[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"emergency-general-surgery\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:emergency-general-surgery":24},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,3,0,[8,38,65],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":18,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":4,"briefSummary":22,"conditions":23,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":25,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":26,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":27,"startDateStruct":30,"completionDateStruct":32,"leadSponsor":34,"locationsCount":37},"100608506","robotic-emergency-general-surgery-program-100608506",false,"NCT07202442","Robotic Emergency General Surgery Program","Beginning of Robotic Emergency General Surgery Program at Nice University Hospital","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Acute cholecystitis with predictors of intraoperative difficulty.\n* Bowel obstruction requiring bowel resection (in presence of CT signs of visceral compromise: poor enhancement of bowel loops, pneumoperitoneum).\n* Complicated acute diverticulitis with perforation and peritonitis.\n* Penetrating abdominal trauma with hemodynamic stability requiring surgery (e.g., bowel resection-anastomosis).\n* Right or left colectomy for other etiologies.\n* Splenectomy in hemodynamically stable or embolized patients.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Hemodynamic instability.\n* Uncomplicated acute appendicitis.\n* Acute cholecystitis without predictors of intraoperative difficulty.","ALL","18 Years",{"count":19,"type":20},30,"ESTIMATED","OBSERVATIONAL","Background Abdominal surgical emergencies account for 20-30% of visceral surgery procedures. However, these emergencies are responsible for more than half of the morbidity in our discipline, with a surgical site infection rate four times higher than in elective surgery, and significantly higher rates of surgical revision and conversion (PMID: 34225343 and 27016997 and 27120712). In cases where minimally invasive surgery is converted to laparotomy, patients are three times more likely to be admitted to critical care units (PMID: 39966134). Visceral surgery currently represents the largest and fastest-growing discipline in robotic surgery. Robotic management of emergency general surgery has been described in the literature for several years, particularly in the United States. Robotic surgery allows a shift from open procedures to minimally invasive techniques or simplifies complex laparoscopic procedures. Several literature reviews and meta-analyses report decreased laparotomy rates, reduced perioperative morbidity, and shorter average length of hospital stay (PMID: 38446451 and 38918109). Abdominal surgical emergencies account for 20-30% of visceral surgery procedures. However, these emergencies are responsible for more than half of the morbidity in our discipline, with a surgical site infection rate four times higher than in elective surgery, and significantly higher rates of surgical revision and conversion (PMID: 34225343 and 27016997 and 27120712). In cases where minimally invasive surgery is converted to laparotomy, patients are three times more likely to be admitted to critical care units (PMID: 39966134). Visceral surgery currently represents the largest and fastest-growing discipline in robotic surgery. Robotic management of emergency general surgery has been described in the literature for several years, particularly in the United States. Robotic surgery allows a shift from open procedures to minimally invasive techniques or simplifies complex laparoscopic procedures. Several literature reviews and meta-analyses report decreased laparotomy rates, reduced perioperative morbidity, and shorter average length of hospital stay (PMID: 38446451 and 38918109).Primary Objective:To assess the implementation of a robotic surgery program for emergency visceral procedures (proof of feasibility in our university hospital). Secondary Objectives: Reduce perioperative morbidity, Reduce the rate of laparotomy, Reduce the average length of hospital stay (LOS), Reduce postoperative admission to critical care, Reduce operative time.",[24],"Emergency General Surgery","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2025-09-29",{"date":28,"type":29},"2025-10-01","ACTUAL",{"date":31,"type":20},"2026-01-01",{"date":33,"type":20},"2027-12-31",{"name":35,"class":36},"Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice","OTHER",1,{"id":39,"slug":40,"hasResults":11,"nctId":41,"briefTitle":42,"officialTitle":42,"acronym":43,"eligibilityCriteria":44,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":45,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":4,"briefSummary":47,"conditions":48,"keywords":51,"overallStatus":25,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":56,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":57,"startDateStruct":59,"completionDateStruct":61,"leadSponsor":63,"locationsCount":4},"100590791","peri-operative-surgical-care-optimisation-for-patients-requiring-emergency-surgery-100590791","NCT06972017","Peri-Operative Surgical Care Optimisation for Patients Requiring Emergency Surgery","PERI-SCOPES","Group 1 and 2: EmLap and NoLap patients (up to 30 participants)\n\nPatient inclusion\u002Fexclusion criteria should mirror NELA inclusion\u002Fexclusion criteria and NELA NoLap guidelines. NELA is the \"National Emergency Laparotomy Audit\" which recruits patients in Wales and England and there inclusion\u002Fexclusion criteria are widely accepted for use in Emergency General Surgery research.\n\nInclusion criteria\n\n* Age \\>65 years old\n* Able to communicate in English\n* Cognitively able to complete the survey\u002Finterviews\n* Able to provide informed, voluntary consent\n* First line treatment is expedited, urgent or emergency abdominal surgery on the gastrointestinal tract\n* Surgery can be laparoscopic or open approach\n\nExclusion criteria\n\n* Age \\\u003C65 years old\n* NoLaps should be excluded if management involved interventional radiology or endoscopic procedures\n* Patients who are offered a period of conservative treatment are not automatically NoLap if surgery may ultimately be offered\n* Diagnosis of dementia or long-standing cognitive impairment\n* Elective laparotomy\u002Flaparoscopy\n* Diagnostic laparotomy\u002Flaparoscopy where no subsequent procedure is performed (however, if no procedure is performed because of inoperable pathology, then include)\n* All surgery involving the appendix or gallbladder, including any surgery relating to complications\n* Non-elective hernia repair without bowel resection or division of adhesions\n* Non-elective formation of colostomy or ileostomy\n* Trauma surgery (blunt or penetrating), vascular surgery, obstetric\u002Fgynaecological surgery or transplant surgery\n* Surgery for pathology of oesophagus, spleen, renal tract, kidneys, liver, gallbladder and biliary tree, pancreas or urinary tract\n\nGroup 3: Families\u002FSupporters (up to 30 participants) Inclusion criteria\n\n* Identified by the patient participant (only approached if nominated by patient)\n* Age \\>18 years old\n* Able to communicate in English\n* Cognitively able to complete the survey\u002Finterviews\n* Able to provide informed, voluntary consent\n\nExclusion criteria\n\n* Age\\\u003C18 years old\n* Lack of patient consent to family\u002Fsupporter involvement\n\nGroup 3: Consultants (interview:12-20 participants\u002Fsurvey: minimum 52 participants) Inclusion criteria\n\n* Key decision-makers will be identified in workstream 1 (likely: surgeons, intensivists and anaesthetists)\n* Post-CCT (Certificate of Completion of Training)\n* Participate in active on-call for EGS in a UK-based Hospital where they make decisions in EGS regularly\n\nExclusion criteria\n\n• Consultants not done \\>2 years of on-call",{"count":46,"type":20},112,"Emergency General Surgery (EGS) is an umbrella term which describes all patients presenting to hospital with an acute abdominal problem. Patients can have various conditions requiring emergency operations. EGS is one of the most common reasons for an emergency admission in the UK.\n\nEGS is often referred to as \"high-risk\" surgery. For those patients who do survive after their surgery, many struggle with frailty and new medical problems resulting in a reduction in their quality of life (QoL).\n\nThe goal of this observational study is to explore QoL and decision-making in EGS through questionnaires and interviews with patients, families\u002Fsupporters and consultants working in EGS.\n\nWorkstream 1 will involve patients and families\u002Fsupporters. Workstream 2 will involve consultants.\n\nThe investigators are interested in patients who have either undergone EGS (EmLaps) or have needed but not undergone EGS (NoLaps). The investigators are interested in exploring participants (patients, families\u002Fsupporters and consultants) experiences of this EmLap vs NoLap decision.\n\nThe main questions the investigators want to answer are:\n\n* What is the long-term QOL of EmLap\u002FNoLap patients and their family\u002Fsupporters?\n* How do patients and their family\u002Fsupporters describe their experience of decision-making in EGS?\n* What are consultant's experiences and views on decision-making in EGS?