Patent Foramen OvaleLOCATENCT07009678
Comparison of Lower vs Upper Extremity Injection Agitated Saline to Identify Patent Foramen Ovale With Echocardiography
A study testing intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site. in people with Patent Foramen Ovale and Cryptogenic Stroke, run by St. John's Hospital at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Study Title LOwer vs upper extremity injection agitated saline for identifiCation of pATent foramen ovalE (LOCATE) Pilot study to determine safety of lower extremity injection of agitated saline for echocardiography of the heart. Primary Investigator Carmelo Panetta, MD University of Minnesota Physicians, St. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Patent Foramen Ovale, Cryptogenic Stroke, Embolic Infarction
- What is being tested?
- intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site.
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 21 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2023to 12 May 2025
- 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
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
4.2. Inclusion Criteria
The subject is / has:
- Age ≥18 at the time of informed consent signature.
- Capable of complying with protocol requirements, including follow-up.
- A Consent Form signed by Subject or legal representative.
- Subjects have a history of concern for right to left shunt, such as a paradoxical embolus as source of a cryptogenic CVA requiring transthoracic echocardiography with agitated saline injection (bubble study)
- No evidence of right to left shunt on injection of upper extremity using transthoracic echocardiography within the previous 24 months
- If taking warfarin, patient is eligible if clinically able to hold warfarin for 3 days prior to procedure.
4.3. Exclusion Criteria
The subject is / has:
- Enrolled in another drug or medical device study within 30 days of study enrollment.
- Absence or size < 2mm diameter of both greater saphenous veins
- Depth of the greater saphenous vein is > 3cm from the skin surface
- Presence of deep vein thrombosis in either greater saphenous veins
- Platelet count less than 50,000
- International Normalized Ratio (INR) > 3 or liver failure within the last 6 months,
- Taking oral anticoagulant (DOAC) within 24 hours
- Taking high dose anticoagulation with heparin or low molecular weight heparin within 12 hours
- Absence of adequate windows for echocardiographic imaging to detect shunt
- Subject is unable to sign consent or considered a part of a vulnerable population: children/minors or age < 18 years, pregnant women, prisoners, terminally ill, comatose, intellectually challenged individuals who are assigned a guardian, institutionalized individuals, visual or hearing impaired without therapy to overcome the impairment, refugees.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: LOwer vs Upper Extremity Injection Agitated Saline for identifiCation of pATent Foramen ovalE (LOCATE) Pilot Study to Determine Safety of Lower Extremity Injection of Agitated Saline for Echocardiography of the Heart
Study Title LOwer vs upper extremity injection agitated saline for identifiCation of pATent foramen ovalE (LOCATE) Pilot study to determine safety of lower extremity injection of agitated saline for echocardiography of the heart.
Primary Investigator Carmelo Panetta, MD University of Minnesota Physicians, St. John's Hospital 1600 St. Johns Blvd, suite 200, Maplewood, MN 55109
Read more
Study Design Prospective study of the safety and efficacy upper versus lower extremity injection agitated saline (bubble study) to identify patent foramen ovale (PFO) with echocardiography
Study Objective PFO are not identified in up to one quarter of subjects who have upper arm injection compared to femoral vein injection. We propose use of the PICC line nurses to obtain access in the greater saphenous vein in the lower leg and compare to the upper extremity injection in those subjects with concern for paradoxical embolus but previously PFO was not identified with an upper arm injection.
Study Endpoint Study the safety and efficacy of lower versus upper extremity injection agitated saline (bubble study) for identifying PFO
Subject Population Subjects with history of cryptogenic stroke or arterial embolus of unknown source with negative upper extremity injection agitate saline (bubble study) to identify a PFO.
Number of Sites Three sites to enroll subjects: St. John's/Woodwinds Hospital, University of Minnesota Medical Center and Southdale Hospital. One site to perform procedure at St John's hospital
Expected Time to Complete Enrollment 8-12 months
Schedule of Events Screening and consent of subjects who with negative bubble study for PFO to have upper and lower extremity bubble study, one week follow up and review echocardiography by two cardiologists.
Additional Information Data safety monitoring board will oversee the results every quarter Sample size 20 subjects were consented and enrolled is supported by this grant from GORE Medical.
