Search

Background: Annually, more than 90000 surgical procedures of the thyroid gland are performed in Germany. strategies aimed at reducing the duration of the surgical procedure are relevant to patients and the health care system especially in the context of reducing costs. However, new techniques for quick and safe hemostasis have to be tested in clinically relevance randomized controlled trials before a general recommendation can be given. The current standard for occlusion of blood vessels in thyroid surgery is ligatures. Vascular clips may be a safe alternative but have not been investigated in a large RCT. Methods/design: CLIVIT (Clips versus Ligatures in Thyroid Surgery) is an investigator initiated, multicenter, patient-blinded, two-group parallel relevance randomized controlled trial designed by the Study Center of the German Surgical Society. Patients scheduled for elective resection of at least two third of the gland for benign thyroid disease are eligible for participation. After surgical exploration patients are randomized intraoperatively into either the conventional ligature group, or into the clip group. The primary objective is to test for a relevant reduction in operating time (at least 15 min) when using the clip technique. Since April 2004, 121 of the totally required 420 patients were randomized in five centers. Discussion: As in all trials the different forms of bias have to be considered, and as in this case, a surgical trial, the role of surgical expertise plays a key role, and will be documented and analyzed separately. This is the first randomized controlled multicenter relevance trial to compare different vessel occlusion techniques in thyroid surgery with adequate power and other detailed information about the design as well as framework. If significant, the results might be generalized and may change the current surgical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The insertion of a Totally Implantable Access Port (TIAP) is a routinely employed technique in patients who need a safe and permanent venous access. The number of TIAP implantations is increasing constantly mainly due to advanced treatment options for malignant diseases. Therefore it is important to identify the implantation technique which has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient. Study design: A single-centre, randomized, controlled superiority trial to compare two different TIAP implantation techniques. Sample size: 160 patients will be included and randomized intraoperatively. Eligibility criteria: Age equal or older than 18 years, patients scheduled for primary elective implantation of a TIAP in local anaesthesia and a signed informed consent. Primary endpoint: Primary success rate of the randomized technique. Intervention: Venae Sectio in combination with the Seldinger Technique (guide wire and a peel away sheath) will be used to place a TIAP. Reference treatment: Conventional Venae Section will be used with a direct insertion of the TIAP without guide wire or peel away sheath. Duration of study: Approximately 20 months. Organisation/Responsibility: The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The trial will also be carried out in keeping with local and regulatory requirements. The Klinisches Studienzentrum Chirurgie (KSC) — Centre of Clinical Trials in Surgery at the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for planning and conduction of the trial. Documentation of patient's data will be accomplished via electronical Case Report Files (eCRF) with MACRO®-Software by the KSC. Randomization, data management, monitoring and biometry are provided by the independent Koordinierungszentrum für Klinische Studien (KKS) — Coordination Centre for Clinical Trails at the University of Heidelberg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The optimal strategy for abdominal wall closure has been an issue of ongoing debate. Available studies do not specifically enroll patients who undergo emergency laparotomy and thus do not consider the distinct biological characteristics of these patients. The present randomized controlled trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of two commonly applied abdominal wall closure strategies in patients undergoing primary emergency midline laparotomy. Methods/design The CONTINT trial is a multicenter, open label, randomized controlled trial with a two-group parallel design. Patients undergoing a primary emergency midline laparotomy are enrolled in the trial. The two most commonly applied strategies of abdominal wall closure after midline laparotomy are compared: the continuous, all-layer suture technique using slowly absorbable monofilament material (two Monoplus® loops) and the interrupted suture technique using rapidly absorbable braided material (Vicryl® sutures). The primary endpoint within the CONTINT trial is an incisional hernia within 12 months or a burst abdomen within 30 days after surgery. As reliable data on this primary endpoint is not available for patients undergoing emergency surgery, an adaptive interim analysis will be conducted after the inclusion of 80 patients, allowing early termination of the trial if necessary or modification of design characteristics such as recalculation of sample size. Discussion This is a randomized controlled multicenter trial with a two-group parallel design to assess the efficacy and safety of two commonly applied abdominal wall closure strategies in patients undergoing primary emergency midline laparotomy. Trial registration NCT00544583

