Study to Evaluate the Performance of a Sustained Vacuum System
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of the SOMAVAC® 100 Sustained Vacuum System after oncologic resections.
Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
---|---|---|
|
N/A |
Study Design
Arms and Interventions
Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
---|---|
Experimental: Treatment Group All participants receive the SOMAVAC® 100 Sustained Vacuum System |
Device: SOMAVAC® 100 Sustained Vacuum System
The SOMAVAC® 100 is a battery operated device that delivers 100mm/Hg of continuous suction.
|
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- Time with drains [1 - 6 weeks]
Determine the length of time drains were used
- Surgical site related complications [1 week - 1 year]
Evaluate the number of surgical site related complication
Secondary Outcome Measures
- Patient reported usability of the suction device [1week - 1year]
Determine patient reported usability of the suction device with the system usability scale
- Amount of fluid collected [1week - 6 weeks]
Determine the total amount of fluid collected
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
-
Aged 21 years or older;
-
Undergoing mastectomy (uni or bilateral), axillary node resection, or inguinal node resection;
-
Capable of providing informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria:
-
Pregnant or lactating females;
-
Patients on steroids or other immune modulators known to impact healing;
-
Patients who are likely to not complete the study;
-
Patients who, in the opinion of the investigator, are unlikely to comply with the protocol;
-
Patients who have participated in this trial previously and who were withdrawn;
-
Patients with known allergies to contacting materials (i.e. latex, metal, etc.);
-
Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy within the last 3 weeks.
Contacts and Locations
Locations
Site | City | State | Country | Postal Code | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | University of Tennessee Heath Science Center | Memphis | Tennessee | United States | 38106 |
Sponsors and Collaborators
- SOMAVAC Medical Solutions
- University of Tennessee Health Science Center
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Martin D Fleming, MD, University of Tennessee Health Science Center
Study Documents (Full-Text)
None provided.More Information
Publications
- Agrawal A, Ayantunde AA, Cheung KL. Concepts of seroma formation and prevention in breast cancer surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2006 Dec;76(12):1088-95. Review.
- Carruthers KH, Eisemann BS, Lamp S, Kocak E. Optimizing the closed suction surgical drainage system. Plast Surg Nurs. 2013 Jan-Mar;33(1):38-42; quiz 43-4. doi: 10.1097/PSN.0b013e31828425db.
- Durai R, Ng PC. How to insert a perfect chest drain. Acta Chir Belg. 2009 Oct;109(5):652-4.
- Janis JE, Khansa L, Khansa I. Strategies for Postoperative Seroma Prevention: A Systematic Review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Jul;138(1):240-252. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002245. Review.
- Kuroi K, Shimozuma K, Taguchi T, Imai H, Yamashiro H, Ohsumi S, Saito S. Evidence-based risk factors for seroma formation in breast surgery. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2006 Apr;36(4):197-206. Review.
- Lamp S. Closed-suction drain systems in the plastic surgery patient. Plast Surg Nurs. 2011 Oct-Dec;31(4):188-90. doi: 10.1097/PSN.0b013e318238d847. Review.
- Long LC. The home healthcare nurse as a patient. Home Healthc Nurse. 2013 Jan;31(1):47. doi: 10.1097/NHH.0b013e3182778da2.
- Phillips BT, Wang ED, Mirrer J, Lanier ST, Khan SU, Dagum AB, Bui DT. Current practice among plastic surgeons of antibiotic prophylaxis and closed-suction drains in breast reconstruction: experience, evidence, and implications for postoperative care. Ann Plast Surg. 2011 May;66(5):460-5. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31820c0593.
- Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD. Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia. 2012 Apr;16(2):179-83. doi: 10.1007/s10029-011-0879-9. Epub 2011 Sep 9.
- Whitson BA, Richardson E, Iaizzo PA, Hess DJ. Not every bulb is a rose: a functional comparison of bulb suction devices. J Surg Res. 2009 Oct;156(2):270-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.03.096. Epub 2009 May 8.
- DOC-201419 Rev B