Abdomen, AcuteppuNCT05051683
Combined Endoscopic & Radiologic Intervention For Management Of Acute Perforated Peptic Ulcer
A study testing combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer in people with Abdomen, Acute, run by Zagazig University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. The study was approved by the research and Ethics committee of our university and performed in accordance with the code of ethics of the world… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Abdomen, Acute
- What is being tested?
- combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 30 Dec 2019to 1 Sep 2021
- 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 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Any patients with acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations . _ age over 18 years.
Who cannot join
- Patients presented with septic shock . _ age below 18 years
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Combined Endoscopic & Radiologic Intervention For Management Of Acute Perforated Peptic Ulcer : A Randomized Controlled Trial
The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. The study was approved by the research and Ethics committee of our university and performed in accordance with the code of ethics of the world medical association (Declaration of Helsinki) for studies involving humans. A written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The sample size was calculated using open Epi program using the following data ; confidence interval 95% , power of test 80% , ratio of unexposed/exposed 1, percent of patients with successful management of acute perforated peptic ulcer by surgical intervention 90% and those with successful management by endoscopy 99% , odds ratio 99%, and risk ratio 2 , so the calculated sample size equal 100 patients divided into two equal groups. Group (1) included 50 patients managed by combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention , group (2) included 50 patients managed by surgery.
Read the detailed description
The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. The study was approved by the research and Ethics committee of our university and performed in accordance with the code of ethics of the world medical association (Declaration of Helsinki) for studies involving humans. A written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The sample size was calculated using open Epi program using the following data ; confidence interval 95% , power of test 80% , ratio of unexposed/exposed 1, percent of patients with successful management of acute perforated peptic ulcer by surgical intervention 90% and those with successful management by endoscopy 99% , odds ratio 99%, and risk ratio 2 , so the calculated sample size equal 100 patients divided into two equal groups. Group (1) included 50 patients managed by combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention , group (2) included 50 patients managed by surgery. Any patients with acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and age over 18 years were included. Patients presented with septic shock and age below 18 years were excluded.
Perioperative measures:
In this prospective randomized controlled trial , all patients were subjected to the followings: patients were selected by randomization method , Full history taking , Complete physical examination , laboratory investigations ( complete blood picture , liver and kidney functions , coagulation profile ) , radiological investigations ( chest x- ray erect , abdominal \& pelvic u/s ).
Surgical techniques :
Traditional surgical exploration and Graham omental patch repair with abdominal lavage either open or laparoscopy was done for group (2). For group (1) endoscopic management using stent , clipping and sewing combined with radiologic interventional drainage was used. For duodenal ulcer only metallic stent was used due to narrow space while for gastric ulcer either stent , clipping and sewing were used due to capacious space.
Metallic stent:
Upper GI endoscopy ( Model GIF - 2TH180; Olympus , Tokyo, Japan) was done , allowing through it stent placement. The endoscopy was passed beyond the site of perforation , a guide wire was passed through the endoscopy into the proximal part of the jejunum and a partially covered duodenal stent ( Hanaro, MI-tech Korea) was advanced and released over the wire ( Jagwire ; Boston Scientific , Marlborough , M , USA) to cover the perforation site. Attention was taken to place the oral part of the stent above the pylorus and the covered part of the stent at site of perforation.
At same time of stent placement a radiologic interventional team worked and drainage was done \& 2 intra-peritoneal tube drains were inserted one was placed sub-hepatic another was placed in the pelvis.
During postoperative day one a methylene blue test was done . and blue color was observed in the drain.
Stent was removed 3 weeks later and site of perforation was observed . if there was any sings of remaining perforation a new stent was placed for another 3 weeks.
Endoscopic clips:
Clips are used to approximate the tissue surrounding the defect to effect closure. Standard clips should be deployed perpendicular to the long axis of the defect. If needed, multiple clips can be placed sequentially, starting at either edge of a defect and meeting at the center. Currently available through-the-scope clips achieve superficial tissue apposition engaging the mucosa and submucosa (with 1.2-mm-wide and 6-mm-long arms capable of an approximately 12-mm grasp), and have been used in conjunction with thermal ablation or mechanical scraping of the tissue around the edges of the defect to achieve a more resilient seal. The Over-the-Scope Clip (Ovesco Endoscopic AG, Tubingen, Germany) is a nitinol clip placed on a cap at the endoscope tip . Unlike clips inserted through the endoscope, the OVESCO can perform full-thickness apposition.