Abstract Background Wound infection affects a considerable portion of patients after abdominal operations, increasing health care costs and postoperative morbidity and affecting quality of life. Antibacterial coating has been suggested as an effective measure to decrease postoperative wound infections after laparotomies. The INLINE metaanalysis has recently shown the superiority of a slowly absorbable continuous suture for abdominal closure; with PDS plus® such a suture has now been made available with triclosan antibacterial coating. Methods/Design The PROUD trial is designed as a randomised, controlled, observer, surgeon and patient blinded multicenter superiority trial with two parallel groups and a primary endpoint of wound infection during 30 days after surgery. The intervention group will receive triclosan coated polydioxanone sutures, whereas the control group will receive the standard polydioxanone sutures; abdominal closure will otherwise be standardized in both groups. Statistical analysis is based on intention-to-treat population via binary logistic regression analysis, the total sample size of n = 750 is sufficient to ensure alpha = 5% and power = 80%, an interim analysis will be carried out after data of 375 patients are available. Discussion The PROUD trial will yield robust data to determine the effectiveness of antibacterial coating in one of the standard sutures for abdominal closure and potentially lead to amendment of current guidelines. The exploration of clinically objective parameters as well as quality of life holds immediate relevance for clinical management and the pragmatic trial design ensures high external validity. Trial Registration The trial protocol has been registered with the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00000390).

Abstract Background The pp-Whipple procedure requires extensive preparation. The conventional preparation technique is done with scissors for dissection and ligatures, and with clips and sutures for hemostasis. This procedure is very time-consuming and requires numerous changes of instruments. The LigaSure™ device allows dissection and hemostasis for preparation with one instrument. Up to now there has been no comparison of the two techniques with regard to operating time and the patients' outcome. It is still unclear which technique has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient. Methods/Design A single-center, randomized, single-blinded, controlled superiority trial to compare two different techniques for dissection in a pp-Whipple procedure. 102 patients will be included and randomized pre-operatively. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for primary elective pp-Whipple procedure who signed the informed consent will be included. The primary endpoint is the operating time of the randomized technique. Control Intervention: Conventional dissection technique; experimental intervention: LigaSureTM dissection technique. Duration of study: Approximately 15 months; follow up time: 3 years. The trial is registered at German ClinicalTrials Register (DRKS00000166).

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer is the second most common tumor in developed countries, with a lifetime prevalence of 5%. About one third of these tumors are located in the rectum. Surgery in terms of low anterior resection with mesorectal excision is the central element in the treatment of rectal cancer being the only option for definite cure. Creating a protective diverting stoma prevents complications like anastomotic failure and meanwhile is the standard procedure. Bowel obstruction is one of the main and the clinically and economically most relevant complication following closure of loop ileostomy. The best surgical technique for closure of loop ileostomy has not been defined yet. Methods/Design A study protocol was developed on the basis of the only randomized controlled mono-center trial to solve clinical equipoise concerning the optimal surgical technique for closure of loop ileostomy after low anterior resection due to rectal cancer. The HASTA trial is a multi-center pragmatic randomized controlled surgical trial with two parallel groups to compare hand-suture versus stapling for closure of loop ileostomy. It will include 334 randomized patients undergoing closure of loop ileostomy after low anterior resection with protective ileostomy due to rectal cancer in approximately 20 centers consisting of German hospitals of all level of health care. The primary endpoint is the rate of bowel obstruction within 30 days after ileostomy closure. In addition, a set of surgical and general variables including quality of life will be analyzed with a follow-up of 12 months. An investigators meeting with a practical session will help to minimize performance bias and enforce protocol adherence. Centers are monitored centrally as well as on-site before and during recruitment phase to assure inclusion, treatment and follow up according to the protocol. Discussion Aim of the HASTA trial is to evaluate the efficacy of hand-suture versus stapling for closure of loop ileostomy in patients with rectal cancer. Trial registration German Clinical Trial Register Number: DRKS00000040

