[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"trauma-abdomen\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:trauma-abdomen":28},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,4,0,[8,50,76,107],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":16,"sex":17,"minAge":18,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":19,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":23,"briefSummary":25,"conditions":26,"keywords":31,"overallStatus":37,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":38,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":39,"startDateStruct":42,"completionDateStruct":44,"leadSponsor":46,"locationsCount":49},"100617116","5-minute-hot-trauma-ct-rates-of-detection-study-100617116",false,"NCT07314437","5 Minute 'HOT' Trauma CT Rates Of Detection Study","Randomised Trial (With Integrated Pilot) Evaluating Whether a Standardised Approach, Educational Package (Including Checklist) Improve Recognition of Major Life-threatening Injuries in the Hot Reporting of Trauma Scans","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Medical professionals involved in trauma image review.\n* This includes clinicians who are emergency department doctors, radiologists and other specialties.\n* Non-radiologist clinicians will be participating completing the hot reports, radiologists will be evaluating their submissions and assessing their accuracy.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Unable to review CT imaging due to lack of previous experience or disability that prevents them from doing so.\n* Under 18 years old.\n* Not a medical professional or clinician.",true,"ALL","18 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},300,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[24],"NA","Many injured patients receive urgent CT imaging to identify major injury. CT imaging of trauma patients is often time critical and the accurate detection of life-threatening findings on this CT is essential. Often following a scan a radiologist is not immediately available to review the imaging, however other members of the trauma team have access to the imaging and may be in a position to provide a \"hot\" report. In this study we aim to demonstrate if an educational intervention with a checklist improves accuracy of the hot report.",[27,28,29,30],"Trauma (Including Fractures)","Trauma Abdomen","Trauma Blunt","Trauma Centers",[32,33,34,35,36],"Trauma","CT","Hot Report","Radiology","HOT-RODs","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-01-08",{"date":40,"type":41},"2026-01-12","ACTUAL",{"date":43,"type":21},"2026-01-30",{"date":45,"type":21},"2027-02-28",{"name":47,"class":48},"University Hospital Plymouth NHS Trust","OTHER",1,{"id":51,"slug":52,"hasResults":11,"nctId":53,"briefTitle":54,"officialTitle":55,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":56,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":57,"maxAge":58,"enrollmentInfo":59,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":61,"briefSummary":63,"conditions":64,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":65,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":66,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":67,"startDateStruct":69,"completionDateStruct":71,"leadSponsor":73,"locationsCount":75},"100323436","phase-4-ceus-for-blunt-abdominal-trauma-in-children-100323436","NCT03490929","CEUS for Blunt Abdominal Trauma in Children","Contrast Enhanced Ultrasonography for Blunt Abdominal Trauma Imaging in Children","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Hemodynamically stable (defined as not needing massive transfusion protocol and not undergoing an emergent surgical procedure within the next hour)\n2. History of or suspicion for blunt abdominal trauma\n3. Abdominal CT ordered or obtained\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. History of allergic reaction to Lumason, sulfur hexaflouride, sulfur hexafluoride lipid microsphere components, or other ingredients in Lumason (polyethylene glycol, distearoylphosphatidylcholine (DSPC), dipalmitoylphosphatidylglycerol sodium (DPPG-Na), palmitic acid)\n2. Co-existing penetrating abdominal trauma\n3. Known congenital or acquired heart disease","0 Years","17 Years",{"count":60,"type":21},146,[62],"PHASE4","Children with blunt abdominal trauma often get a CT as the first line imaging to evaluate for intra-abdominal organ injury. CT scans have some downsides with regard to radiation exposure, costs, and need for transport. Contrast enhanced ultrasonography has recently shown some promise as a way to detect intra-abdominal organ injury and may be able to replace the need for conventional CT scanning, without the need for ionizing radiation and the ability to be performed at the bedside.",[28],"RECRUITING","2025-12-16",{"date":68,"type":41},"2025-12-17",{"date":70,"type":41},"2018-06-01",{"date":72,"type":21},"2026-12-31",{"name":74,"class":48},"Children's Hospital of Philadelphia",2,{"id":77,"slug":78,"hasResults":11,"nctId":79,"briefTitle":80,"officialTitle":81,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":82,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":83,"maxAge":84,"enrollmentInfo":85,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":87,"briefSummary":88,"conditions":89,"keywords":93,"overallStatus":37,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":98,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":99,"startDateStruct":101,"completionDateStruct":103,"leadSponsor":105,"locationsCount":4},"100603927","evaluation-of-liver-resection-using-harmonic-scalpel-versus-cavitron-ultrasonic-surgical-aspirator-cusa-100603927","NCT07142876","Evaluation Of Liver Resection Using Harmonic Scalpel Versus Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA).","Evaluation Of Liver Resection Using Harmonic Scalpel Versus Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA)","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients needing liver resection in normal liver and cirrhotic liver child-pough A and early B\n* Age \\> 6 and \\\u003C 70 years old\n* One or two small (5 cm or less) hepatic lesions confined to the liver with no extra hepatic involvement\n* Patients with -ve markers for viral hepatitis\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients with age \\\u003C 6 or \\> 70 years old\n* liver cirrhosis Child-pough C\n* liver cell failure\n* very large lesions including most of the liver tissue\n* hepatic lesions with vascular invasion\n* evidence of metastasis in cases with HCC\n* patients with +ve markers for viral hepatitis","6 Years","70 Years",{"count":86,"type":21},50,[24],"Evaluation Of Liver Resection Using Harmonic Scalpel Versus Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA)\n\nIntroduction The mode of parenchymal transection in hepatic resection has been a topic of great debate for decades. Many resections have now evolved into laparoscopic , and robotic-assisted procedures to limit morbidity. Morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection has progressively improved over the years due to improved equipment, operative technique \\[3\\], and anesthetic management. Prior to 1980, mortality rates were reported to be in the 10-20% range with many deaths related to perioperative hemorrhage. Now perioperative mortality has dropped significantly to approximately 5%.\n\nThe clamp-crush technique, first reported in 1974, has been used for decades and remains the standard means of parenchymal division for many surgeons. Control of intraoperative hemorrhage has been one of the principle technical problems in advancing liver surgery. Excess blood loss and intraoperative blood transfusions have been shown to be associated with increased perioperative mortality and morbidity including an increased rate of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence . Transfusions are also associated with increased infections and with increased cost. Costs of blood transfusions were recently examined in surgical patients.\n\nMany devices are now available to surgeons for division of the liver parenchyma in both open and minimally invasive surgery including: the CUSA (Tyco Healthcare, Mansfield, MA), Harmonic Scalpel (Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH, USA), Ligasure (Valley Lab, Tyco Healthcare, Boulder, CO, USA), Tissue Link (Salient Surgical Technologies, Portsmouth, NH), water-jet dissection, radiofrequency, microwave assisted resection, vascular staplers, and others In this study, we looked at the TissueLink bipolar sealer device that was used in combination with the CUSA in group 1 termed the CUSA\u002FTissueLink group, and the Harmonic Scalpel in the group 2 termed Harmonic Scalpel\u002FTissueLink. The TissueLink uses radiofrequency energy focused near the end of the device for electrocautery and a low volume saline drip that produces ohmic heat causing precoagulation of hepatic parenchyma. The saline keeps the temperature at or below 100 C to avoid eshcar formation ultimately helping prevent delayed biliary leak and hemorrhage. The hemostatic effects of TissueLink are a result of its disruption of the collagen in blood vessels causing closing of the lumen .\n\nThe CUSA, a commonly used device in hepatic resection, was used in combination with the TissueLink in this study. We previously described this combination of devices reporting a shorter length of hospital stay, decreased operative time, and decreased intraoperative blood transfusion . CUSA uses ultrasonic energy to fragment and aspirate parenchymal tissue. This exposes biliary as well as vascular structures that may then be closed in a variety of ways at the surgeon's discretion. It allows for a precise transection plane allowing preservation of normal hepatic tissue .\n\nThe Harmonic Scalpel, used in this study in combination with the TissueLink, utilizes ultrasonic vibration of two blades causing destruction of hydrogen bonds. This disruption of hydrogen bonds causes protein denaturization coagulating small vessels of 3 mm diameter. The parenchyma is also cut when the blades move in a saw-like fashion In this study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of two different techniques described above for the division of the hepatic parenchyma in order to improve perioperative outcomes.",[90,91,92,28],"Liver Resection","Liver Tumours","Liver Transplant Disorder",[94,95,96,97],"liver resection","CUSA","Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator","Harmonic","2025-08-26",{"date":100,"type":41},"2025-08-27",{"date":102,"type":21},"2025-08-22",{"date":104,"type":21},"2026-12-30",{"name":106,"class":48},"Sohag University",{"id":108,"slug":109,"hasResults":11,"nctId":110,"briefTitle":111,"officialTitle":112,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":113,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":18,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":115,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":117,"briefSummary":118,"conditions":119,"keywords":124,"overallStatus":37,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":132,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":133,"startDateStruct":135,"completionDateStruct":137,"leadSponsor":139,"locationsCount":49},"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":116,"type":21},250,[24],"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.",[120,121,122,28,123],"Laparotomy","Dehiscence Wound","Surgical Site Infections","Emergency General Surgery",[125,126,127,128,129,130,131],"fascial dehiscence","surgical site infection","laparotomy","ex-lap","STRATAFIX","PDS","triclosan-coated barbed suture","2023-11-27",{"date":134,"type":41},"2023-11-28",{"date":136,"type":21},"2024-01-01",{"date":138,"type":21},"2027-01-31",{"name":140,"class":48},"University of Southern California"]