following percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), known diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, prosthetic heart valves, transcatheter aortic valve procedures, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, peripheral artery revascularization procedures etc. This is a highly relevant and understudied clinical area with no randomized clinical trials or large-scale prospective evidence, except for bridging data with unfractionated heparin (UFH). Most recommendations and guidelines are based on consensus expert opinion. While post-PCI patients, especially those treated with coronary stents are placed on dual antiplatelet agents such as aspirin and P2Y12 blocking agents, performing surgery while on these agents increase the risk of hemorrhagic complications, discontinuation or interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been associated with adverse ischemic outcomes secondary to myocardial infarction (MI) and stent thrombosis (ST). Moreover, there is only no clear consensus regarding continuation of aspirin perioperatively in these patients. As in the case of PCI, similar arguments for juxtaposed risks (thrombosis vs. bleeding) can be made for a myriad of clinical situations where chronic (?45 days) use antiplatelet and anticoagulant medication (together referred to as antithrombotic drugs) are indicated. In addition, there are many procedures and surgeries with different bleeding and ischemic risks that cannot be studies through dedicated randomized studies and a registry collection of such information could provide valuable guidance to providers and patients worldwide.

Start: January 2018