Read the detailed description
- Introduction 1.1. Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is present in one third of the population based on autopsy (1) and up to half of those with a prior stroke (2). Diagnosis with echocardiography with an injection of agitated saline (bubble study) in the upper arm for detecting a PFO is the standard of care (3,4). 1.2. Historical Treatments The presence of eustachian ridge in the right atrium is thought to direct blood flow from inferior vena cava (IVC) across the PFO. Conversely, the superior vena cava (SVC) has blood flow directed into the right ventricle. Three studies found in the cardiac catheterization laboratory the femoral vein injection agitated saline can identify up to one quarter more PFO than upper extremity injection(5-7). A larger recent study on 244 people already diagnosed with a PFO, found operators did not detect 25% of patients with PFO by upper arm injection agitated saline compared to femoral vein injection (7). A prospective multicenter study to compare upper arm versus the greater saphenous vein of the leg injection agitated saline with echocardiography to screen for PFO in subjects with prior cryptogenic stroke and of whom no PFO was detected via standard approach with the upper arm injection agitated saline. Funding available enroll 20 subjects with support from GORE therapeutics. 1.3. Study Device Description Access in the greater saphenous vein for an agitated saline injection to identify more PFO compared to an upper arm injection.
- Study Objectives 2.1. Primary Objective: 2.1.1. To evaluate the safety of access in the greater saphenous vein 2.1.2. To compare the efficacy and grading of size of a PFO from upper and lower extremity injection of agitated saline (bubble study
- Study Design
3.1. Coordinators/leadership team: Primary Investigator: Carmelo Panetta, MD Admin lead for Clinical Research East Campus: Andrew Snyder Admin lead for Clinical Research UofMN Campus: Michelle Hintz Admin lead for Nursing team for central iv access/PICC line: Melissa Bustamonte Biostatistician: Sue Duval, PhD Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN
Fairview East Campus St. John's Hospital 1575 Beam Ave, Maplewood, MN 55109 Site Primary Investigator: Carmelo Panetta, MD, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN Non invasive/Echocardiography Director: Mitch Timmons, MD
University of Minnesota Medical Center 500 SE Harvard St, Minneapolis, MN 55455 Site Primary Investigator: Ganesh Raveendran, MD Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN Non invasive Director: Marc Pritzker, MD, Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN
Southdale Medical Center 6401 France Ave South, Edina, MN 55435 Site Primary Investigator: Marit Thorsgard, MD, Cardiology University of Minnesota Physicians
3.2. Description of Study Design This a prospective non-randomized multicenter study comparing upper versus lower extremity injection of agitated saline (bubble study) to identify PFO.
Subjects with history of cryptogenic stroke are screened who have negative bubble study for PFO by clinical research staff. Subjects are contacted and consented. Patients enrolled would be scheduled in the set times (currently allotted time slot in the afternoon Monday thru Friday at St.John's Hospital).
Access of the femoral vein is considered a procedure limited to the cardiac catheterization laboratory, intensive care unit or the emergency department and generally performed by a physician. The greater saphenous vein courses along the medial aspect of the thigh and enters the femoral vein near the femoral head (see Figure). The location of the greater saphenous vein is ideal for peripheral access given fewer valves to obstruct passage of bubbles to the heart, located usually 0.5 to 2 cm under the skin and is not associated with an artery. The nurse who is previously trained as a specialist in central intravenous access (often referred to as the peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line nurse) would be trained on locating and inserting a 4F (1.33mm diameter) 20cm length catheter (Bard MidLine catheter kit) into the greater saphenous vein in the thigh with standard sterile technique and ultrasound. The upper extremity peripheral intravenous line would be placed by echo technician or PICC nurse per standard of care.
After proper echocardiographic windows have been located, an injection of agitated saline and echocardiography would be performed to search for evidence of bubbles traversing from the right to the left atria and identifying a PFO. The identical agitated saline injection would then be done in lower extremity (which is then lifted up to help with flow back to the heart). After each injection, a waiting period to allow bubbles to pass thru the pulmonary circuit before the next injection. Standard views would be performed in each case to allow echocardiography reviewers to properly comment on the presence or absence of PFO.
