Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01347697

Collagen Implant (Biological Mesh) Versus GM Flap for Reconstruction of Pelvic Floor After ELAPE in Rectal Cancer

The trial compares two different techniques for reconstruction of the lesser pelvic floor after an extended abdominoperineal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer. The alternative reconstruction techniques in the trial are:

* a technique using a gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap or * a technique using an acellular porcine collagen implant (biological mesh)

The primary endpoint will be physical performance six months from operation and our hypothesis is that the technique using an acellular porcine implant will cause less impaired physical performance compared to the technique using a myocutaneous flap.

The study is interventional, randomized and by definition a comparative effectiveness research project.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Extended abdominoperineal excision (EAPE) of the rectum is the potentially curative operation for rectal carcinomas too low for primary anastomosis, especially if the levator and sphincter musculature is infiltrated. This enlarged operation, when the levator musculature is excised en bloc with the rectum, creates a large defect. Primary closure is often not possible, and reconstruction with prosthetic material or a myocutaneous flap is necessary to avoid a perineal hernia. Implantation of a collagen sheet (biological mesh) has shown preliminary good results and on the other hand, the use of a gluteus myocutaneous flap is routine in many clinics. There is a lack of scientific evidence to prove which method is better for the reconstruction of the lesser pelvic floor.

The current study aims to compare the two reconstruction techniques.

Centres that treat locally advanced rectal cancers with the extended abdominoperineal excision of rectum (EAPE)[Holm et al 2007] can participate provided that:

  • the operative technique is standardized according to the study protocol
  • the centre/unit has resources for examinations of participants by a physiotherapist or a nurse
  • the centre/unit has one investigator in charge of the study locally
  • the centre/unit has an operative volume that enables at least 6 patients to be included/randomised during the anticipated three year study phase for inclusions

Centres that do not operate the rectal cancers included in this study can participate by arranging the preoperative examination and physical tests as well as follow-up of patients that are referred to other centres for the operation. In these cases the operating centre cares for the randomisation, operation and start of postoperative rehabilitation while the study follow-up and final rehabilitation can be completed at the patients' primary referral hospital. The primary referral hospital needs a site investigator in charge of study patients just like centres that do the operations.

Patients with primary or recurrent cancers of rectal origin can be included but individual patients can be included only once. Concomitant therapies are allowed and preoperative or postoperative radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy may be given or not according to local multidisciplinary team (MDT) decisions.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Adult (18 years or older) rectal cancer patients where wide resection of pelvic floor muscles together with rectum and anal canal have made reconstruction of pelvic floor necessary i.e. primary suture of pelvic floor in the midline is not possible. Resection of coccyx is optional.

Exclusion criteria

  • Age less than 18 years
  • Very large resections including partial resection of sacrum and patients considered for bilateral flap reconstruction
  • Large concomitant resection of vaginal wall where total (vaginal) wound closure is not an option
  • Expected survival less than one year at operation
  • Patient do not sign informed consent document

Treatment and study plan

Reconstruction with an acellular porcine dermal collagen implant (biological mesh)

Procedure

Reconstruction of floor of lesser pelvis with an acellular porcine dermal collagen implant (biological mesh) after extended excision of rectum including levator muscles in advanced low rectal cancer.

Reconstruction with a gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap

Procedure

Reconstruction of floor of lesser pelvis with an gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap after extended excision of rectum including levator muscles in advanced low rectal cancer.

Primary outcomes

  1. Performance in Timed-Stands Test

    Time frame: 6 months after surgery

    Timed-Stands test is a combined measure of physical performance depending on at least muscle strength, balance, tenderness of gluteal skin and muscles and co-ordination of motion.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in physical performance

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery compared with preoperative results

    Change in Timed-Stands Test performance

  2. Primary wound healing assessed with the Southampton Wound Assessment Scale

    Time frame: 3 months from operation

    The Southampton Wound Assessment Scale is a validated measure of wound healing after surgery.

  3. Complications according to classification by Dindo-Clavien

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery

    The Dindo-Clavien classification of surgical complications is a validated instrument.

  4. Proportion of persistent perineal sinus or fistula

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery

    Proportion of patients with the wound healing defect of all patients in the particular study arm

  5. Ability to sit

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery

    Ability to sit is graded with a scale in three degrees.

  6. Change of pain and discomfort in gluteal region measured with VAS

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery compared to preoperative

    A standard visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0-100 mm is used.

  7. Pain and discomfort in gluteal region, spot measures with VAS

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery

    A standard visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0-100 mm is used.

  8. Change of quality of life measured with EQ-5D and EORTC forms C30 and CR29

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery compared to preoperative

    EQ-5D and EORTC are validated quality of life instruments

  9. Quality of life spot measures

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery

    Quality of life at specified time points

  10. Length of hospital stay

    Time frame: Six months after surgery

    Length of index hospital stay in days.

  11. Costs of surgical treatment

    Time frame: 12 months after surgery

    Hospital expenses converted to US$

  12. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs gained)

    Time frame: 12 months after surgery

    Quality adjusted life year (QALY) is calculated using an quality of life utility index at repeated time points. The utility index is adjusted for the relevant background population.

  13. Local recurrence

    Time frame: Five years after surgery

    Local recurrence of rectal cancer detected by clinical or radiological investigation

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Umeå University

Other

Collaborators

  • The Swedish Society of Medicine
  • Västerbotten County Council, Sweden

Registry information

Official study title

Nordic Extended Abdominoperineal Excision (NEAPE) Study, a RCT Comparing a Porcine Acellular Dermal Collagen Implant (Biological Mesh) With a Gluteus Maximus Flap for Reconstruction of Pelvic Floor After ELAPE in Rectal Cancer

Acronym: NEAPE

Important dates

Study start
2011
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
May 4, 2011
Registry last updated
Oct 3, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.