Abstract Background A recently published systematic review indicated superiority of duodenum-preserving techniques when compared with pancreatoduodenectomy, for the treatment of patients with chronic pancreatitis in the head of the gland. A multicentre randomised trial to confirm these results is needed. Methods/Design ChroPac aims to investigate differences in quality of life, mortality and morbidity during 24 months after surgery (duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection versus pancreatoduodenectomy) in patients with chronic pancreatitis of the pancreatic head. ChroPac is a randomised, controlled, observer and patient blinded multicentre surgical trial with two parallel comparison groups. The primary outcome measure will be the average quality of life during 24 months after surgery. Statistical analysis is based on the intention-to-treat population. Analysis of covariance will be applied for the intervention group comparison adjusting for age, centre and quality of life before surgery. Level of significance is set at 5% (two-sided) and sample size (n = 100 per group) is determined to assure a power of 90%. Discussion The ChroPac trial will explore important outcomes from different perspectives (e.g. surgeon, patient, health care system). Its pragmatic approach promises high external validity allowing a comprehensive evaluation of the surgical strategy for treatment of patients with chronic pancreatitis. Trial registration Controlled-trials.com ISRCTN38973832

Abstract Background Intraoperative haemorrhage is a known predictor for perioperative outcome of patients undergoing hepatic resection. While anaesthesiological lowering of central venous pressure (CVP) by fluid restriction is known to reduce bleeding during transection of the hepatic parenchyma its potential side effects remain poorly investigated. In theory it may have negative effects on kidney function and tissue perfusion and bears the risk to result in severe haemodynamic instability in case of profound intraoperative blood loss. The present randomised controlled trial evaluates efficacy and safety of infrahepatic inferior vena cava (IVC) clamping as an alternative surgical technique to reduce CVP during hepatic resection. Methods/Design The proposed IVC CLAMP trial is a single-centre randomised controlled trial with a two-group parallel design. Patients and outcome-assessors are blinded for the treatment intervention. Patients undergoing elective hepatic resection due to any reason are enrolled in IVC CLAMP. All patients admitted to the Department of General-, Visceral-, and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg for elective hepatic resection are consecutively screened for eligibility and written informed consent is obtained on the day before surgery. The primary objective of this trial is to assess and compare the amount of blood loss during hepatic resection in patients receiving surgical CVP reduction by clamping of the IVC as compared to anaesthesiological CVP without infrahepatic IVC clamping reduction. In addition to blood loss a set of general as well as surgical variables are analysed. Discussion This is a randomised controlled patient and observer blinded two-group parallel trial designed to assess efficacy and safety of infrahepatic IVC clamping during elective hepatectomy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials NCT00732979

Abstract Background Concomitant treatment in addition to intervention may influence the primary outcome, especially in complex interventions such as surgical trials. Evidence-based standards for perioperative care after distal pancreatectomy, however, have been rarely defined. This study's objective was therefore to identify and analyse the current basis of evidence for perioperative management in distal pancreatectomy. Methods A standardised questionnaire was sent to 23 European centres recruiting patients for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on open distal pancreatectomy that would compare suture versus stapler closure of the pancreatic remnant (DISPACT trial, ISRCTN 18452029). Perioperative strategies (e.g., bowel preparation, pain management, administration of antibiotics, abdominal incision, drainages, nasogastric tubes, somatostatin, mobilisation and feeding regimens) were assessed. Moreover, a systematic literature search in the Medline database was performed and retrieved meta-analyses and RCTs were reviewed. Results All 23 centres returned the questionnaire. Consensus for thoracic epidural catheters (TECs), pain treatment and transverse incisions was found, as well as strong consensus for the placement of intra-abdominal drainages and perioperative single-shot antibiotics. Also, there was consensus that bowel preparation, somatostatin application, postoperative nasogastric tubes and intravenous feeding might not be beneficial. The literature search identified 16 meta-analyses and 19 RCTs demonstrating that bowel preparation, somatostatin therapy and nasogastric tubes can be omitted. Early mobilisation, feeding and TECs seem to be beneficial for patients. The value of drainages remains unclear. Conclusion Most perioperative standards within the centres participating in the DISPACT trial are in accordance with current available evidence. The need for drainages requires further investigation. Trial registration Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN 18452029