\n\nWorkstream 1 participants (patients and family members\u002Fsupporters) will complete questionnaires and take part in interviews at different time-points following their decision (1 month\u002F3 months\u002F 9-12 months). Questionnaires and interviews will explore QoL and decision-making in EGS.\n\nConsultant participants will be asked to complete an online survey and\u002For take part in an individual interview. Both will explore decision-making in EGS.",[49,50,24],"Quality of Life (QOL)","Decision Making",[52,53,54,55,24],"Quality of Life","Decision-making","NoLap","EmLap","2025-05-06",{"date":58,"type":29},"2025-05-14",{"date":60,"type":20},"2025-06",{"date":62,"type":20},"2027-12",{"name":64,"class":36},"NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde",{"id":66,"slug":67,"hasResults":11,"nctId":68,"briefTitle":69,"officialTitle":70,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":71,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":72,"enrollmentInfo":73,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":75,"phases":76,"briefSummary":78,"conditions":79,"keywords":84,"overallStatus":25,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":92,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":93,"startDateStruct":95,"completionDateStruct":97,"leadSponsor":99,"locationsCount":37},"100519428","barbed-suture-vs-non-barbed-closure-for-emergency-exploratory-laparotomy-rct-100519428","NCT06043414","Barbed Suture vs Non-Barbed Closure for Emergency Exploratory Laparotomy RCT","Incisional Surgical Site Infection and Fascial Dehiscence After Abdominal Fascial Closure With Triclosan-Coated Barbed Suture vs Polydioxanone Suture After Emergency Exploratory Laparotomy: A Randomized Control Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* All adult individuals aged 18 years or older who undergo emergent laparotomy via a midline approach for trauma or non-trauma emergency general surgery who undergo complete fascial closure at the time of the index laparotomy operation.\n* Individuals with CDC Class I, II, III and IV type surgical wounds\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Individuals under 18 years of age\n* Individuals with known immune deficiencies\n* Individuals taking chronic immunosuppressive medications\n* Individuals presenting with nosocomial infections\n* Individuals presenting with pre-existing abdominal wall hernia\n* Individuals requiring multiple operations for sequential fascial closure\n* Individuals incarcerated at time of operation\n* Individuals with known preexisting connective tissue disease\n* Individuals with known preexisting ventral abdominal wall hernia\n* Individuals who are pregnant time of operation\n* Individuals who are deceased prior to conclusion of exploratory laparotomy\n* Individuals lost to follow-up or deceased during the first 30 days after laparotomy.","100 Years",{"count":74,"type":20},250,"INTERVENTIONAL",[77],"NA","This randomized control trial aims to compare the efficacy of triclosan-coated barbed suture (TCB) versus conventional non-barbed polydioxanone (PDS) suture in the closure of the abdominal fascia after emergency exploratory laparotomy. The study addresses the common complications of incisional surgical site infections (SSI) and fascial dehiscence (FD) following emergency exploratory laparotomy. The primary objective is to assess the effectiveness of triclosan-coated barbed suture and conventional non-barbed suture in reducing the rates of incisional SSI and FD within 30 days postoperatively. The study population comprises adult patients undergoing emergent laparotomy for traumatic injuries or acute intraabdominal pathology. This prospective, single-blinded randomized control trial will be conducted at Los Angeles General Medical Center. Patients will be randomized to receive either triclosan-coated barbed suture or conventional non-barbed suture for abdominal fascial closure, with a standard closure technique employed. Patients will be followed up for 30 days postoperatively to monitor surgical site infections, fascial dehiscence, and other outcomes. Statistical analysis will be conducted to compare outcomes between the study arms, assessing the efficacy of triclosan-coated barbed suture in reducing the incidence of SSI and FD, along with secondary outcomes.",[80,81,82,83,24],"Laparotomy","Dehiscence Wound","Surgical Site Infections","Trauma Abdomen",[85,86,87,88,89,90,91],"fascial dehiscence","surgical site infection","laparotomy","ex-lap","STRATAFIX","PDS","triclosan-coated barbed suture","2023-11-27",{"date":94,"type":29},"2023-11-28",{"date":96,"type":20},"2024-01-01",{"date":98,"type":20},"2027-01-31",{"name":100,"class":36},"University of Southern California"]