Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=105 Randomized Prevention

Prevena™ vs Dermabond in Groin Wound Infections in Vascular Surgery

Wound Infection

Enrolled (actual)
105
Serious AEs
5.0%
Results posted
Dec 2020
Primary outcome: Primary: Comparison of Healing of Groin Wounds Between Patients Treated With Prevena vs Dermabond — 41; 54 Participants

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Prevena Incision Management System (Device); Dermabond (Device)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
State University of New York at Buffalo
Primary completion
Sep 2019

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Comparison of Healing of Groin Wounds Between Patients Treated With Prevena vs Dermabond
41; 54
SECONDARY
Cost of Care
SECONDARY
Number of Visiting Nurses Home Visits and Physician Office Visits to Assess/Treat Wound Infection
7; 7

Summary

This study evaluates the clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness of Prevena Incision Management System versus Dermabond in preventing groin wound infections in patients who undergo vascular surgery requiring a groin wound. Half of the patients will receive Dermabond and the other half will receive the Prevena Incision Management System for their groin wounds.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • In need of elective vascular procedure requiring ≥8 cm groin incision.
  • Able to provide consent
  • Able to care for wound or have support person to complete wound care
  • Willing to comply with follow-up

Exclusion Criteria

None

View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02836990). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search