Abstract Background Totally Implantable Access Ports (TIAP) are being extensively used world-wide and can be expected to gain further importance with the introduction of new neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments in oncology. Two different techniques for the implantation can be selected: A direct puncture of a central vein and the utilization of a Seldinger device or the surgical Venae sectio. It is still unclear which technique has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient. Design A single-center, expertise based randomized, controlled superiority trial to compare two different TIAP implantation techniques. 100 patients will be included and randomized pre-operatively. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for primary elective implantation of a TIAP under local anesthesia who signed the informed consent will be included. The primary endpoint is the primary success rate of the randomized technique. Control Intervention: Venae Sectio will be employed to insert a TIAP by a surgeon; Experimental intervention: Punction of V. Subclavia will be used to place a TIAP by a radiologist. Duration of study: Approximately 10 months, follow up time: 90 days. Organisation/Responsibility The PORTAS 2 – Trial will be conducted in accordance with the protocol and in compliance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The Center of Clinical Trials at the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for design and conduct of the trial including randomization and documentation of patients' data. Data management and statistical analysis will be performed by the independent Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), University of Heidelberg. Trial Registration The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00600444).

Abstract Background Although considered the reference standard for generating valid scientific evidence of a treatment's benefits and harms, the number of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT) comparing surgical techniques remains low. Much effort has been made in order to overcome methodological issues and improve quality of RCTs in surgery. To the present there has been, however, only little emphasis on development and maintenance of institutions for implementation of adequately designed and conducted surgical RCTs. Mehods/Design Description of the developments in surgical RCT infrastructure in Germany between 2001 and 2006. Cross sectional evaluation of completed and ongoing surgical RCTs within the German Surgical Society and the Clinical Study Centre, Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg. Results Foundation of a national Clinical Trial Centre (CTC) for the organisation of multi-centre RCTs in the surgical setting (Study Center of the German Surgical Society, SDGC). Establishment of a network of CTCs with affiliated Clinical Sites (CSs) to enhance patient recruitment and shorten the duration of RCTs. Since its foundation four surgical RCTs with a total sample size of 1650 patients (1006 of these randomised) have been supervised by the SDGC with 35 CSs involved in patient recruitment. Five further CTCs were set up in 2006. Together with their affiliated CSs a network has been organised providing improved conditions for the conduction of surgical RCTs. Conclusion Improvement of infrastructure substantially facilitates integration of RCTs into routine surgical practice. A network of collaborating CTCs and CSs can provide an adequate infrastructure for the conduction of multi-centre RCTs.

Abstract Background Acute cholecystitis occurs frequently in the elderly and in patients with gall stones. Most cases of severe or recurrent cholecystitis eventually require surgery, usually laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the Western World. It is unclear whether an initial, conservative approach with antibiotic and symptomatic therapy followed by delayed elective surgery would result in better morbidity and outcome than immediate surgery. At present, treatment is generally determined by whether the patient first sees a surgeon or a gastroenterologist. We wish to investigate whether both approaches are equivalent. The primary endpoint is the morbidity until day 75 after inclusion into the study. Design A multicenter, prospective, randomized non-blinded study to compare treatment outcome, complications and 75-day morbidity in patients with acute cholecystitis randomized to laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 24 hours of symptom onset or antibiotic treatment with moxifloxacin and subsequent elective cholecystectomy. For consistency in both arms moxifloxacin, a fluorquinolone with broad spectrum of activity and high bile concentration is used as antibiotic. Duration: October 2006 – November 2008 Organisation/Responsibility The trial was planned and is being conducted and analysed by the Departments of Gastroenterology and General Surgery at the University Hospital of Heidelberg according to the ethical, regulatory and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and the Good Clinical Practice guideline (GCP). Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00447304

Abstract Background Patients with end stage liver disease are characteristically malnourished which is associated with poor outcome. Formulas enriched with arginine, ω-3 fatty acids, and nucleotides, "immunonutrients", potentially improve their nutritional status. This study is designed to evaluate the clinical outcome of long-term "immunonutrition" of patients with end-stage liver disease while on the waiting list for liver transplantation. Methods/design A randomized controlled double blind multi-center clinical trial with two parallel groups comprising a total of 142 newly registered patients for primary liver transplantation has been designed to assess the safety and efficacy of the long-term administration of ORAL IMPACT®, an "immunonutrient" formula, while waiting for a graft. Patients will be enrolled the day of registration on the waiting list for liver transplantation. Study ends on the day of transplantation. Primary endpoints include improved patients' nutritional and physiological status, as measured by mid-arm muscle area, triceps skin fold thickness, grip strength, and fatigue score, as well as patients' health related quality of life. Furthermore, patients will be followed for 12 postoperative weeks to evaluate anabolic recovery after transplantation as shown by reduced post-transplant mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, wound healing, infectious morbidities (pneumonia, intraabdominal abscess, sepsis, line sepsis, wound infection, and urinary tract infection), acute and chronic rejection, and mortality. Discussion Formulas enriched with arginine, ω-3 fatty acids, and nucleotides have been proven to be beneficial in reducing postoperative infectious complications and length of hospital stay among the patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery. Possible mechanisms include downregulation of the inflammatory responses to surgery and immune modulation rather than a sole nutritional effect. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00495859