At same time a radiologic interventional team worked and drainage was done \& 2 intra-peritoneal tube drains were inserted one was placed sub-hepatic another was placed in the pelvis.
During postoperative day one a methylene blue test was done . and blue color was observed in the drain.
Sewing:
The Stomaphy X suturing system (Endo Gastric Solutions, Redmond, WA) and the Apollo Over Stitch (Apollo Endo surgery, Austin, TX), which creates full-thickness plications , has shown early success .
At same time a radiologic interventional team worked and drainage was done \& 2 intra-peritoneal tube drains were inserted one was placed sub-hepatic another was placed in the pelvis.
During postoperative day one a methylene blue test was done . and blue color was observed in the drain.
Follow up after surgery and discharge from the hospital:
The investigators examined the patients clinically, made routine laboratory investigations , and for group (1) upper GI endoscopy at 2 weeks later.
Statistical analysis:
The collected data were analyzed by computer using Statistical Package of Social Services version 22 (SPSS), Data were represented in tables and graphs, Continuous Quantitative variables e.g. age were expressed as the mean ± SD \& (range), and categorical qualitative variables were expressed as absolute frequencies (number) \& relative frequencies (percentage).
Suitable statistical tests of significance were used after checked for normality. Categorical data were cross tabulated and analyzed by the Chi-square test or Fisher's Exact Test; Continuous data were evaluated by student t- test. The results were considered statistically significant when the significant probability was less than 0.05 (P < 0.05). P-value < 0.001 was considered highly statistically significant (HS), and P-value ≥ 0.05 was considered statistically insignificant (NS).
- Conditions
- Abdomen, Acute
- Being tested
- combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer
- Keywords
- perforated peptic ulcer
- Medical subject headings
- Abdomen, Acute, Peptic Ulcer Perforation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcerProcedure or surgery
endoscopic management using stent , clipping and sewing combined with radiologic interventional drainage was used. For duodenal ulcer only metallic stent was used due to narrow space while for gastric ulcer either stent , clipping and sewing were used due to capacious space.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| group (1) | Active comparator | combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer Receives: Procedure: combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer |
| group (2) | No intervention | surgical management of acute perforated peptic ulcer |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
incidence of complications after combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention
incidence of complications after combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention
Measured: within one week after the endoscopy
Secondary outcomes (1)
incidence of mortality after combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention
incidence of mortality after combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention
Measured: within one month after the endoscopy
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Sep 2021
- Study start30 Dec 2019
- Primary completion1 Aug 2021
- Study completion1 Sep 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Abdomen, AcuteStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Zagazig UniversityThe 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. the calculated sample size equal 100 patients divided into two equal groups. Group (1) included 50 patients managed by combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention , group (2) included 50 patients managed by surgery.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Zagazig University
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Said Mohamed Said Abdou Negm, Zagazig University
- Investigators
- Said Mohamed Negm, MD, Principal investigator, ZAGAZIG UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05051683
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Zagazig General Surgery
- Acronym
- ppu
- Status last verified
- Sep 2021
- First submitted
- 10 Sep 2021
- Last updated
- 21 Sep 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Negm S, Mohamed H, Shafiq A, AbdelKader T, Ismail A, Yassin M, Mousa B, Abozaid M, Orban YA, Al Alawi M, Farag A. Combined endoscopic and radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer: a randomized controlled trial. World J Emerg Surg. 2022 May 24;17(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s13017-022-00429-9.
PubMed 35610657
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Sep 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Combined Endoscopic & Radiologic Intervention For Management Of Acute Perforated Peptic Ulcer : A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05051683
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ppu / Zagazig General Surgery
- Conditions
- Abdomen, Acute
- Keywords
- perforated peptic ulcer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Zagazig UniversityOther government
- Study start
- 30 Dec 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Aug 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Sep 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Sep 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.
