Stroke, AcuteBEGASTONNCT04758052
Tracheostomy With Bedside Simultaneous Gastrostomy Vs Usual Care Tracheostomy And Delayed Gastrostomy Placement
A study testing Timing of placement in people with Stroke, Acute and TBI, run by University of Mississippi Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
There is currently no prospective study analyzing the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy versus tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy placement (TSG versus TDG) on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 85 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke, Acute, TBI, Neuromuscular Diseases
- What is being tested?
- Timing of placement
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 31 Mar 2021to Aug 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 to 85 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 18 years old- 85 years old
- Admitted under the NSICU service
- Shared-decision making with surrogate decision maker and primary neuro-intensivist agreement to proceed with tracheostomy and gastrostomy with documented discussion.
- have indications for tracheostomy and gastrostomy
- Subjects or their SDM or legally authorized representative (LARs) must voluntarily provide informed consent prior to the initiation of any study-specific procedure in a form approved by an independent IRB. In the absence of subject's ability to provide informed consent, informed consent must be given by a person who has the legal right to act on behalf of the subject in accordance with local laws.
Who cannot join
- Patients who require tracheostomy only or gastrostomy only
- history of prior gastrostomy, tracheostomy, laryngectomy, gastrostomy prior to tracheostomy decision, known head and neck and gastrointestinal abnormality (cancer, congenital abnormality, anatomic variants)
- withdrawal of care, a transfer from another service or hospital if patient has been there for >24hr.
- known social discharge issues anticipating hospital stay >100 days
- Patients with nonsurvivable injuries, anticipated mortality <72 hours
- standard of care contraindications for either bedside tracheostomy and gastrostomy
Show all 15Show fewer
- Absolute contraindications for gastrostomy: gastric outlet obstruction, significant gastroparesis, significant gastroesophageal reflux, a proximal high-output entercutaneous fistula
- Standard Contraindications for percutaneous gastrostomy technique: ascites, morbid obesity and esophageal and gastric pathology
- Standard Contraindications for either PEG or PUG procedures
- Standard Contraindications to percutaneous dilational tracheostomy: Gross anatomical distortion of the neck, previous neck surgery , burns, radiotherapy, unstable or rigid cervical spine, tracheal distortion, stenosis, or malacia, morbid obesity (BMI >35kg/m2), massive thyroid gland or vessels in the operation field on ultrasound, hemodynamic instability, refractory intracranial hypertension, hemodynamic instability, Coagulopathy (Aptt>50s, INR>1.5, platelet count <50,000μL, emergency need for a tracheostomy or need for a permanent tracheostoma, very difficult airway management
- Pregnancy
- Life expectancy less than three-weeks
- Goals of care disagreement between care team and LAR
- braindead
- LAR preferred procedures placed in LTAC
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Christa O'Hana S. Nobleza
Jackson, Mississippi, 39216
About this study
Official title: Bedside Gastrostomy With Simultaneous Tracheostomy Effect On Outcomes Of Neurocritically-Ill Patients (Proof Of Concept Study)
There is currently no prospective study analyzing the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy versus tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy placement (TSG versus TDG) on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients. The investigators will study TSG via concomitant PDT and PUG procedures, while TDG will occur per usual care. This study is a prospective randomized open-label blinded endpoint study to assess the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy (TSG) versus the usual care of tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy (TDG) placement on outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients.
Read the detailed description
The practice of performing tracheostomy and gastrostomy simultaneously has been reported since the 1980s. The safety and feasibility of simultaneous tracheostomy with gastrostomy (TSG), compared to non-simultaneous or delayed approach (TDG), among neurocritically-ill patients have been reported by various case series and retrospective cohort studies.The timing of tracheostomy generally among neurocritically-ill patients varies from early <5 days or late >7 -10 days. There are currently no guidelines specifically on neurocritically-ill patients and the timing of gastrostomy placement however, it is generally recommended to wait 2-3 weeks as a time limited trial however, there are patients that are able to leave the hospital with the main limitation as being the feeding access. Although it has been suggested to consider tracheostomy to become an indication for gastrostomy this has not been widely accepted although there is an increase in awareness of the TSG approach especially in patients with neurologic conditions.
Tracheostomy have been traditionally indicated include airway obstruction associated with infection, malignancy, injury, sleep apnea and vocal cord dysfunction, prolonged intubation, facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation, pulmonary hygiene and aspiration.
