Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Surgery 1/2003

Open Access 01-12-2003 | Study protocol

Postsurgical pain outcome of vertical and transverse abdominal incision: Design of a randomized controlled equivalence trial [ISRCTN60734227]

Authors: Margot A Reidel, Hanns-Peter Knaebel, Christoph M Seiler, Christine Knauer, Johann Motsch, Norbert Victor, Markus W Büchler

Published in: BMC Surgery | Issue 1/2003

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There are two ways to open the abdominal cavity in elective general surgery: vertically or transversely. Various clinical studies and a meta-analysis have postulated that the transverse approach is superior to other approaches as regards complications. However, in a recent survey it was shown that 90 % of all abdominal incisions in visceral surgery are still vertical incisions. This discrepancy between existing recommendations of clinical trials and clinical practice could be explained by the lack of acceptance of these results due to a number of deficits in the study design and analysis, subsequent low internal validity, and therefore limited external generalisability. The objective of this study is to address the issue from the patient's perspective.

Methods

This is an intraoperatively randomized controlled observer and patient-blinded two-group parallel equivalence trial. The study setting is the Department of General-, Visceral-, Trauma Surgery and Outpatient Clinic of the University of Heidelberg, Medical School. A total of 172 patients of both genders, aged over 18 years who are scheduled for an elective abdominal operation and are eligible for either a transverse or vertical incision. To show equivalence of the two approaches or the superiority of one of them from the perspective of the patient, a primary endpoint is defined: the pain experienced by the patient (VAS 0–100) on day two after surgery and the amount of analgesic required (piritramide [mg/h]). A confidence interval approach will be used for analysis. A global α-Level of 0.05 and a power of 0.8 is guaranteed, resulting in a size of 86 patients for each group. Secondary endpoints are: time interval to open and close the abdomen, early-onset complications (frequency of burst abdomen, postoperative pulmonary complications, and wound infection) and late complications (frequency of incisional hernias). Different outcome variables will be ranked by patients and surgeons to assess the relevance of possible endpoints from the patients' and surgeons' perspective.