The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. The study was approved by the research and Ethics committee of our university and performed in accordance with the code of ethics of the world medical association (Declaration of Helsinki) for studies involving humans. A written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The sample size was calculated using open Epi program using the following data ; confidence interval 95% , power of test 80% , ratio of unexposed/exposed 1, percent of patients with successful management of acute perforated peptic ulcer by surgical intervention 90% and those with successful management by endoscopy 99% , odds ratio 99%, and risk ratio 2 , so the calculated sample size equal 100 patients divided into two equal groups. Group (1) included 50 patients managed by combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention , group (2) included 50 patients managed by surgery.
Detailed description
The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. The study was approved by the research and Ethics committee of our university and performed in accordance with the code of ethics of the world medical association (Declaration of Helsinki) for studies involving humans. A written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The sample size was calculated using open Epi program using the following data ; confidence interval 95% , power of test 80% , ratio of unexposed/exposed 1, percent of patients with successful management of acute perforated peptic ulcer by surgical intervention 90% and those with successful management by endoscopy 99% , odds ratio 99%, and risk ratio 2 , so the calculated sample size equal 100 patients divided into two equal groups. Group (1) included 50 patients managed by combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention , group (2) included 50 patients managed by surgery. Any patients with acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and age over 18 years were included. Patients presented with septic shock and age below 18 years were excluded.
Perioperative measures:
In this prospective randomized controlled trial , all patients were subjected to the followings: patients were selected by randomization method , Full history taking , Complete physical examination , laboratory investigations ( complete blood picture , liver and kidney functions , coagulation profile ) , radiological investigations ( chest x- ray erect , abdominal \& pelvic u/s ).
Surgical techniques :
Traditional surgical exploration and Graham omental patch repair with abdominal lavage either open or laparoscopy was done for group (2). For group (1) endoscopic management using stent , clipping and sewing combined with radiologic interventional drainage was used. For duodenal ulcer only metallic stent was used due to narrow space while for gastric ulcer either stent , clipping and sewing were used due to capacious space.
Metallic stent:
Upper GI endoscopy ( Model GIF - 2TH180; Olympus , Tokyo, Japan) was done , allowing through it stent placement. The endoscopy was passed beyond the site of perforation , a guide wire was passed through the endoscopy into the proximal part of the jejunum and a partially covered duodenal stent ( Hanaro, MI-tech Korea) was advanced and released over the wire ( Jagwire ; Boston Scientific , Marlborough , M , USA) to cover the perforation site. Attention was taken to place the oral part of the stent above the pylorus and the covered part of the stent at site of perforation.
At same time of stent placement a radiologic interventional team worked and drainage was done \& 2 intra-peritoneal tube drains were inserted one was placed sub-hepatic another was placed in the pelvis.
During postoperative day one a methylene blue test was done . and blue color was observed in the drain.
Stent was removed 3 weeks later and site of perforation was observed . if there was any sings of remaining perforation a new stent was placed for another 3 weeks.
Endoscopic clips:
Clips are used to approximate the tissue surrounding the defect to effect closure. Standard clips should be deployed perpendicular to the long axis of the defect. If needed, multiple clips can be placed sequentially, starting at either edge of a defect and meeting at the center. Currently available through-the-scope clips achieve superficial tissue apposition engaging the mucosa and submucosa (with 1.2-mm-wide and 6-mm-long arms capable of an approximately 12-mm grasp), and have been used in conjunction with thermal ablation or mechanical scraping of the tissue around the edges of the defect to achieve a more resilient seal. The Over-the-Scope Clip (Ovesco Endoscopic AG, Tubingen, Germany) is a nitinol clip placed on a cap at the endoscope tip . Unlike clips inserted through the endoscope, the OVESCO can perform full-thickness apposition.
At same time a radiologic interventional team worked and drainage was done \& 2 intra-peritoneal tube drains were inserted one was placed sub-hepatic another was placed in the pelvis.
