Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous Tissue Clinical Trial
Official title:
Evaluation of Loop Drainage Technique Versus Standard Incision and Drainage for Treatment of Simple Soft Tissue Abscesses
Verified date | December 2021 |
Source | University of Maryland, Baltimore |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
In the Emergency Department (ED), patients frequently seek medical treatment for cutaneous abscesses. Traditional incision and drainage (I&D), with or without packing of cutaneous abscesses has long been the accepted standard of care. This procedure is often very painful for the patient. Additionally, compliance with wound care and follow-up can present barriers to proper care and healing. Research has suggested that incision and loop drainage of an abscess may be another effective treatment for simple cutaneous abscess. Thus far, research into this procedure has been limited to the pediatric population with small sample sizes. In these previous studies, this technique was found to be an effective and less painful treatment for abscesses. Research has not been done in the adult population using this procedure. If this procedure is found to be as effective and less painful in the adult population, then it should be considered as a potential preferred I&D method for cutaneous abscess in the ED.
Status | Terminated |
Enrollment | 5 |
Est. completion date | February 1, 2018 |
Est. primary completion date | February 1, 2018 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: 1. 18 years or older 2. Presents to ED with simple cutaneous abscess 3. Provides informed consent. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Under 18 years of age 2. Abscess too small for performance of procedure 3. Signs of systemic infection 4. Need for hospitalization 5. Previously treated for current abscess 6. Clinician determines abscess would not be amenable to drainage by loop technique 7. Patients known to be pregnant 8. Incarcerated patients 9. Students / Employees of the facility 10. Presence of any other condition(s) that the investigator feels makes the patient unsuitable for study inclusion. |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
United States | University of Maryland Medical Systems | Baltimore | Maryland |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
University of Maryland, Baltimore |
United States,
Kushnir VA, Mosquera C. Novel technique for management of Bartholin gland cysts and abscesses. J Emerg Med. 2009 May;36(4):388-90. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.05.019. Epub 2008 Nov 26. — View Citation
Ladd AP, Levy MS, Quilty J. Minimally invasive technique in treatment of complex, subcutaneous abscesses in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Jul;45(7):1562-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.03.025. — View Citation
Ladde JG, Baker S, Rodgers CN, Papa L. The LOOP technique: a novel incision and drainage technique in the treatment of skin abscesses in a pediatric ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2015 Feb;33(2):271-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.10.014. Epub 2014 Oct 16. — View Citation
McNamara WF, Hartin CW Jr, Escobar MA, Yamout SZ, Lau ST, Lee YH. An alternative to open incision and drainage for community-acquired soft tissue abscesses in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2011 Mar;46(3):502-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.08.019. — View Citation
Taira BR, Singer AJ, Thode HC Jr, Lee CC. National epidemiology of cutaneous abscesses: 1996 to 2005. Am J Emerg Med. 2009 Mar;27(3):289-92. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2008.02.027. — View Citation
Thompson DO. Loop drainage of cutaneous abscesses using a modified sterile glove: a promising technique. J Emerg Med. 2014 Aug;47(2):188-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2014.04.035. Epub 2014 Jun 11. — View Citation
Tsoraides SS, Pearl RH, Stanfill AB, Wallace LJ, Vegunta RK. Incision and loop drainage: a minimally invasive technique for subcutaneous abscess management in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Mar;45(3):606-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.06.013. — View Citation
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Procedure failure rate | Determining the difference in failure rates between the study group and control group. Treatment failure is a composite outcome defined as having the presence of any of the following: requiring a 2nd incision and drainage procedure, a patient that requires administration of antibiotics after the initial treatment period due to worsening clinical status, a patient that requires hospitalization after the initial treatment period due to worsening clinical status. | 5 -7 days after procedure | |
Secondary | Difference in pain associated with the procedure using a visual analog pain scale | To evaluate the difference in pain between the experimental and control groups associated with the procedure using a visual analog pain scale (0-100). | Measured after the procedure on day 1 | |
Secondary | Patient Satisfaction using a visual analog pain scale | To measure the difference in patient satisfaction with overall treatment between the study and control groups using the visual analog scale (0-100). | 5-7 days after procedure |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT02443272 -
Comparison of Loop Drainage Versus Incision and Drainage for Abscesses in Children
|
N/A | |
Withdrawn |
NCT03911518 -
Loop Drainage Versus Incision and Drainage for Abscesses
|
N/A |