search
Back to results

Loop Drainage Versus Incision and Drainage for Abscesses

Primary Purpose

Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous Tissue

Status
Withdrawn
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Loop drainage
Incision and drainage
Sponsored by
Gary Peksa
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous Tissue focused on measuring incision and drainage, loop drainage, soft tissue infection, abscess

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 100 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adults age 18 years or older
  • Abscess is considered simple, purulent, and cutaneous
  • Abscess is deemed amenable to outpatient drainage

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Inability to speak English
  • Abscess location of breast or face
  • Pilonidal abscesses
  • Concurrent use of chemotherapy or steroids
  • Allergy to sulfa/trimethoprim or lidocaine
  • Inability to provide consent
  • Incarcerated patients
  • Inability to give a valid contact number or email address
  • Presence of multiple abscesses
  • Abscess size less than 2 cm
  • Pregnant patients
  • History of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency
  • History of Steven Johnson's Syndrome
  • Patients with fever greater than 100.4 Fahrenheit

Sites / Locations

    Arms of the Study

    Arm 1

    Arm 2

    Arm Type

    Active Comparator

    Experimental

    Arm Label

    Control

    Intervention

    Arm Description

    Incision and drainage.

    Loop drainage.

    Outcomes

    Primary Outcome Measures

    Rate of Clinical Cure
    Defined as healing of the abscess without the need for further clinical intervention (change in antibiotics, repeat drainage, or admission)

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    Intra-Procedure Pain Rating
    Numeric rating scale of 0-10. A rating of 0 indicates no pain. A rating of 10 indicates the worst pain.
    Time to Complete Drainage
    Time from initial incision to application of dry dressing
    Patient Satisfaction: Numeric rating scale
    Likert scale of 1-5. A rating of 1 indicates poor satisfaction. A rating of 5 indicates the best satisfaction.
    Provider Satisfaction: Numeric rating scale
    Likert scale of 1-5. A rating of 1 indicates poor satisfaction. A rating of 5 indicates the best satisfaction.
    Recurrence Rate
    New lesions requiring drainage
    Cosmetic Healing
    Visual analog scale of 1-100 mm. A score of 1 indicates poor cosmetic healing. A score of 100 indicates excellent cosmetic healing.

    Full Information

    First Posted
    April 9, 2019
    Last Updated
    July 1, 2019
    Sponsor
    Gary Peksa
    Collaborators
    Brooke Army Medical Center, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Loyola University, Kaiser Permanente, Stony Brook University
    search

    1. Study Identification

    Unique Protocol Identification Number
    NCT03911518
    Brief Title
    Loop Drainage Versus Incision and Drainage for Abscesses
    Official Title
    Loop vs. Traditional Incision and Drainage: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial
    Study Type
    Interventional

    2. Study Status

    Record Verification Date
    July 2019
    Overall Recruitment Status
    Withdrawn
    Why Stopped
    Pilot study not necessary as new data has become available.
    Study Start Date
    July 2019 (Anticipated)
    Primary Completion Date
    November 2019 (Anticipated)
    Study Completion Date
    December 2019 (Anticipated)

    3. Sponsor/Collaborators

    Responsible Party, by Official Title
    Sponsor-Investigator
    Name of the Sponsor
    Gary Peksa
    Collaborators
    Brooke Army Medical Center, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Loyola University, Kaiser Permanente, Stony Brook University

    4. Oversight

    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
    No
    Data Monitoring Committee
    No

    5. Study Description

    Brief Summary
    This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial of loop drainage versus traditional incision and drainage in adult patients presenting to the emergency department.
    Detailed Description
    BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE The usual care in the United States for abscess management is generally incision and drainage. There have been various techniques described for incision and drainage: 1. incision and drainage followed by healing by secondary intention, 2. Incision and drainage followed by primary closure, and 3. Loop drainage (more recently, the topic of this study) with subsequent loop removal and healing by secondary intention. The treatment failure rate for traditional incision and drainage is variable, but can range from 10-30%. Costs associated with treatment failure are between $1,000 and $2,0005. The relatively high failure rate associated with traditional incision and drainage has led to research into less invasive, more effective techniques. In 2010, the loop drainage technique was first described. This technique consists of making 2 small incisions on either end of the abscess cavity followed by pulling a small drain through the incisions and then tying the drain in place. It remains in place and is removed once no further drainage is noticed (usually in 10-14 days). Original studies were primarily done by pediatric surgeons using vessel loops or penrose drains. In 2014, the concept of using the cuff from the bottom of a sterile glove was introduced. This allows for this technique to easily be used with materials found easily in any emergency department. The amount of research done with this technique on adults is limited. To date, only two studies with a total of 109 patients evaluated loop drainage in adults. One of these studies was retrospective and included only 63 patients. The other prospective study was limited in that it included only 46 patients. Given the demonstration of increased clinical cure rate in pediatric populations and the potential for increased clinical cure rates in adults, more study into this topic is worthwhile to determine the optimal approach to adult subcutaneous abscess drainage. STUDY DESCRIPTION This study will be a pilot study and multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating loop drainage compared to conventional incision and drainage in adults older than 18 who have simple, purulent, cutaneous abscesses deemed amenable to outpatient incision and drainage by the attending clinician. Study participants will be randomized to investigational vs control arm in a 1:1 ratio (Randomization will occur via blocked randomization in blocks of 10). Enrollment will occur primarily when investigators are on shift (convenience sampling). This study will not be blinded, however, observer bias will be reduced by having an investigator blinded to treatment assignment determine the cosmetic healing rate at 90 days. Participants will receive drainage of their abscess (either conventional or loop). For conventional drainage, the wound will be incised with a #11 blade scalpel along the point of maximal fluctuance, approximately 2-3 cm, and then all loculations bluntly dissected with a set of Kelly clamps. After drainage of pus, the wound will be loosely packed with gauze. Afterwards, a dry dressing will be placed and the patient will be instructed to change the external dressing twice daily or every time it becomes saturated. Patients randomized to standard care will be instructed to remove the packing at 48 hours after incision and drainage. Loop drainage will occur via 2 small incisions, approximately 2 cm, with the cuff from the base of a sterile glove pulled through and then tied off3. The patient will be instructed to move this cuff back and forth three times daily and cover it with a dry dressing. Once the abscess drainage procedure is complete, the participant will complete a questionnaire asking about pain during procedure and satisfaction with the procedure. All participants will be discharged with a prescription trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) 160mg/800mg, two tablets by mouth twice daily for ten days. All participants will be instructed to return to the emergency department and contact the PI if they have any worsening signs of infection. Between 10 and 14 days after the initial procedure, patients will follow up in the emergency department for wound recheck. At this visit, the maximal diameter of both erythema and swelling will be measured, and a questionnaire will be administered regarding wound care satisfaction, repeat medical visits, fevers, and any side effects of either the procedure or antibiotic therapy. Loop participants will have the loop removed at the follow up visit. Participants will be called at 30 days for data collection on abscess recurrences. Patient will be asked to return for a wound recheck and submit a photo of the wound, to assess cosmetic appearance of wound at 90 days.

    6. Conditions and Keywords

    Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
    Abscess of Skin and/or Subcutaneous Tissue
    Keywords
    incision and drainage, loop drainage, soft tissue infection, abscess

    7. Study Design

    Primary Purpose
    Treatment
    Study Phase
    Not Applicable
    Interventional Study Model
    Parallel Assignment
    Masking
    Outcomes Assessor
    Masking Description
    An investigator blinded to treatment assignment determine the cosmetic healing rate at 90 days
    Allocation
    Randomized
    Enrollment
    0 (Actual)