Gastrostomy tubes have been considered as standard of care for patients requiring alternate forms of long-term enteral feeding. Other indications include long-term nutrition support associated with neurologic or spinal cord deficits, primary swallowing dysfunction, facial or pharyngeal injuries, malignancy of the head and neck and the esophagus, gastric decompression. Approaches available to perform tracheostomy include open, percutaneous tracheostomy, percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT); Percutaneous Radiologic Tracheostomy and percutaneous ultrasound tracheostomy. Gastrostomy is a temporary or permanent controlled fistula from the lumen of the stomach to the skin. For gastrostomy, approaches include open surgical gastrostomy (SG) or Stamm gastrostomy, Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), Percutaneous Radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) and Percutaneous Ultrasound gastrostomy (PUG).
In a retrospective cohort study on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients who have undergone TSG versus delayed gastrostomy TDG (non-simultaneous tracheostomy and gastrostomy), the patients undergoing TSG had shorter Neurocritical Care Unit (NCCU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, overall hospital cost and higher pre-discharge prealbumin levels. In another study examining the effect of early gastrostomy tube placement on stroke patients, it was found that early gastrostomy tube placement was associated with shorter LOS and higher odds of home or acute rehabilitation discharge disposition. In a retrospective study on intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage patients, it was found that tracheostomy was associated with ICU LOS with almost a 10-day difference if tracheostomy is placed before 7 days or after 14 days. They also found a 6- day difference in overall length of stay between those who had the gastrostomy tubes placed before 7 days or after 14 days. Importantly they saw that the timing of tracheostomy and gastrostomy placement was not associated with mortality. In practice, usual care favors delayed gastrostomy due to availability of imaging resources, proceduralist coordination, and provider preference. Bedside PEG requires the availability of specialized mobile endoscopic equipment and physicians trained in upper endoscopy. In a retrospective study of TSG, among the most common reason for procedural delays were coordination with GI service for performance of PEG. Further, mobile endoscopes are expensive and uncommon across the healthcare system, thus preventing PEG from practical generalizability as an early gastrostomy technique. TSG has been performed using standard PDT and PUG. Because PUG utilizes point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) technology readily available at the bedside it is a generalizable method for early gastrostomy. Finally, direct comparative evidence to support guidelines for TSG over TDG do not exist. In the absence of clear guidelines, provider preference permits delayed gastrostomy decisions.There is currently no prospective study analyzing the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy versus tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy placement (TSG versus TDG) on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients. To analyze the effect on patient outcomes of early intervention (TSG versus TDG), a pragmatic randomized clinical trial is needed. The investigators will study TSG via concomitant PDT and PUG procedures, while TDG will occur per usual care. This study is a prospective randomized open-label blinded endpoint study to assess the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy (TSG) versus the usual care of tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy (TDG) placement on outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients.
- Conditions
- Stroke, Acute, TBI, Neuromuscular Diseases, Status Epilepticus, Coma, Cerebrovascular Disorders
- Being tested
- Timing of placement
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Neuromuscular Diseases, Status Epilepticus, Coma, Cerebrovascular Disorders, Spinal Cord Injuries, Trauma, Nervous System
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Timing of placementOther
Simultaneous placement of tracheostomy and gastrostomy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| simultaneous tracheostomy with gastrostomy (TSG) | Experimental | This arm include the patients assigned to placement of gastrostomy immediately after tracheostomy. Receives: Other: Timing of placement |
| non-simultaneous or delayed approach tracheostomy and gastrostomy (TDG) | No intervention | This arm include the patients who proceed with "usual care" placement of tracheostomy and gastrostomy as per Neurocritical care Unit service standard. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
ICU length of stay
total number of midnights a patient is in the ICU for the duration of their hospital stay
Measured: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
Secondary outcomes (10)
hospital length of stay
total number of midnights a patients is in the hospital for the encounter that the patient
Measured: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
nutritional metrics
pre-albumin, albumin, caloric requirements met
Measured: up to 14 days before the procedure and up to 14-days before discharge
procedural analgo-sedation used
total dosage of analgo-sedation used
Measured: intraprocedure
all-cause mortality
proportion of patients who expired due to all-causes
Measured: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
swallow function return
presence, and time to minimal nectar thickened diet is allowed
Measured: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
