Unique ID issued by UMIN | UMIN000029561 |
---|---|
Receipt number | R000033774 |
Scientific Title | A randomized controlled phase III study comparing circular stapler vs modified Collard technique as esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer |
Date of disclosure of the study information | 2017/10/16 |
Last modified on | 2023/04/24 09:47:21 |
A randomized controlled phase III study comparing circular stapler vs modified Collard technique as esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer
Comparision of esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer
A randomized controlled phase III study comparing circular stapler vs modified Collard technique as esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer
Comparision of esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer
Japan |
Thoracic esophageal cancer
Gastrointestinal surgery |
Malignancy
NO
To determine optimal anastomosis after esophagectomy, we compare circular stapler and modified Collard technique
Safety,Efficacy
Confirmatory
Pragmatic
Phase III
Incidence of anastomotic stricture
Incidence of anastomotic leakage
Incidence of postoperative complication
Time of anastomosis
QOL
Interventional
Parallel
Randomized
Individual
Open -no one is blinded
Active
YES
NO
Institution is not considered as adjustment factor.
Central registration
2
Prevention
Maneuver |
anastomosis by circular stapler
modified Collard technique by linear stapler
20 | years-old | <= |
Not applicable |
Male and Female
1)thoracic esophageal cancer without infiltration to cervical esophagus
2)radical esophagectomy with lympha node dissection
3)gastric conduit reconstruction through posterior mediastinal route or retrosternal route
4)cervical anastmosis
5)ECOG Performance status 0 to 1
6)sufficient function of important organs
7)written informed consent
1)Salvage surgery
2)Patients performed preoperative chemoradiotherapy
3)severe complications
4)Patients judged inappropriate for the study by the physicians
100
1st name | Takahiro |
Middle name | |
Last name | Hosoi |
Aichi Cancer Center Hospital
Department of Gastroenterological Surgery
4640021
1-1, Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku, Aichi
052-762-6111
thosoi@aichi-cc.jp
1st name | Takahiro |
Middle name | |
Last name | Hosoi |
Aichi Cancer Center Hospital
Department of Gastroenterological Surgery
4640021
1-1, Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku, Aichi
052-762-6111
thosoi@aichi-cc.jp
Aichi Cancer Center Hospital
Department of Gastroenterological Surgery
Aichi Cancer Center Hospital
Department of Gastroenterological Surgery
Other
Aichi Cancer Center Hospital
1-1, Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku, Aichi
052-762-6111
irb@aichi-cc.jp
NO
愛知県がんセンター中央病院(愛知県)
2017 | Year | 10 | Month | 16 | Day |
https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/icdr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000033774
Unpublished
https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/icdr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000033774
100
Among 100 randomized patients (CS group, n =50; MC group, n =50), anastomotic strictures were observed in 18 (42%) patients in the CS group and in no patients in the MC group.
There were no significant between-group differences in anastomotic leakage (CS group, 7% vs MC group, 8%; P =0.94).
Quality of life domains of dysphagia and choking when swallowing at 3 months after surgery were significantly better in the MC group than in the CS group.
2023 | Year | 04 | Month | 24 | Day |
In total, 157 patients were scheduled to undergo radical esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis using a gastric conduit for treatment of
thoracic esophageal cancer. Fifty-seven patients were excluded from the study because they did not meet the inclusion criteria (n = 47) or refused to participate (n = 10).
The remaining 100 patients were subsequently randomized to the CS group (n = 50) or the MC group (n = 50).
Seven patients in the CS group and 4 patients in the MC group were excluded because the primary endpoint was not available; the remaining 43 and 46 patients, respectively, were analyzed as the FAS.
The patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the CS or MC technique by the minimization method.
The patients was performed using either the CS technique or the MC technique.
The postoperative management was identical for the 2 groups.
After discharge, the patients returned for an outpatient visit once monthly for 3 months. They were thereafter examined at 3 and 6 months after surgery. Upper gastrointestinal
endoscopy was routinely performed at 6 months after surgery or whenever dysphagia developed. BWL and QOL (assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL
questionnaires, C30 and OES18 modules) were measured before surgery and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery.19,20 These measurements were discontinued when recurrence was observed.
no special instruction
The primary endpoint was the incidence of anastomotic stricture. The secondary endpoints included the incidence of postoperative complications(including anastomotic leakage) and quality of life (QoL).
Completed
2017 | Year | 10 | Month | 15 | Day |
2017 | Year | 10 | Month | 15 | Day |
2018 | Year | 01 | Month | 01 | Day |
2020 | Year | 09 | Month | 28 | Day |
2020 | Year | 09 | Month | 30 | Day |
2020 | Year | 09 | Month | 30 | Day |
2021 | Year | 06 | Month | 02 | Day |
2017 | Year | 10 | Month | 15 | Day |
2023 | Year | 04 | Month | 24 | Day |
Value
https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000033774