Conclusion

This is a randomized controlled observer and patient-blinded two-group parallel trial to answer the question if the transverse abdominal incision is equivalent to the vertical one due to the described endpoints.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Nies C, Celik I, Lorenz W, Koller M, Plaul U, Krack W, Sitter H, Rothmund M: [Outcome of minimally invasive surgery. Qualitative analysis and evaluation of the clinical relevance of study variables by the patient and physician]. Chirurg. 2001, 72: 19-28. 10.1007/s001040051262.CrossRefPubMed Nies C, Celik I, Lorenz W, Koller M, Plaul U, Krack W, Sitter H, Rothmund M: [Outcome of minimally invasive surgery. Qualitative analysis and evaluation of the clinical relevance of study variables by the patient and physician]. Chirurg. 2001, 72: 19-28. 10.1007/s001040051262.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Greenall MJ, Evans M, Pollock AV: Midline or transverse laparotomy? A random controlled clinical trial. Part I: Influence on healing. Br J Surg. 1980, 67: 188-190.CrossRefPubMed Greenall MJ, Evans M, Pollock AV: Midline or transverse laparotomy? A random controlled clinical trial. Part I: Influence on healing. Br J Surg. 1980, 67: 188-190.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Greenall MJ, Evans M, Pollock AV: Midline or transverse laparotomy? A random controlled clinical trial. Part II: Influence on postoperative pulmonary complications. Br J Surg. 1980, 67: 191-194.CrossRefPubMed Greenall MJ, Evans M, Pollock AV: Midline or transverse laparotomy? A random controlled clinical trial. Part II: Influence on postoperative pulmonary complications. Br J Surg. 1980, 67: 191-194.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Stone HH, Hoefling SJ, Strom PR, Dunlop WE, Fabian TC: Abdominal incisions: transverse vs vertical placement and continuous vs interrupted closure. South Med J. 1983, 76: 1106-1108.CrossRefPubMed Stone HH, Hoefling SJ, Strom PR, Dunlop WE, Fabian TC: Abdominal incisions: transverse vs vertical placement and continuous vs interrupted closure. South Med J. 1983, 76: 1106-1108.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Almenara R, Cabrer C, de Lacy AM, Sust M, Taura P, Fuster J, Grande L, Pera M, Sentis J: Subcostal incision versus midline laparotomy in gallstone surgery: a prospective and randomized trial. Br J Surg. 1988, 75: 473-475.CrossRefPubMed Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Almenara R, Cabrer C, de Lacy AM, Sust M, Taura P, Fuster J, Grande L, Pera M, Sentis J: Subcostal incision versus midline laparotomy in gallstone surgery: a prospective and randomized trial. Br J Surg. 1988, 75: 473-475.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference van 't Riet M, Steyerberg EW, Nellensteyn J, Bonjer HJ, Jeekel J: Meta-analysis of techniques for closure of midline abdominal incisions. Br J Surg. 2002, 89: 1350-1356. 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2002.02258.x.CrossRef van 't Riet M, Steyerberg EW, Nellensteyn J, Bonjer HJ, Jeekel J: Meta-analysis of techniques for closure of midline abdominal incisions. Br J Surg. 2002, 89: 1350-1356. 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2002.02258.x.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Armstrong PJ, Burgess RW: Choice of incision and pain following gallbladder surgery. Br J Surg. 1990, 77: 746-748.CrossRefPubMed Armstrong PJ, Burgess RW: Choice of incision and pain following gallbladder surgery. Br J Surg. 1990, 77: 746-748.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Grantcharov TP, Rosenberg J: Vertical compared with transverse incisions in abdominal surgery. Eur J Surg. 2001, 167: 260-267. 10.1080/110241501300091408.CrossRefPubMed Grantcharov TP, Rosenberg J: Vertical compared with transverse incisions in abdominal surgery. Eur J Surg. 2001, 167: 260-267. 10.1080/110241501300091408.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference POI clinical practice preliminary data, Paris 13th April 2003 GlaxoSmithKline. 2003 POI clinical practice preliminary data, Paris 13th April 2003 GlaxoSmithKline. 2003
11.
go back to reference Guillou PJ, Hall TJ, Donaldson DR, Broughton AC, Brennan TG: Vertical abdominal incisions--a choice?. Br J Surg. 1980, 67: 395-399.CrossRefPubMed Guillou PJ, Hall TJ, Donaldson DR, Broughton AC, Brennan TG: Vertical abdominal incisions--a choice?. Br J Surg. 1980, 67: 395-399.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rucinski J, Margolis M, Panagopoulos G, Wise L: Closure of the abdominal midline fascia: meta-analysis delineates the optimal technique. Am Surg. 2001, 67: 421-426.PubMed Rucinski J, Margolis M, Panagopoulos G, Wise L: Closure of the abdominal midline fascia: meta-analysis delineates the optimal technique. Am Surg. 2001, 67: 421-426.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Halasz NA, Torrance C: Vertical versus Horizontal laparotomies. Archives of Surgery. 1964, 88: 911-914.CrossRefPubMed Halasz NA, Torrance C: Vertical versus Horizontal laparotomies. Archives of Surgery. 1964, 88: 911-914.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Geissner E: Die Schmerzempfindungs-Skala (SES). 1996, Hogrefe, Verlag für Psychologie Geissner E: Die Schmerzempfindungs-Skala (SES). 1996, Hogrefe, Verlag für Psychologie
15.
go back to reference Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG: The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001, 357: 1191-1194. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3.CrossRefPubMed Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG: The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001, 357: 1191-1194. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Postsurgical pain outcome of vertical and transverse abdominal incision: Design of a randomized controlled equivalence trial [ISRCTN60734227]
Authors
Margot A Reidel
Hanns-Peter Knaebel
Christoph M Seiler
Christine Knauer
Johann Motsch
Norbert Victor
Markus W Büchler
Publication date
01-12-2003
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Surgery / Issue 1/2003
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2482
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-3-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2003

BMC Surgery 1/2003 Go to the issue