During postoperative day one a methylene blue test was done . and blue color was observed in the drain.
Sewing:
The Stomaphy X suturing system (Endo Gastric Solutions, Redmond, WA) and the Apollo Over Stitch (Apollo Endo surgery, Austin, TX), which creates full-thickness plications , has shown early success .
At same time a radiologic interventional team worked and drainage was done \& 2 intra-peritoneal tube drains were inserted one was placed sub-hepatic another was placed in the pelvis.
During postoperative day one a methylene blue test was done . and blue color was observed in the drain.
Follow up after surgery and discharge from the hospital:
The investigators examined the patients clinically, made routine laboratory investigations , and for group (1) upper GI endoscopy at 2 weeks later.
Statistical analysis:
The collected data were analyzed by computer using Statistical Package of Social Services version 22 (SPSS), Data were represented in tables and graphs, Continuous Quantitative variables e.g. age were expressed as the mean ± SD \& (range), and categorical qualitative variables were expressed as absolute frequencies (number) \& relative frequencies (percentage).
Suitable statistical tests of significance were used after checked for normality. Categorical data were cross tabulated and analyzed by the Chi-square test or Fisher's Exact Test; Continuous data were evaluated by student t- test. The results were considered statistically significant when the significant probability was less than 0.05 (P < 0.05). P-value < 0.001 was considered highly statistically significant (HS), and P-value ≥ 0.05 was considered statistically insignificant (NS).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- The investigators included all patients who were developed acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations and were admitted to our hospital between December 2019 to August 2021. the calculated sample size equal 100 patients divided into two equal groups. Group (1) included 50 patients managed by combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention , group (2) included 50 patients managed by surgery.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| group (1) | Active comparator | Procedure: combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcercombined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer |
| group (2) | No intervention | –surgical management of acute perforated peptic ulcer |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Any patients with acute perforated peptic ulcer manifestations . _ age over 18 years.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients presented with septic shock . _ age below 18 years
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 |
|---|---|---|
| combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcerendoscopic management using stent , clipping and sewing combined with radiologic interventional drainage was used. For duodenal ulcer only metallic stent was used due to narrow space while for gastric ulcer either stent , clipping and sewing were used due to capacious space. | Procedure or surgery | group (1) |
Primary outcome
incidence of complications after combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention
Time frame: within one week after the endoscopy
incidence of complications after combined endoscopic \& radiologic intervention
1 secondary outcome
incidence of mortality after combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention
Time frame: within one month after the endoscopy
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Sep 2021.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35610657Negm S, Mohamed H, Shafiq A, AbdelKader T, Ismail A, Yassin M, Mousa B, Abozaid M, Orban YA, Al Alawi M, Farag A. Combined endoscopic and radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer: a randomized controlled trial. World J Emerg Surg. 2022 May 24;17(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s13017-022-00429-9.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Abdomen, Acute
RecruitingPhase 2
REctus Sheath Trial
Acute Pain, Postoperative Pain, Acute
RecruitingObservational study
AIDE: Decision Support for Anastomosis or Colostomy in Emergency Surgery for Complicated Acute Diverticulitis
Complicated Diverticulitis, Acute Diverticulitis
Active, not recruiting
Influence of FreeO2 on Percentage of Time Within Oxygen Saturation Target Using Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV) and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) for Patients Admitted for AECOPD or Bariatric Surgery
COPD Exacerbation, Oxygen Toxicity
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar ESP Block Versus TAP Block for Postoperative Pain Control in Children Undergoing Open Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia, Postoperative Pain
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Intestinal Obstruction Surgery. Acute Abdominal Pathology. №9:05/05/2026
Small Bowel Adhesion, Obstruction Bowel
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.
Said Mohamed Negm, MD principal investigator
ZAGAZIG UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention for management of acute perforated peptic ulcer in people with Abdomen, Acute, run by Zagazig University at 1 site in Egypt.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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 21 Sep 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 Egypt. 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 is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
incidence of complications after combined endoscopic & radiologic intervention (time frame: within one week after the endoscopy). 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 NCT05051683, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 21 Sep 2021.