Comparing Endoglide to Endoserter for DSAEK Graft Insertion
NCT ID: NCT01791075
Last Updated: 2013-02-15
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
NA
42 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2012-01-31
2014-01-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Staged and Combined Surgery for Cataract Patients With Corneal Endothelial Dysfunction
NCT02523950
Corneal Endothelial Cell Loss After Trabeculectomy Versus Phakotrabeculectomy
NCT03107000
Descemet Stripping (Automated) Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSEK or DSAEK)
NCT00543660
Corneal Endothelium Evaluation After Phacoemulsification in Diabetec and Non-diabetic Patients With Pseudoexfoliation
NCT04965168
Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Combined With Intraocular Lens Exchange: Sequential Versus Combined Surgery
NCT04344522
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The standard of care at the Toronto Western Hospital for Dr. Rootman's and Dr. Slomovic's patients with corneal endothelial disease is to perform DSAEK surgery with the Tan Endoglide for insertion of the donor graft. Other surgeons at Toronto Western Hospital use either Busin glide or specifically designed forceps for insertion of the donor graft as part of the standard of care. Still others have advocated the use of the suture pull-through technique.
There is significant disagreement in the literature regarding the DSAEK insertion technique that best preserves the donor endothelium. Some investigators report better results with a forceps or sutures, and others caution against any folding. The less traumatic the insertion to the endothelium, the better the long term survival of the corneal transplant. In addition, surgeons also debate whether large- or small-incision DSAEK is better for the graft's long-term viability, its propensity for postoperative dislocation, and the ease of insertion in the OR. The proposed advantages of the Tan EndoGlide include consistent and reliable delivery of the corneal donor through a small incision with minimal endothelial loss. The advantages of a small-incision DSAEK are, that it provides a more stable wound postoperatively, sutureless surgery, speed, and convenience for combining the procedure with standard phacoemulsification. Balancing the attractiveness of small-incision DSAEK with the concern for endothelial injury from donor folding and forceps compression, the Endosaver (Ocular Systems, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC) a novel DSAEK injector device, has been recently introduced. It allows the surgeon to insert unfolded tissue without a forceps through a 4-mm clear corneal incision.
Both devices have been approved for use by Health Canada as a Class 1 device (http://www.angioedupro.com/Sharpoint/index.php?seek=394).
Recently, the results of a randomised prospective study being conducted by Dr. D. Tan (inventor of the Tan EndoGlide) were published. In this study the effect on endothelial cell counts using the Tan EndoGlide has been evaluated. The investigators report a 15.6% of endothelial cell loss 12 months after DSAEK surgery. There are no published studies regarding the Endosaver injector, nevertheless, preliminary results indicate poorer outcome (30% cell loss after one month). No study comparing the two devices in regard to endothelial cell loss was reported so far.
The purpose of this study is to compare the Tan EndoGlide with the new Endosaver injector in terms of damage to the donor corneal endothelium by comparing the endothelial cell loss at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Our study would involve prospectively examining a total of 42 subjects (21 eyes with the Tan EndoGlide and 21 eyes with the Endosaver injector) and compare endothelial cell loss and visual outcomes between groups.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Tan Endoglide
Patients assigned to this arm will have their endothelial donor graft injected into the anterior chamber using the Tan Endoglide.
Tan Endoglide
Patients assigned to this intervention will have their endothelial donor graft injected into the anterior chamber using the Tan Endoglide
Endosaver/serter
Patients assigned to this arm will have their endothelial donor graft injected into the anterior chamber using the Endosaver/serter injector.
Endosaver
Patients assigned to this intervention will have their endothelial donor graft injected into the anterior chamber using the Tan Endoglide
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Tan Endoglide
Patients assigned to this intervention will have their endothelial donor graft injected into the anterior chamber using the Tan Endoglide
Endosaver
Patients assigned to this intervention will have their endothelial donor graft injected into the anterior chamber using the Tan Endoglide
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Clinical diagnosis include endothelial cell dysfunction secondary to Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, pseudophakic or aphakic bullous keratopathy, failed penetrating keratoplasty or DSAEK, iridocorneal endothelial syndrome or trauma.
* Ability to understand the nature of the procedure and give full informed consent.
* Patients who are able to comply with the standard DSAEK follow-up protocol at the Toronto Western Hospital.
Exclusion Criteria
* Patients with complex anterior segment pathology precluding successful DSAEK procedure.
* Patients not giving full informed consent to participate in the trial
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University Health Network, Toronto
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
David S. Rootman, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
TWH - UHN
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Toronto Western Hospital
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
REB 10-0631-B
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.