Abstract Background Annually, more than 90000 surgical procedures of the thyroid gland are performed in Germany. Strategies aimed at reducing the duration of the surgical procedure are relevant to patients and the health care system especially in the context of reducing costs. However, new techniques for quick and safe hemostasis have to be tested in clinically relevance randomized controlled trials before a general recommendation can be given. The current standard for occlusion of blood vessels in thyroid surgery is ligatures. Vascular clips may be a safe alternative but have not been investigated in a large RCT. Methods/design CLIVIT (Clips versus Ligatures in Thyroid Surgery) is an investigator initiated, multicenter, patient-blinded, two-group parallel relevance randomized controlled trial designed by the Study Center of the German Surgical Society. Patients scheduled for elective resection of at least two third of the gland for benign thyroid disease are eligible for participation. After surgical exploration patients are randomized intraoperatively into either the conventional ligature group, or into the clip group. The primary objective is to test for a relevant reduction in operating time (at least 15 min) when using the clip technique. Since April 2004, 121 of the totally required 420 patients were randomized in five centers. Discussion As in all trials the different forms of bias have to be considered, and as in this case, a surgical trial, the role of surgical expertise plays a key role, and will be documented and analyzed separately. This is the first randomized controlled multicenter relevance trial to compare different vessel occlusion techniques in thyroid surgery with adequate power and other detailed information about the design as well as framework. If significant, the results might be generalized and may change the current surgical practice.

Abstract Background The insertion of a Totally Implantable Access Port (TIAP) is a routinely employed technique in patients who need a safe and permanent venous access. The number of TIAP implantations is increasing constantly mainly due to advanced treatment options for malignant diseases. Therefore it is important to identify the implantation technique which has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient. Study design A single-centre, randomized, controlled superiority trial to compare two different TIAP implantation techniques. Sample size: 160 patients will be included and randomized intra-operatively. Eligibility criteria: Age equal or older than 18 years, patients scheduled for primary elective implantation of a TIAP in local anaesthesia and a signed informed consent. Primary endpoint: Primary success rate of the randomized technique. Intervention: Venae Sectio in combination with the Seldinger Technique (guide wire and a peel away sheath) will be used to place a TIAP. Reference treatment: Conventional Venae Sectio will be used with a direct insertion of the TIAP without guide wire or peel away sheath. Duration of study: Approximately 20 months. Organisation/Responsibility The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The trial will also be carried out in keeping with local and regulatory requirements. The Klinisches Studienzentrum Chirurgie (KSC) – Centre of Clinical Trials in Surgery at the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for planning and conduction of the trial. Documentation of patient's data will be accomplished via electronical Case Report Files (eCRF) with MACRO®-Software by the KSC. Randomization, data management, monitoring and biometry are provided by the independent Koordinierungszentrum für Klinische Studien (KKS) – Coordination Centre for Clinical Trails at the University of Heidelberg.

Abstract Background Chronic pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease which is characterized by an irreversible conversion of pancreatic parenchyma to fibrous tissue. Beside obstructive jaundice and pseudocyst formation, about half of the patients need surgical intervention due to untreatable chronic pain during the course of the disease. In most of the patients with chronic pancreatitis, the head of the pancreas is the trigger of the chronic inflammatory process. Therefore, resection of pancreatic head tissue must be the central part of any surgical intervention. However, it is unclear to which extent the surgical procedure must be radical in order to obtain a favourable outcome for the patients. Design A single centre randomized controlled, superiority trial to compare two techniques of duodenum preserving pancreatic head resection. Sample size: 65 patients will be included and randomized intraoperatively. Eligibility criteria: All patients with chronic pancreatitis and indication for surgical resection and signed informed consent. Cumulative primary endpoint (hierarchical model): duration of surgical procedure, quality of life after one year, duration of intensive care unit stay, duration of hospital stay. Reference treatment: Resection of the pancreatic head with dissection of the pancreas from the portal vein and transsection of the gland (Beger procedure). Intervention: Partial Resection of the pancreatic head without transsection of the organ and visualization of the portal vein (Berne procedure). Duration: September 2003-October 2007. Organisation/responsibility The trial is conducted in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with the moral, ethical, regulatory and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and the Good Clinical Practice guideline (GCP). The Center for Clinical Studies of the Department of Surgery Heidelberg is responsible for planning, conducting and final analysis of the trial.