The sheath/catheter in greater saphenous vein would be removed and manual pressure held to prevent bleeding for 15 minutes in the cardiac catheterization laboratory recovery suite.
Interpretation by two cardiologists would be completed (*one at the institution where the procedure performed and second outside cardiologist). The results would be placed into the electronic medical records and forwarded to the original physician who ordered the initial bubble study prior to enrollment in the LOCATE study.
- Conditions
- Patent Foramen Ovale, Cryptogenic Stroke, Embolic Infarction
- Being tested
- intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site.
- Medical subject headings
- Foramen Ovale, Patent, Ischemic Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site.Diagnostic test
Also called agitated saline injection (bubble study)
Ultrasound access of greater saphenous vein with placement of midline 4French catheter and use of sphygmomanometer to regulate valsalva maneuver, imaging with and without valsalva and injection of agitated saline.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Lower extremity used for injection of agitated saline to detect PFO | Experimental | Not described Receives: Diagnostic Test: intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Safety and efficacy of placement of access in greater saphenous vein and performing agitated saline injection (bubble study) with echocardiography to screen for patent foramen ovale.
Placement of midline PICC line 4French in greater saphenous vein by PICC nurses with ultrasound and 18 gauge iv in right arm
Measured: total time for procedure is 4 hours from arrival to departure. Follow up one week later to identify complications
Comparison of injection of agitate saline via upper versus lower extremity for detection of patent foramen ovale with echocardiography
see published manuscript - technique noted above.
Measured: A total time of two hours for the procedure and additional 30 minutes to call the participant one week after the procedure.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Injection of agitated saline via greater saphenous vein compared to upper arm injection for visualization of PFO
view the atria, septum and ventricles via three views with echocardiography. see published manuscript for details
Measured: Two hours to do the echocardiography and additional 30 min to call the participant one week after the procedure.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Jun 2025
- Study start1 Mar 2023
- Primary completion12 May 2025
- Study completion12 May 2025
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 Patent Foramen OvaleStudies 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
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 21 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- St. John's Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Minnesota, W.L.Gore & Associates
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07009678
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LOCATE Study 2023
- Acronym
- LOCATE
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 12 May 2025
- Last updated
- 6 Jun 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Panetta CJ, Forgosh LB, Bisinov E, Hussein H, Benditt D, Miller B, Yanavitski M, Thorsgard M, Jorgenson B, Raveendran G, Iqbal N. Lower vs upper extremity injection of agitated saline for identification of patent foramen ovale (LOCATE). J Echocardiogr. 2025 Sep;23(3):188-195. doi: 10.1007/s12574-025-00685-z. Epub 2025 Mar 22.
PubMed 40120067
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Jun 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- LOwer vs Upper Extremity Injection Agitated Saline for identifiCation of pATent Foramen ovalE (LOCATE) Pilot Study to Determine Safety of Lower Extremity Injection of Agitated Saline for Echocardiography of the Heart
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07009678
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LOCATE / LOCATE Study 2023
- Conditions
- Patent Foramen Ovale, Cryptogenic Stroke, Embolic Infarction
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 21 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- St. John's HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Minnesota, W.L.Gore & Associates
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 May 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 12 May 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Jun 2025 (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.
Study Title LOwer vs upper extremity injection agitated saline for identifiCation of pATent foramen ovalE (LOCATE) Pilot study to determine safety of lower extremity injection of agitated saline for echocardiography of the heart.
Primary Investigator Carmelo Panetta, MD University of Minnesota Physicians, St. John's Hospital 1600 St. Johns Blvd, suite 200, Maplewood, MN 55109
Study Design Prospective study of the safety and efficacy upper versus lower extremity injection agitated saline (bubble study) to identify patent foramen ovale (PFO) with echocardiography
Study Objective PFO are not identified in up to one quarter of subjects who have upper arm injection compared to femoral vein injection. We propose use of the PICC line nurses to obtain access in the greater saphenous vein in the lower leg and compare to the upper extremity injection in those subjects with concern for paradoxical embolus but previously PFO was not identified with an upper arm injection.