discharge disposition
discharge location (acute rehabilitation, home, LTAC, nursing home, transferred, expired)
Measured: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
Functional outcome
Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended, Minimum score =1, Maximum score= 8, lower score is worse
Measured: at discharge, assessed up to 6-months
total analgo-sedation dose and duration in the ICU
total analgo-sedation dosages (infusion and boluses)
Measured: within ICU-stay, assessed up to 10 days
proportion of ventilator acquired pneumonia before and after procedures
according to updated CDC definition (https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/PDFs/pscManual/6pscVAPcurrent.pdf)
Measured: within ICU stay, assessed up to 10-days
overall ICU and hospital cost
total ICU cost estimated by LOS and severity-derived-diagnosis-related groups [DRG] multiplicator of each patient (Bösel et al., 2013) and total hospital cost at discharge
Measured: within in-hospital stay, assessed up to 10-days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Feb 2021
- Study start31 Mar 2021
- Primary completionJan 2022 (estimated)
- Study completionAug 2022 (estimated)
Why it stopped: Principal Investigator change in institution
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Stroke, AcuteStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- single-center prospective randomized open-label blinded endpoint proof-of-concept study to assess the effect of TSG versus usual care TDG placement on outcomes among neurocritically-ill patients.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Mississippi Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04758052
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2020V0278
- Acronym
- BEGASTON
- Status last verified
- Jun 2021
- First submitted
- 4 Feb 2021
- Last updated
- 9 Jun 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Jun 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Bedside Gastrostomy With Simultaneous Tracheostomy Effect On Outcomes Of Neurocritically-Ill Patients (Proof Of Concept Study)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04758052
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BEGASTON / 2020V0278
- Conditions
- Stroke, Acute, TBI, Neuromuscular Diseases, Status Epilepticus, Coma, Cerebrovascular Disorders
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: Principal Investigator change in institution
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Mississippi Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 31 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jan 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Aug 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 17 Feb 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
There is currently no prospective study analyzing the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy versus tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy placement (TSG versus TDG) on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients. The investigators will study TSG via concomitant PDT and PUG procedures, while TDG will occur per usual care. This study is a prospective randomized open-label blinded endpoint study to assess the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy (TSG) versus the usual care of tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy (TDG) placement on outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients.
Detailed description
The practice of performing tracheostomy and gastrostomy simultaneously has been reported since the 1980s. The safety and feasibility of simultaneous tracheostomy with gastrostomy (TSG), compared to non-simultaneous or delayed approach (TDG), among neurocritically-ill patients have been reported by various case series and retrospective cohort studies.The timing of tracheostomy generally among neurocritically-ill patients varies from early <5 days or late >7 -10 days. There are currently no guidelines specifically on neurocritically-ill patients and the timing of gastrostomy placement however, it is generally recommended to wait 2-3 weeks as a time limited trial however, there are patients that are able to leave the hospital with the main limitation as being the feeding access. Although it has been suggested to consider tracheostomy to become an indication for gastrostomy this has not been widely accepted although there is an increase in awareness of the TSG approach especially in patients with neurologic conditions.
Tracheostomy have been traditionally indicated include airway obstruction associated with infection, malignancy, injury, sleep apnea and vocal cord dysfunction, prolonged intubation, facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation, pulmonary hygiene and aspiration.
Gastrostomy tubes have been considered as standard of care for patients requiring alternate forms of long-term enteral feeding. Other indications include long-term nutrition support associated with neurologic or spinal cord deficits, primary swallowing dysfunction, facial or pharyngeal injuries, malignancy of the head and neck and the esophagus, gastric decompression. Approaches available to perform tracheostomy include open, percutaneous tracheostomy, percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT); Percutaneous Radiologic Tracheostomy and percutaneous ultrasound tracheostomy. Gastrostomy is a temporary or permanent controlled fistula from the lumen of the stomach to the skin. For gastrostomy, approaches include open surgical gastrostomy (SG) or Stamm gastrostomy, Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), Percutaneous Radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) and Percutaneous Ultrasound gastrostomy (PUG).