Background: Preventing ischemia‒reperfusion injury (IRI) is a major issue in kidney transplantation, particularly for transplant recipients receiving a kidney from extended criteria donors (ECD). The main consequence of IRI is delayed graft function (DGF). Hypoxia is one of the key factors in IRI, suggesting that the use of an oxygen carrier as an additive to preservation solution may be useful. In the OxyOp trial, we showed that the organs preserved using the oxygen carrier HEMO2life® displayed significantly less DGF. In the OxyOp2 trial, we aim to definitively test and quantify the efficacy of HEMO2life® for organ preservation in a large population of kidney grafts., Methods: OxyOp2 is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, comparative, single-blinded, parallel-group study versus standard of care in renal transplantation. After the selection of a suitable donor according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria, both kidneys will be used in the study. Depending on the characteristics of the donor, both kidneys will be preserved either in static cold storage (standard donors) or on machine perfusion (for ECD and deceased-after-cardiac-death donors (DCD)). The kidneys resulting from one donor will be randomized: one to the standard-of-care arm (organ preserved in preservation solution routinely used according to the local practice) and the other to the active treatment arm (HEMO2life® on top of routinely used preservation solution). HEMO2life® will be used for ex vivo graft preservation at a dose of 1 g/l preservation solution. The primary outcome is the occurrence of DGF, defined as the need for renal replacement therapy during the first week after transplantation., Discussion: The use of HEMO2life® in preservation solutions is a novel approach allowing, for the first time, the delivery of oxygen to organs. Improving graft survival by limiting ischemic lesions is a major public-health goal in the field of organ transplantation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT04181710 . registered on November 29, 2019., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Nowadays, the main challenge of transplantation is the improvement of long-term care, aiming at reducing treatment-related complications and at decreasing rejection rates. Patients' adherence to both treatment and hygienic-dietary measures is mandatory to achieve these objectives. Adherence to immunosuppressive drugs is estimated to be only 70%. We hypothesized that the implementation of a personalized pharmaceutical plan (PPP) would increase adherence and therefore graft survival., Methods/design: This study is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial with transplantation units defining clusters. Twelve clusters from 10 university hospitals were recruited. All centres started on the same day in the control phase. Every 7 weeks, one centre will switch to the intervention phase and remain there until the end of inclusions. We plan to recruit 1716 kidney and/or liver transplant patients. The intervention phase consists in setting up the PPP: development of the patient's hospital and community pharmaceutical follow-up. In the hospital, the pharmacist will carry out drug reconciliation upon admission, daily pharmaceutical follow-up of prescriptions and pharmaceutical interviews with the patient in order to explain the modalities of taking immunosuppressive drugs and hygienic-dietary measures. After hospitalization, during the post-transplantation year, pharmaceutical meetings will take place, prior to medical consultations in order to check the patient's understanding of the prescription, his adherence, to remind them of hygienic-dietary measures and to look for adverse effects. The hospital pharmacist will also be in charge of establishing a close link with the community pharmacist (CP) and general practitioner, especially providing discharge medication reconciliation, an e-learning and a checklist. Moreover, prior to each pharmaceutical consultation, the hospital pharmacist will contact the CP to discuss patient adherence. The primary outcome is adherence to immunosuppressive treatments 1 year post-transplantation assessed by using the BAASIS questionnaire and the health insurance data from the national health data system. A medico-economic study will measure the efficiency of this plan., Discussion: GRePH aims to increase adherence of liver and/or kidney transplant patients to their immunosuppressive therapies in order to reduce transplant rejections. To this end, a new clinical pharmacy model, the PPP, will be set up in 10 university hospitals., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04295928 . Registered on 5 March 2020., (© 2021. The Author(s).)