Active clinical trials for "Surgical Wound"

To demonstrate that BondEase™ and conventional wound closure devices (CWCD) are the same in terms of cosmesis (appearance) of the repaired wound when these devices are used for closure of surgical and traumatic wounds . To demonstrate safety of BondEase™.

OPSITE Post-Op Visible is a tri-layer dressing made up of a low adherent wound contact layer, lattice shaped absorbent pad and a top film that is waterproof and a bacterial barrier and is coated with a water-based adhesive. The comparator is a standard care treatment regime comprising tape and gauze. This study requires 100 eligible patients which will be recruited from the patients routinely see by the study investigators at each study site. Eligible patients will undergo surgery that results in a surgical wound of 27cm or less that is expected to have low or moderate levels of exudate and will have received at least one randomised study treatment. The primary objective is to compare OPOV and tape/gauze in terms of wear time per patient.

The main objective of this study is to assess the safety and the efficacy of EscharEx in preparing the wound's bed in patients with hard to heal venous leg ulcers, diabetic lower extremity ulcers and traumatic/post operative wounds. This study will be a multi-center, assessor blinded, randomized, controlled study intended to demonstrate superiority of EscharEx debriding treatment over the Gel Vehicle control treatment in patients with hard to heal wounds. 72 + 24 adults with >50% necrotic/slough/fibrin non-viable tissue on a hard to heal wound (venous leg ulcer, diabetic lower extremity ulcer or traumatic/ post operative wound) between 5 cm2 and 200 cm2 (surface area in stage 1) or 3 cm2 - 150 cm2 (in stage 2), will be enrolled into the study. Patients will undergo a 1 week screening period (2 visits) which will include: record of demographics, medical history and concomitant medications, vital signs, physical examination, clinical laboratory tests, wound photography and assessments and questionnaires (wound status and quality of life). During this period wounds will be treated by standard treatment per the decision of the physician. During this screening period, subjects whose study wound size (surface area) decreases by more than 20 percent will be excluded. Following completion of the screening process, eligible patients will be randomized to either EscharEx or Gel vehicle debridement treatments. In stage 1 (72 patients): Treatment will be performed for up to 10 applications or until complete debridement is achieved, whichever occurs first. In stage 2 (24 patients): Treatment will be performed for up to 8 applications or until complete debridement is achieved, whichever occurs first. Following each application the wound will be washed, photographed and assessed for wound size, removal of nonviable tissue and change in granulation tissue (by digital planimetry software), wound status, and safety parameters. Subsequent to each debridement treatment the wound will be dressed with moist-to-moist saline gauze (except when successive 24h or 48h treatments are performed, in the second stage). Following completion of the debridement treatment period, patients will be treated according to standard procedures and evaluated (wound assessments) once a week until complete wound closure for up to 12 weeks from last application (up to 12 visits). Only during the first stage of the study, for patients who achieved wound closure, additional 3 monthly (3 visits) follow- up visits of wound closure recurrence will be conducted. Quality of life (QoL) will be evaluated at the last follow-up visit - 3 months post wound closure follow-up period. For patients who didn't achieve wound closure only the 3 months FU visit will be conducted. For patients enrolled at the second stage, if wound closure was achieved at the 12 weeks follow-up, additional visit will be performed 2 weeks later to confirm wound closure.

This is a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, controlled, multi-center study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RUT058-60 (Group A) as an intra-cavity lavage compared to sterile saline (Group B) in adult subjects undergoing abdominal surgery.

The postoperative period following cesarean is associated with moderate to severe pain that requires a considerable amount of analgesics that carry with them side-effects such as nausea, vomiting, fatigue and immobilization. Several studies have tried, with variable results, to find a more effective analgesia alternative such as infusion of local anesthetics through a catheter in the surgical wound sinus, a practice that has currently been widely used in clinical practice. Despite existing references on its use in the postoperative period following cesareans there continues to be a lack of information on other aspects. The investigators study hypothesis is that the use of levobupivacaine in the surgical wound will reduce the surface of hyperalgesia compared to the control group.

There is limited application of the use of PRP in obstetrics, therefore there is a need for assessment if it is efficacy in improving skin wound healing in cesarean section.

The objective of the trial is to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the Cardiva Mid-Bore Venous Vascular Closure System (VVCS) in sealing femoral venous access sites and providing reduced times to ambulation (TTA) compared with manual compression at the completion of catheter-based procedures performed through 6 - 12 Fr introducer sheaths.

DuraSeal Dural Sealant has been approved as a dural sealant by the FDA for use in cranial and spinal procedures. This study was completed to further evaluate the safety of the DuraSeal Sealant in a post-approval setting as compared to control (defined as methods typically employed by surgeons to seal the dura).

In the past two decades, the femtosecond laser (FSL) technology has been introduced in the corneal refractive surgery filed, and brought a remarkable innovation. It can make tissue dissection through photodisruption and plasma cavitation. Initially, the FSL was used predominantly to make a corneal flap when performing laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), which is followed by stromal ablation using excimer laser. A new surgical technique called femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx) has been developed that uses only FSL to dissect two interfaces to create refractive lenticule and then remove it, which is very similar with LASIK. Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) which is the advanced form of all-in-one FSL refractive technique does not make a corneal flap rather make small incision where the separated refractive lenticule is removed through, and the upper part of the corneal tissue is called cap. Since the clinical outcomes of SMILE were firstly published in 2011, SMILE has been widely used for correction of myopia or myopic astigmatism worldwide. SMILE provides excellent visual outcomes and has advantages including a lesser decrease in corneal sensitivity and absence of flap related complications compared to LASIK. Because corneal ectasia after refractive surgery is the one of most terrifying complication, corneal biomechanics has been drawn interests to many researchers and clinicians. Theoretically, SMILE may preserve corneal biomechanics better than LASIK, because the anterior stroma which is stiffer than the posterior stroma remains intact in SMILE. However, there are some controversies, because previous studies investigating corneal biomechanics have been reported inconsistent outcomes, although SMILE has been reported equal to or better than LASIK. Weakening of corneal biomechanics and iatrogenic corneal ectasia have also been reported after SMILE. In addition, because the tensile strength of cornea gradually decreases as it goes backwards, creating deeper refractive lenticule may result in stronger cornea by preserving more of anterior lamellae of the cornea. But on the contrary, leaving sufficient residual stromal bed has been known to be important in preventing iatrogenic corneal ectasia, hence creating thin cap may be effective and desirable. Although many researches have been investigated the difference in biomechanical response between SMILE and LASIK, there are few studies evaluating the dependence of cap thickness on postoperative biomechanical strength after SMILE. El-Massry et al. reported that the thicker cap thickness showed higher postoperative corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) with Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, NY) which may not be optimal for a clear description of the viscosity and elasticity of the cornea,3 ; however, other studies have been presented that there is no significant difference of corneal biomechanics with cap thickness. There is no comparative human study using Corvis ST (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) despite presence of the study using Corvis ST in rabbit eyes. Furthermore, no prospective study with large number of subjects has been performed to date.

A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial to Investigate the Effect of Natrox Topical Oxygen Wound Therapy on the Healing rates of Diabetic Foot Ulcers.