MelenaEDCAPNCT02442830
Comparing Early Capsule Deployment to Current Standard of Care for Management of Gastrointestinal Bleeding
A study testing Early Video Capsule Endoscopy in people with Melena and Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage, run by University of Massachusetts, Worcester at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The objectives of this study are to test whether there are statistically significant differences between the standard of care workup workup of non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding by endoscopy [upper, lower and other tests], compared with deployment of a video capsule as the first test followed by the most… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Melena, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
- What is being tested?
- Early Video Capsule Endoscopy
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 87 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 19 Apr 2015to 2 Jul 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age greater than 18 years old
- New onset of melena or hematochezia
- Able to sign consent
- Hemodynamically stable (i.e. blood pressure >100/60 or pulse <110 at the time of consent)
- ED must plan to admit patient to the hospital or Clinical Decision Unit.
Who cannot join
- Adults unable to consent
- Individuals who are not yet adults (infants, children, teenagers)
- Pregnant women
- Prisoners
- Prior history of gastroparesis
- Prior history of gastric, or small bowel surgery
Show all 17Show fewer
- Prior history of Crohn's disease
- Concern for infectious colitis
- Non-English speaking
- Evidence of dysphagia at the time of presentation
- Presence of bright red blood per rectum concerning for hemorrhoids
- Allergy to metoclopramide or erythromycin
- Code status of Do Not Resuscitate/Do Not Intubate (DNR/DNI) or Comfort Measures Only (CMO)
- Prior history of abdominal radiation
- Presence of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) or pacemaker or other implanted electronic devices
- Abdominal pain suggesting an acute abdomen or obstruction. In clinical practice, only patients with crampy abdominal pain due to Crohn's disease, previous intestinal surgery and a previous history of radiation therapy require a patency capsule or CT enterography before capsule endoscopy.
- Patients who cannot undergo surgery
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center -- University Campus
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01605
About this study
Official title: A Comparison of Early Deployment of a Video Capsule (Endocapsule EC-10: Olympus Tokyo. Japan) in the Emergency Department Versus Standard of Care Workup of Non-hematemesis Gastrointestinal Bleeding
The objectives of this study are to test whether there are statistically significant differences between the standard of care workup workup of non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding by endoscopy [upper, lower and other tests], compared with deployment of a video capsule as the first test followed by the most appropriate endoscopic procedure based on video capsule findings, if needed. The investigators propose to examine differences in time to diagnosis, reduction in numbers of procedures, and length of stay between a standard of care workup protocol and our proposed protocol of early capsule endoscopy deployment.
Read the detailed description
After 40 years of considering gastrointestinal bleeding as upper or lower and largely ignoring the small intestine, there is accumulating evidence that the standard of care approach to the assessment of non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding could be improved by early deployment of a video capsule (VCE) as the first diagnostic test. Currently, VCE is considered the gold standard as the diagnostic test for small intestinal bleeding. In a recent study at the University of Massachusetts (UMass) 336 patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with complaints of gastrointestinal bleeding 36 patients (10.7%) were given a VCE during their stay.
In patients with hematemesis, upper endoscopy remains the diagnostic and therapeutic modality of choice. However patients with melena and hematochezia may benefit from early VCE since both signs and symptoms provide poor localization as to the origin of bleeding. Data from this previous Umass study suggests that the ingestion of a VCE in the ED could quickly and non-invasively provide clinicians accurate data as to the origin of the bleeding. This information could provide a guide to further management of the patient. VCE is able to visualize bleeding in the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, small intestine and right colon, thereby eliminating the guess work of deciding which endoscopic approach to use.
At UMass, that same study showed that of the 36 patients who received a video capsule, 26 (72.2%) had diagnostic studies (i.e. bleeding was identified). In comparison, 152 patients required upper endoscopy (of which 52.9% were diagnostic) and 64 patients required colonoscopy (of which 47% were diagnostic). Of those 26 patients with diagnostic capsule studies, 13 also required upper endoscopy, 1 required a colonoscopy, and 4 required both a colonoscopy and endoscopy. It is important to recognize, however, that often capsule studies are performed after upper endoscopy and colonoscopy and performed and are found to be negative. This sequence is the standard of care work up of bleeding. Despite being performed later in the hospital course of our patients, capsule studies have a high diagnostic yield. In reality VCE is used uncommonly in acute bleeding because it is rarely considered in the context of acute GI bleeding In this study, the investigators propose the approach of using the video capsule as the first diagnostic test prior to colonoscopy and endoscopy; this may lead to a shortened time to diagnosis, a reduction in length of stay, and a reduction in numbers of procedures due to early, accurate localization of the source of bleeding. All of these components could result in better quality of care and cost containment. Further, it is known that 80% of patients stop bleeding spontaneously. Thus the earlier they are examined the more likely the origin of the bleeding is likely to be found The use of VCE has been approved by the FDA since 2001 for small intestinal bleeding obscure GI Bleeding. It is very safe and no deaths associated with its use have been reported. More than two million capsules have been used and complications of obstruction and perforation are extremely rare.
