Loading clinical trials...
Loading clinical trials...
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Antibiotic Cement Bead Pouch Versus Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for the Management of Severe Open Tibia Fracture Wounds
The Beads vs Vac trial is a multi-centre randomized controlled trial of 312 participants with a severe open tibia fracture requiring multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries. Eligible participants will be randomized to receive either an antibiotic bead pouch or negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for their temporary open fracture wound management. Outcomes will be assessed at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months post-surgery. The primary outcome will be a composite outcome to evaluate clinical status six months after randomization. Components of the composite outcome will be hierarchically assessed in the following order: 1) all-cause mortality, 2) injury-related amputation of the lower extremity, 3) unplanned reoperation to manage wound complications, infection, or delayed fracture healing, and 4) clinical fracture healing as assessed using the Functional IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) instrument. The secondary outcomes will independently assess the four components of the primary outcome. This is a Phase III trial.
The primary objective of early open fracture management is to minimize the risk of complications. In severe cases, multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries are required to overcome the severe wound contamination, to reassess the evolving tissue injury, and/or to temporize and plan appropriate soft tissue coverage with a skin graft or muscle flap. When multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries are needed, there is uncertainty on how the open fracture wound should be managed between procedures. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), commonly known as a Wound VAC, is the preferred method of open fracture wound management for most surgeons. Opponents of NPWT believe that NPWT desiccates the open fracture wound and rapidly removes any local antibiotics placed in the wound during surgery. Instead of using NPWT, they place temporary non-absorbable antibiotic-laden cement beads into the open fracture wound and seal it with a large occlusive dressing. This wound management strategy is known as an antibiotic cement bead pouch, or more commonly a Bead Pouch. Mounting evidence questions the effectiveness of NPWT to prevent open fracture complications. Additionally, emerging comparative studies suggest the antibiotic bead pouch may significantly reduce the risk of infection compared to NPWT. This trial seeks to fill this critical knowledge gap. The primary objective of this trial is to determine if the antibiotic bead pouch, compared to NPWT application, is more effective at reducing open tibia fracture complications. The primary outcome will be a composite outcome to evaluate clinical status six months after randomization. Components of the composite outcome will be hierarchically assessed in the following order: 1) all-cause mortality, 2) injury-related amputation of the lower extremity, 3) unplanned reoperation to manage wound complications, infection, or delayed fracture healing, and 4) clinical fracture healing as assessed using the Functional IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) instrument. The secondary objectives will independently assess the four components of the primary outcome. The trial population includes patients 18 years and older with a severe open tibia fracture requiring more than one irrigation and debridement and being treated with internal or external fixation for definitive fracture management. Patients who have contraindications to the NPWT or local intrawound antibiotics will be excluded. 312 participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either an intraoperative antibiotic bead pouch or negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). Participants will receive their allocated wound management strategy at the conclusion of their first irrigation and debridement procedure. Participants will have follow-up assessments at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months post-fracture. The primary outcome will be a composite outcome to evaluate clinical status six months after randomization. Components of the composite outcome will be hierarchically assessed in the following order: 1) all-cause mortality, 2) injury-related amputation of the lower extremity, 3) unplanned reoperation to manage wound complications, infection, or delayed fracture healing, and 4) clinical fracture healing as assessed using the Functional IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) instrument. The secondary outcomes will independently assess the four components of the primary outcome. An Adjudication Committee will review all primary and secondary endpoints and a Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) will review all safety events.
Age
18 - No limit years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No
Dignity Health Chandler Regional Medical Center
Chandler, Arizona, United States
University of California, Davis
Davis, California, United States
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California, United States
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Los Angeles, California, United States
University of California, Irvine
Orange, California, United States
Yale University
New Haven, Connecticut, United States
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida, United States
University of Miami
Miami, Florida, United States
Indiana University
Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
University of Maryland, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Start Date
November 5, 2023
Primary Completion Date
March 31, 2027
Completion Date
October 1, 2027
Last Updated
March 10, 2026
312
ESTIMATED participants
Antibiotic Cement Bead Pouch
DRUG
Negative Pressure Wound Therapy
DEVICE
Lead Sponsor
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Collaborators
Data Source & Attribution
This clinical trial information is sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
Modifications: This data has been reformatted for display purposes. Eligibility criteria have been parsed into inclusion/exclusion sections. Location data has been geocoded to enable distance-based search. For the authoritative and most current information, please visit ClinicalTrials.gov.
Neither the United States Government nor Clareo Health make any warranties regarding the data. Check ClinicalTrials.gov frequently for updates.
View ClinicalTrials.gov Terms and Conditions