Study Endpoint Study the safety and efficacy of lower versus upper extremity injection agitated saline (bubble study) for identifying PFO
Subject Population Subjects with history of cryptogenic stroke or arterial embolus of unknown source with negative upper extremity injection agitate saline (bubble study) to identify a PFO.
Number of Sites Three sites to enroll subjects: St. John's/Woodwinds Hospital, University of Minnesota Medical Center and Southdale Hospital. One site to perform procedure at St John's hospital
Expected Time to Complete Enrollment 8-12 months
Schedule of Events Screening and consent of subjects who with negative bubble study for PFO to have upper and lower extremity bubble study, one week follow up and review echocardiography by two cardiologists.
Additional Information Data safety monitoring board will oversee the results every quarter Sample size 20 subjects were consented and enrolled is supported by this grant from GORE Medical.
Detailed description
- Introduction 1.1. Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is present in one third of the population based on autopsy (1) and up to half of those with a prior stroke (2). Diagnosis with echocardiography with an injection of agitated saline (bubble study) in the upper arm for detecting a PFO is the standard of care (3,4). 1.2. Historical Treatments The presence of eustachian ridge in the right atrium is thought to direct blood flow from inferior vena cava (IVC) across the PFO. Conversely, the superior vena cava (SVC) has blood flow directed into the right ventricle. Three studies found in the cardiac catheterization laboratory the femoral vein injection agitated saline can identify up to one quarter more PFO than upper extremity injection(5-7). A larger recent study on 244 people already diagnosed with a PFO, found operators did not detect 25% of patients with PFO by upper arm injection agitated saline compared to femoral vein injection (7). A prospective multicenter study to compare upper arm versus the greater saphenous vein of the leg injection agitated saline with echocardiography to screen for PFO in subjects with prior cryptogenic stroke and of whom no PFO was detected via standard approach with the upper arm injection agitated saline. Funding available enroll 20 subjects with support from GORE therapeutics. 1.3. Study Device Description Access in the greater saphenous vein for an agitated saline injection to identify more PFO compared to an upper arm injection.
- Study Objectives 2.1. Primary Objective: 2.1.1. To evaluate the safety of access in the greater saphenous vein 2.1.2. To compare the efficacy and grading of size of a PFO from upper and lower extremity injection of agitated saline (bubble study
- Study Design
3.1. Coordinators/leadership team: Primary Investigator: Carmelo Panetta, MD Admin lead for Clinical Research East Campus: Andrew Snyder Admin lead for Clinical Research UofMN Campus: Michelle Hintz Admin lead for Nursing team for central iv access/PICC line: Melissa Bustamonte Biostatistician: Sue Duval, PhD Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN
Fairview East Campus St. John's Hospital 1575 Beam Ave, Maplewood, MN 55109 Site Primary Investigator: Carmelo Panetta, MD, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN Non invasive/Echocardiography Director: Mitch Timmons, MD
University of Minnesota Medical Center 500 SE Harvard St, Minneapolis, MN 55455 Site Primary Investigator: Ganesh Raveendran, MD Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN Non invasive Director: Marc Pritzker, MD, Professor of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, UofMN
Southdale Medical Center 6401 France Ave South, Edina, MN 55435 Site Primary Investigator: Marit Thorsgard, MD, Cardiology University of Minnesota Physicians
3.2. Description of Study Design This a prospective non-randomized multicenter study comparing upper versus lower extremity injection of agitated saline (bubble study) to identify PFO.
Subjects with history of cryptogenic stroke are screened who have negative bubble study for PFO by clinical research staff. Subjects are contacted and consented. Patients enrolled would be scheduled in the set times (currently allotted time slot in the afternoon Monday thru Friday at St.John's Hospital).
Access of the femoral vein is considered a procedure limited to the cardiac catheterization laboratory, intensive care unit or the emergency department and generally performed by a physician. The greater saphenous vein courses along the medial aspect of the thigh and enters the femoral vein near the femoral head (see Figure). The location of the greater saphenous vein is ideal for peripheral access given fewer valves to obstruct passage of bubbles to the heart, located usually 0.5 to 2 cm under the skin and is not associated with an artery. The nurse who is previously trained as a specialist in central intravenous access (often referred to as the peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line nurse) would be trained on locating and inserting a 4F (1.33mm diameter) 20cm length catheter (Bard MidLine catheter kit) into the greater saphenous vein in the thigh with standard sterile technique and ultrasound. The upper extremity peripheral intravenous line would be placed by echo technician or PICC nurse per standard of care.
