Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 6:40 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-29 @ 5:53 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT06350357
Status:
RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2024-04-05
First Post:
2024-04-01
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Conventional Clipping Versus Punching Closure
Sponsor:
Ningbo No. 1 Hospital
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Conventional Clipping Versus Punching Closure for Defect Closure After ESD：a Randomized Controlled Trial
Status:
RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2024-04
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an important minimally invasive treatment method for early digestive tract tumors, with a high cure rate, and it is widely used in clinical practice. And wound closure after ESD is a great challenge, which is closely related to postoperative perforation bleeding. Clip closure is one of the most commonly used closure methods. However, when the wound is large or when the wound is located more difficult to operate, conventional closure may lead to delayed perforation, and postoperative clips may be prone to early spontaneous shedding. The authors have recently reported a method that may be able to close larger and difficult wounds because the grooves can better fix the metal clips. The latest study suggests that this approach may be safe and effective, but the study has a small sample size and has no controls. Therefore, high-quality clinical study evidence related to punch closure is required in the strategy of defect closure after ESD, in order to better evaluate the feasibility and safety of this new endoscopic closure method.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: