Irrigation Versus no Irrigation for Cutaneous Abscess

Cutaneous Abscess Clinical Trial

Official title:

Is Routine Irrigation of Cutaneous Abscesses Necessary?

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT01606657
• Other study ID #: 10012010
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: May 21, 2012
• Last updated: May 1, 2017
• Start date: August 2010
• Est. completion date: April 2015

Study information

• Verified date: May 2017
• Source: University of California, San Francisco
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

In this study, the investigators are trying to find out if washing out the abscess (pocket of pus) with fluid will help, instead of only taking out the pus. Your care will be the same as usual, except that you will be selected randomly to have your abscess washed out with fluid, or not.

Description:

Irrigation of the abscess cavity is commonly described as part of the procedure of incision and drainage of cutaneous abscesses (1-4). Despite this, there are no randomized controlled trials that demonstrate the benefit of irrigation in treatment of these abscesses. Potential disadvantages of irrigation include increased procedural time, pain, increased cost with sterile irrigation solutions and materials to capture the irrigation effluent, and increased risk of microbiologic contamination of the surrounding area. The goal of this study is to examine patients undergoing incision and drainage of cutaneous abscesses to determine if irrigation of the abscess cavity affects the need for further interventions.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 201
• Est. completion date: April 2015
• Est. primary completion date: September 2014
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

1. All patients 18 years of age and above

2. Patients that require a cutaneous abscess incision and drainage

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Unable to return for 48-hour followup.

2. Patients being admitted to the hospital or going to the operating room for incision and drainage

3. Pregnant patients

4. Prisoners

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Abscess
• Cutaneous Abscess
• Skin Diseases

Intervention

Procedure:
• Irrigation
The patient will receive irrigation as a part of their wound care

Other:
• No Irrigation
The patient will not receive irrigation as part of their wound care

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	Community Regional Trauma and Burn Center	Fresno	California

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
University of California, San Francisco

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (4)

Abraham N, Doudle M, Carson P. Open versus closed surgical treatment of abscesses: a controlled clinical trial. Aust N Z J Surg. 1997 Apr;67(4):173-6. — View Citation

Llera JL, Levy RC. Treatment of cutaneous abscess: a double-blind clinical study. Ann Emerg Med. 1985 Jan;14(1):15-9. — View Citation

O'Malley GF, Dominici P, Giraldo P, Aguilera E, Verma M, Lares C, Burger P, Williams E. Routine packing of simple cutaneous abscesses is painful and probably unnecessary. Acad Emerg Med. 2009 May;16(5):470-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00409.x. Epub 2009 Apr 10. — View Citation

Stewart MP, Laing MR, Krukowski ZH. Treatment of acute abscesses by incision, curettage and primary suture without antibiotics: a controlled clinical trial. Br J Surg. 1985 Jan;72(1):66-7. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Patients needing further treatment after irrigation for I&D	Percentage of patients needing further treatment i. Further treatment defined as; Repeat I&D; Addition of an antibiotic (as new or to a pre-existing antibiotic); Admission to hospital for cutaneous abscess-related problem; Abscess; Cellulitis; Septic arthritis; Sepsis	7 day phone follow-up
Secondary	VAS is correlated with decreased pain after I&D	1) VAS post procedure pain score	two years