After proper echocardiographic windows have been located, an injection of agitated saline and echocardiography would be performed to search for evidence of bubbles traversing from the right to the left atria and identifying a PFO. The identical agitated saline injection would then be done in lower extremity (which is then lifted up to help with flow back to the heart). After each injection, a waiting period to allow bubbles to pass thru the pulmonary circuit before the next injection. Standard views would be performed in each case to allow echocardiography reviewers to properly comment on the presence or absence of PFO.
The sheath/catheter in greater saphenous vein would be removed and manual pressure held to prevent bleeding for 15 minutes in the cardiac catheterization laboratory recovery suite.
Interpretation by two cardiologists would be completed (*one at the institution where the procedure performed and second outside cardiologist). The results would be placed into the electronic medical records and forwarded to the original physician who ordered the initial bubble study prior to enrollment in the LOCATE study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Lower extremity used for injection of agitated saline to detect PFO | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
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 |
|---|---|---|
| intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site.Also: agitated saline injection (bubble study)Ultrasound access of greater saphenous vein with placement of midline 4French catheter and use of sphygmomanometer to regulate valsalva maneuver, imaging with and without valsalva and injection of agitated saline. | Diagnostic test | Lower extremity used for injection of agitated saline to detect PFO |
Primary outcome
Safety and efficacy of placement of access in greater saphenous vein and performing agitated saline injection (bubble study) with echocardiography to screen for patent foramen ovale.
Time frame: total time for procedure is 4 hours from arrival to departure. Follow up one week later to identify complications
Placement of midline PICC line 4French in greater saphenous vein by PICC nurses with ultrasound and 18 gauge iv in right arm
Comparison of injection of agitate saline via upper versus lower extremity for detection of patent foramen ovale with echocardiography
Time frame: A total time of two hours for the procedure and additional 30 minutes to call the participant one week after the procedure.
see published manuscript - technique noted above.
1 secondary outcome
Injection of agitated saline via greater saphenous vein compared to upper arm injection for visualization of PFO
Time frame: Two hours to do the echocardiography and additional 30 min to call the participant one week after the procedure.
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 6 Jun 2025.
- Background: PubMed 40120067Panetta CJ, Forgosh LB, Bisinov E, Hussein H, Benditt D, Miller B, Yanavitski M, Thorsgard M, Jorgenson B, Raveendran G, Iqbal N. Lower vs upper extremity injection of agitated saline for identification of patent foramen ovale (LOCATE). J Echocardiogr. 2025 Sep;23(3):188-195. doi: 10.1007/s12574-025-00685-z. Epub 2025 Mar 22.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Patent Foramen Ovale
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Hummingbird ICE Study
ATRIAL APPENDAGE CLOSURE for ATRIAL FIBRILLATION, Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
Recruiting
Discontinuation of Antithrombotic Treatment Following Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Young Patients With Cryptogenic Stroke
Patent Foramen Ovale, Ischemic Stroke
Active, not recruiting
Comparing PFO Outcomes of the Occlutech Flex II PFO Occluder to Standard of Care PFO Occlusion
Stroke, Patent Foramen Ovale
RecruitingPhase 3
Migraine Headaches Elimination With Patent Foramen Ovale-Directed Therapy
Migraine Disease, Patent Foramen Ovale
Recruiting
Comparing Two PFO Closure Devices in Adults With Previous Stroke or TIA
Patent Foramen Ovale, 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 intravenous access in greater saphenous vein compared to upper extremity site. in people with Patent Foramen Ovale and Cryptogenic Stroke, run by St. John's Hospital 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?
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 6 Jun 2025. 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 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?
Safety and efficacy of placement of access in greater saphenous vein and performing agitated saline injection (bubble study) with echocardiography to screen for patent foramen ovale. (time frame: total time for procedure is 4 hours from arrival to departure. Follow up one week later to identify complications). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT07009678, 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 6 Jun 2025.