In a retrospective cohort study on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients who have undergone TSG versus delayed gastrostomy TDG (non-simultaneous tracheostomy and gastrostomy), the patients undergoing TSG had shorter Neurocritical Care Unit (NCCU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, overall hospital cost and higher pre-discharge prealbumin levels. In another study examining the effect of early gastrostomy tube placement on stroke patients, it was found that early gastrostomy tube placement was associated with shorter LOS and higher odds of home or acute rehabilitation discharge disposition. In a retrospective study on intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage patients, it was found that tracheostomy was associated with ICU LOS with almost a 10-day difference if tracheostomy is placed before 7 days or after 14 days. They also found a 6- day difference in overall length of stay between those who had the gastrostomy tubes placed before 7 days or after 14 days. Importantly they saw that the timing of tracheostomy and gastrostomy placement was not associated with mortality. In practice, usual care favors delayed gastrostomy due to availability of imaging resources, proceduralist coordination, and provider preference. Bedside PEG requires the availability of specialized mobile endoscopic equipment and physicians trained in upper endoscopy. In a retrospective study of TSG, among the most common reason for procedural delays were coordination with GI service for performance of PEG. Further, mobile endoscopes are expensive and uncommon across the healthcare system, thus preventing PEG from practical generalizability as an early gastrostomy technique. TSG has been performed using standard PDT and PUG. Because PUG utilizes point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) technology readily available at the bedside it is a generalizable method for early gastrostomy. Finally, direct comparative evidence to support guidelines for TSG over TDG do not exist. In the absence of clear guidelines, provider preference permits delayed gastrostomy decisions.There is currently no prospective study analyzing the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy versus tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy placement (TSG versus TDG) on the outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients. To analyze the effect on patient outcomes of early intervention (TSG versus TDG), a pragmatic randomized clinical trial is needed. The investigators will study TSG via concomitant PDT and PUG procedures, while TDG will occur per usual care. This study is a prospective randomized open-label blinded endpoint study to assess the effect of tracheostomy with bedside simultaneous gastrostomy (TSG) versus the usual care of tracheostomy with delayed gastrostomy (TDG) placement on outcomes of neurocritically-ill patients.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- single-center prospective randomized open-label blinded endpoint proof-of-concept study to assess the effect of TSG versus usual care TDG placement on outcomes among neurocritically-ill patients.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| simultaneous tracheostomy with gastrostomy (TSG) | Experimental | Other: Timing of placementThis arm include the patients assigned to placement of gastrostomy immediately after tracheostomy. |
| non-simultaneous or delayed approach tracheostomy and gastrostomy (TDG) | No intervention | –This arm include the patients who proceed with "usual care" placement of tracheostomy and gastrostomy as per Neurocritical care Unit service standard. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 18 years old- 85 years old
- Admitted under the NSICU service
- Shared-decision making with surrogate decision maker and primary neuro-intensivist agreement to proceed with tracheostomy and gastrostomy with documented discussion.
- have indications for tracheostomy and gastrostomy
- Subjects or their SDM or legally authorized representative (LARs) must voluntarily provide informed consent prior to the initiation of any study-specific procedure in a form approved by an independent IRB. In the absence of subject's ability to provide informed consent, informed consent must be given by a person who has the legal right to act on behalf of the subject in accordance with local laws.
Key exclusion criteria (15 listed)
- Patients who require tracheostomy only or gastrostomy only
- history of prior gastrostomy, tracheostomy, laryngectomy, gastrostomy prior to tracheostomy decision, known head and neck and gastrointestinal abnormality (cancer, congenital abnormality, anatomic variants)
- withdrawal of care, a transfer from another service or hospital if patient has been there for >24hr.
- known social discharge issues anticipating hospital stay >100 days
- Patients with nonsurvivable injuries, anticipated mortality <72 hours
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Timing of placementSimultaneous placement of tracheostomy and gastrostomy | Other | simultaneous tracheostomy with gastrostomy (TSG) |
Primary outcome
ICU length of stay
Time frame: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
total number of midnights a patient is in the ICU for the duration of their hospital stay
10 secondary outcomes
hospital length of stay
Time frame: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
nutritional metrics
Time frame: up to 14 days before the procedure and up to 14-days before discharge
procedural analgo-sedation used
Time frame: intraprocedure
all-cause mortality
Time frame: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
swallow function return
Time frame: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
discharge disposition
Time frame: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days
Functional outcome
Time frame: at discharge, assessed up to 6-months
total analgo-sedation dose and duration in the ICU
Time frame: within ICU-stay, assessed up to 10 days
proportion of ventilator acquired pneumonia before and after procedures
Time frame: within ICU stay, assessed up to 10-days
overall ICU and hospital cost
Time frame: within in-hospital stay, assessed up to 10-days
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Jun 2021.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Stroke, Acute
Not yet recruiting
Temporal Interference Stimulation for Upper-Limb Motor Recovery in Early Subacute Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
ELATE Study: Evaluating Large-vessel Acute Thrombectomy in Extended Time Window
Acute Ichemic Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Selective Intra-Arterial Hypothermia After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion
Acute Ischemic Stroke, Basilar Artery Occlusion
RecruitingObservational study
Continuous Dual Aspiration Technique With Zoom System for Stroke
Ischemic Stroke, Acute Stroke
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
A Multicenter, Open-label, Randomized, Non-inferiority Clinical Trial With Blinded Endpoint Assessment of Early Tirofiban After Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Timing of placement in people with Stroke, Acute and TBI, run by University of Mississippi Medical Center 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 15 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: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Jun 2021. 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?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
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?
ICU length of stay (time frame: during hospital stay, assessed up to 10 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 9 Jun 2021.