Interest in the broader use of VCE is accumulating. More recently studies of VCE deployed in the ED, in patients with upper GI bleeding showed improved management. Our group recently demonstrated that the closer a VCE is performed to the time of bleeding the higher the likelihood of locating the sources and the higher the therapeutic intervention rate. The investigators also have demonstrated that the use of capsule endoscopy in patients with non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding (NHGIB) has a higher diagnostic yield than does colonoscopy. With improved diagnostic yields, capsule endoscopy may help clinicians by providing guidance in the management of patients with NHGIB.
This protocol is be the first attempt to prospectively examine this concept in a large randomized prospective trial. The questions the investigators are studying are: can early capsule intervention decrease time to diagnosis, numbers of procedures and hospital length of stay in patients with non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding?
- Conditions
- Melena, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
- Being tested
- Early Video Capsule Endoscopy
- Medical subject headings
- Melena, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Early Video Capsule EndoscopyDevice
Also called Olympus Endocapsule 10 (EC-10) System
The intervention is the use of video capsule endoscopy as the first test in a patient presenting to the ED with active bleeding. The capsule allows for visualization of the entire GI tract.
Once a capsule has been given to a study patient, a staff member will use the capsule's real-time viewer to see if there is any active bleeding in the stomach. If bleeding is seen the investigators will pursue an upper endoscopy. If no bleeding is seen a staff member will review the entire findings of the capsule and make a decision regarding which therapeutic measure to pursue.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Early Video Capsule Endoscopy | Experimental | The intervention for subjects in this arm will be to have a video capsule deployed as soon as possible after presentation to the emergency department. Information from the video capsule will be obtained and reviewed to determine location of bleeding. Once that information has been obtained a decision will be made on which endoscopic test is most pertinent in finding and treating the source of bleeding. Receives: Device: Early Video Capsule Endoscopy |
| Standard of Care Workup Group | No intervention | In this arm, patients will receive "standard of care workup" for non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding. This could include upper endoscopy, colonoscopy, and additional capsule or small bowel enteroscopy depending on the subject's presentation and the results of the workup performed by the gastroenterology team. For patients requiring a video capsule endoscopy as part of "standard of care workup" the patients will be given the same Olympus video capsule that is used in the "Early Capsule" group. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time to Localization of Bleeding
Time to localization of bleeding refers to the time after a patient is admitted to the emergency room and a bleeding source is localized. We defined localization of bleeding as endoscopic visualization of stigmata of recent hemorrhage.
Measured: Enrollment to localization of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Number of Participants With Localization of Bleeding by the End of Admission
This measurement counts the number of participants with a bleeding source localized by the end of admission.
Measured: Patient's will be assessed for the duration of their hospital stay and for thirty days afterwards.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 May 2015 (estimated)
- Study start19 Apr 2015
- Primary completion2 Jul 2017
- Study completion2 Jul 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for MelenaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Massachusetts, WorcesterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 87 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Massachusetts, Worcester
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Olympus Corporation
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, David Cave, University of Massachusetts, Worcester
- Investigators
- David Cave, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Professor of Medicine
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02442830
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- H00006661
- Acronym
- EDCAP
- Status last verified
- Jul 2018
- First submitted
- 23 Apr 2015
- Last updated
- 7 Aug 2018
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
Publications
Singh A, Marshall C, Chaudhuri B, Okoli C, Foley A, Person SD, Bhattacharya K, Cave DR. Timing of video capsule endoscopy relative to overt obscure GI bleeding: implications from a retrospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):761-6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.11.041. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
PubMed 23375526Jawaid S, Gondal B, Singh, A, Marshall C, and Cave D. The epidemiology of gastrointestinal bleeding in an academic emergency department as a basis for reconfiguring the conventional approach to its diagnosis and management. Gastrointestinal Endsocopy 2013;77:Supplement, Page AB483.
Jawaid S, Marya N, Gondal B, Maranda L, Marshall C, Charpentier J, Singh A, Foley A, and Cave D. . A reconsideration of the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal bleeding based on its epidemiology and outcomes analysis. Gastrointestinal Endsocopy 2014;79:Supplement, Page AB231.
Marya NB, Jawaid S, Foley A, Han S, Patel K, Maranda L, Kaufman D, Bhattacharya K, Marshall C, Tennyson J, Cave DR. A randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy of early video capsule endoscopy with standard of care in the approach to nonhematemesis GI bleeding (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jan;89(1):33-43.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.06.016. Epub 2018 Jun 20.
PubMed 29935143
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Aug 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Comparison of Early Deployment of a Video Capsule (Endocapsule EC-10: Olympus Tokyo. Japan) in the Emergency Department Versus Standard of Care Workup of Non-hematemesis Gastrointestinal Bleeding
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02442830
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EDCAP / H00006661
- Conditions
- Melena, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 87 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Massachusetts, WorcesterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Olympus Corporation
- Study start
- 19 Apr 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 2 Jul 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 2 Jul 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 May 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 7 Aug 2018
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The objectives of this study are to test whether there are statistically significant differences between the standard of care workup workup of non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding by endoscopy [upper, lower and other tests], compared with deployment of a video capsule as the first test followed by the most appropriate endoscopic procedure based on video capsule findings, if needed. The investigators propose to examine differences in time to diagnosis, reduction in numbers of procedures, and length of stay between a standard of care workup protocol and our proposed protocol of early capsule endoscopy deployment.
Detailed description
After 40 years of considering gastrointestinal bleeding as upper or lower and largely ignoring the small intestine, there is accumulating evidence that the standard of care approach to the assessment of non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding could be improved by early deployment of a video capsule (VCE) as the first diagnostic test. Currently, VCE is considered the gold standard as the diagnostic test for small intestinal bleeding. In a recent study at the University of Massachusetts (UMass) 336 patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with complaints of gastrointestinal bleeding 36 patients (10.7%) were given a VCE during their stay.
In patients with hematemesis, upper endoscopy remains the diagnostic and therapeutic modality of choice. However patients with melena and hematochezia may benefit from early VCE since both signs and symptoms provide poor localization as to the origin of bleeding. Data from this previous Umass study suggests that the ingestion of a VCE in the ED could quickly and non-invasively provide clinicians accurate data as to the origin of the bleeding. This information could provide a guide to further management of the patient. VCE is able to visualize bleeding in the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, small intestine and right colon, thereby eliminating the guess work of deciding which endoscopic approach to use.
At UMass, that same study showed that of the 36 patients who received a video capsule, 26 (72.2%) had diagnostic studies (i.e. bleeding was identified). In comparison, 152 patients required upper endoscopy (of which 52.9% were diagnostic) and 64 patients required colonoscopy (of which 47% were diagnostic). Of those 26 patients with diagnostic capsule studies, 13 also required upper endoscopy, 1 required a colonoscopy, and 4 required both a colonoscopy and endoscopy. It is important to recognize, however, that often capsule studies are performed after upper endoscopy and colonoscopy and performed and are found to be negative. This sequence is the standard of care work up of bleeding. Despite being performed later in the hospital course of our patients, capsule studies have a high diagnostic yield. In reality VCE is used uncommonly in acute bleeding because it is rarely considered in the context of acute GI bleeding In this study, the investigators propose the approach of using the video capsule as the first diagnostic test prior to colonoscopy and endoscopy; this may lead to a shortened time to diagnosis, a reduction in length of stay, and a reduction in numbers of procedures due to early, accurate localization of the source of bleeding. All of these components could result in better quality of care and cost containment. Further, it is known that 80% of patients stop bleeding spontaneously. Thus the earlier they are examined the more likely the origin of the bleeding is likely to be found The use of VCE has been approved by the FDA since 2001 for small intestinal bleeding obscure GI Bleeding. It is very safe and no deaths associated with its use have been reported. More than two million capsules have been used and complications of obstruction and perforation are extremely rare.
Interest in the broader use of VCE is accumulating. More recently studies of VCE deployed in the ED, in patients with upper GI bleeding showed improved management. Our group recently demonstrated that the closer a VCE is performed to the time of bleeding the higher the likelihood of locating the sources and the higher the therapeutic intervention rate. The investigators also have demonstrated that the use of capsule endoscopy in patients with non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding (NHGIB) has a higher diagnostic yield than does colonoscopy. With improved diagnostic yields, capsule endoscopy may help clinicians by providing guidance in the management of patients with NHGIB.
This protocol is be the first attempt to prospectively examine this concept in a large randomized prospective trial. The questions the investigators are studying are: can early capsule intervention decrease time to diagnosis, numbers of procedures and hospital length of stay in patients with non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding?
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Early Video Capsule Endoscopy | Experimental | Device: Early Video Capsule EndoscopyThe intervention for subjects in this arm will be to have a video capsule deployed as soon as possible after presentation to the emergency department. Information from the video capsule will be obtained and reviewed to determine location of bleeding. Once that information has been obtained a decision will be made on which endoscopic test is most pertinent in finding and treating the source of bleeding. |
| Standard of Care Workup Group | No intervention | –In this arm, patients will receive "standard of care workup" for non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding. This could include upper endoscopy, colonoscopy, and additional capsule or small bowel enteroscopy depending on the subject's presentation and the results of the workup performed by the gastroenterology team. For patients requiring a video capsule endoscopy as part of "standard of care workup" the patients will be given the same Olympus video capsule that is used in the "Early Capsule" group. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age greater than 18 years old
- New onset of melena or hematochezia
- Able to sign consent
- Hemodynamically stable (i.e. blood pressure >100/60 or pulse <110 at the time of consent)
- ED must plan to admit patient to the hospital or Clinical Decision Unit.
Key exclusion criteria (17 listed)
- Adults unable to consent
- Individuals who are not yet adults (infants, children, teenagers)
- Pregnant women
- Prisoners
- Prior history of gastroparesis
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Early Video Capsule EndoscopyAlso: Olympus Endocapsule 10 (EC-10) SystemThe intervention is the use of video capsule endoscopy as the first test in a patient presenting to the ED with active bleeding. The capsule allows for visualization of the entire GI tract. Once a capsule has been given to a study patient, a staff member will use the capsule's real-time viewer to see if there is any active bleeding in the stomach. If bleeding is seen the investigators will pursue an upper endoscopy. If no bleeding is seen a staff member will review the entire findings of the capsule and make a decision regarding which therapeutic measure to pursue. | Device | Early Video Capsule Endoscopy |
Primary outcome
Time to Localization of Bleeding
Time frame: Enrollment to localization of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner.
Time to localization of bleeding refers to the time after a patient is admitted to the emergency room and a bleeding source is localized. We defined localization of bleeding as endoscopic visualization of stigmata of recent hemorrhage.
1 secondary outcome
Number of Participants With Localization of Bleeding by the End of Admission
Time frame: Patient's will be assessed for the duration of their hospital stay and for thirty days afterwards.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 Aug 2018.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 23375526Singh A, Marshall C, Chaudhuri B, Okoli C, Foley A, Person SD, Bhattacharya K, Cave DR. Timing of video capsule endoscopy relative to overt obscure GI bleeding: implications from a retrospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):761-6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.11.041. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
- BackgroundJawaid S, Gondal B, Singh, A, Marshall C, and Cave D. The epidemiology of gastrointestinal bleeding in an academic emergency department as a basis for reconfiguring the conventional approach to its diagnosis and management. Gastrointestinal Endsocopy 2013;77:Supplement, Page AB483.
- BackgroundJawaid S, Marya N, Gondal B, Maranda L, Marshall C, Charpentier J, Singh A, Foley A, and Cave D. . A reconsideration of the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal bleeding based on its epidemiology and outcomes analysis. Gastrointestinal Endsocopy 2014;79:Supplement, Page AB231.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29935143Marya NB, Jawaid S, Foley A, Han S, Patel K, Maranda L, Kaufman D, Bhattacharya K, Marshall C, Tennyson J, Cave DR. A randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy of early video capsule endoscopy with standard of care in the approach to nonhematemesis GI bleeding (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jan;89(1):33-43.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.06.016. Epub 2018 Jun 20.
Related trials for Melena
Recruiting
A Study to Evaluate the Performance of a Wireless Optical Sensor Capsule in Detection of UGIB
Melena, Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Not yet recruitingObservational study
The Auxiliary Effect of Artificial Intelligence in the Detection of Precancerous Lesions in Proximal Colon Cancer
Abdominal Pain, Black Stools
Recruiting
PillSense for Suspected Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Bleeding Ugi
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
David Cave, MD, PhD principal investigator
Professor of Medicine
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Early Video Capsule Endoscopy in people with Melena and Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage, run by University of Massachusetts, Worcester at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 17 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 7 Aug 2018). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time to Localization of Bleeding (time frame: Enrollment to localization of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02442830, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Aug 2018.