    8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

    Arm Title
    Control
    Arm Type
    Active Comparator
    Arm Description
    Incision and drainage.
    Arm Title
    Intervention
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Loop drainage.
    Intervention Type
    Procedure
    Intervention Name(s)
    Loop drainage
    Intervention Description
    Loop drainage will occur via 2 small incisions, approximately 2 cm, with the cuff from the base of a sterile glove pulled through and then tied off.
    Intervention Type
    Procedure
    Intervention Name(s)
    Incision and drainage
    Intervention Description
    The wound will be incised with a #11 blade scalpel along the point of maximal fluctuance, approximately 2-3 cm, and then all loculations bluntly dissected with a set of Kelly clamps. After drainage of pus, the wound will be loosely packed with gauze.
    Primary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Rate of Clinical Cure
    Description
    Defined as healing of the abscess without the need for further clinical intervention (change in antibiotics, repeat drainage, or admission)
    Time Frame
    Days 10-14
    Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Intra-Procedure Pain Rating
    Description
    Numeric rating scale of 0-10. A rating of 0 indicates no pain. A rating of 10 indicates the worst pain.
    Time Frame
    Day 0
    Title
    Time to Complete Drainage
    Description
    Time from initial incision to application of dry dressing
    Time Frame
    Day 0
    Title
    Patient Satisfaction: Numeric rating scale
    Description
    Likert scale of 1-5. A rating of 1 indicates poor satisfaction. A rating of 5 indicates the best satisfaction.
    Time Frame
    Days 0, 10-14
    Title
    Provider Satisfaction: Numeric rating scale
    Description
    Likert scale of 1-5. A rating of 1 indicates poor satisfaction. A rating of 5 indicates the best satisfaction.
    Time Frame
    Day 0
    Title
    Recurrence Rate
    Description
    New lesions requiring drainage
    Time Frame
    Day 30
    Title
    Cosmetic Healing
    Description
    Visual analog scale of 1-100 mm. A score of 1 indicates poor cosmetic healing. A score of 100 indicates excellent cosmetic healing.
    Time Frame
    Day 90

    10. Eligibility

    Sex
    All
    Minimum Age & Unit of Time
    18 Years
    Maximum Age & Unit of Time
    100 Years
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    No
    Eligibility Criteria
    Inclusion Criteria: Adults age 18 years or older Abscess is considered simple, purulent, and cutaneous Abscess is deemed amenable to outpatient drainage Exclusion Criteria: Inability to speak English Abscess location of breast or face Pilonidal abscesses Concurrent use of chemotherapy or steroids Allergy to sulfa/trimethoprim or lidocaine Inability to provide consent Incarcerated patients Inability to give a valid contact number or email address Presence of multiple abscesses Abscess size less than 2 cm Pregnant patients History of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency History of Steven Johnson's Syndrome Patients with fever greater than 100.4 Fahrenheit
    Overall Study Officials:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Gillian Schmitz, MD
    Organizational Affiliation
    Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator

    12. IPD Sharing Statement

    Plan to Share IPD
    No
    Citations:
    PubMed Identifier
    25435407
    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.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    24928539
    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.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    24973422
    Citation
    Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, Dellinger EP, Goldstein EJ, Gorbach SL, Hirschmann JV, Kaplan SL, Montoya JG, Wade JC; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Jul 15;59(2):e10-52. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu444. Erratum In: Clin Infect Dis. 2015 May 1;60(9):1448. Dosage error in article text.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    21376200
    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.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    27621209
    Citation
    Gaszynski R, Punch G, Verschuer K. Loop and drain technique for subcutaneous abscess: a safe minimally invasive procedure in an adult population. ANZ J Surg. 2018 Jan;88(1-2):87-90. doi: 10.1111/ans.13709. Epub 2016 Sep 12.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    28162873
    Citation
    Ozturan IU, Dogan NO, Karakayali O, Ozbek AE, Yilmaz S, Pekdemir M, Suner S. Comparison of loop and primary incision & drainage techniques in adult patients with cutaneous abscess: A preliminary, randomized clinical trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Jun;35(6):830-834. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2017.01.036. Epub 2017 Jan 22.
    Results Reference
    background
    PubMed Identifier
    28917436
    Citation
    Gottlieb M, Peksa GD. Comparison of the loop technique with incision and drainage for soft tissue abscesses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Emerg Med. 2018 Jan;36(1):128-133. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2017.09.007. Epub 2017 Sep 10.
    Results Reference
    background

    Learn more about this trial

    Loop Drainage Versus Incision and Drainage for Abscesses

    We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs