The Role of Push Enteroscopy in Patients With Passing Melena With Nondiagnostic EGD.
NCT ID: NCT06574542
Last Updated: 2024-08-29
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.
COMPLETED
NA
77 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-07-08
2022-12-30
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.
Urgent Panendoscopy in Patients Presenting With Hematochezia
NCT06985277
The Effectiveness of Video-capsule Endoscopy in Gastrointestinal Bleeding of Obscure Origin
NCT01424254
Endoscopic Evaluation of Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding (GIB) in Patients Presenting With Melena
NCT00164723
Efficacy of Wireless Capsule Endoscopy and CT Enterography in Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding
NCT02219568
A Prospective Study Comparing Urgent Video Capsule Endoscopy With Urgent Double-balloon Enteroscopy
NCT01654770
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Despite thorough evaluations using both EGD and colonoscopy, the cause of overt GI bleeding remains unidentified in 4% to 15% of cases, prompting consideration of small bowel bleeding. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is often recommended in this situation due to its high diagnostic yield and noninvasive nature. However, VCE has limitations, such as missing proximal small bowel lesions and the inability to provide therapeutic interventions.
Push enteroscopy (PE) offers an alternative approach for investigating obscure GI bleeding. This straightforward endoscopic technique, which most gastroenterologists can perform without specialized equipment, is cost-effective and diagnostically efficient, with yields ranging from 30% to 50%. Utilizing PE in patients with melena and a negative EGD may help avoid unnecessary procedures like colonoscopy and VCE, ultimately reducing treatment costs.
This study aims to compare the diagnostic effectiveness of push enteroscopy (PE) and colonoscopy in patients presenting with melena, no hematemesis, and negative EGD results.
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.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Patients with Melena, No Hematemesis, and Nondiagnostic EGD
Consecutive patients who presented with melena (defined as black, tarry stools) without hematemesis, in whom EGD did not identify a bleeding source, were included for further investigation
Push enteroscopy (PE)
All patients enrolled in this study underwent evaluation using push enteroscopy (PE)
Colonoscopy
After push enteroscopy (PE), all patients subsequently underwent a colonoscopy on the same day or the next day. However, if a culprit lesion was identified during PE and the patient was considered at risk for undergoing colonoscopy, the colonoscopy was not performed and was presumed to be negative.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Push enteroscopy (PE)
All patients enrolled in this study underwent evaluation using push enteroscopy (PE)
Colonoscopy
After push enteroscopy (PE), all patients subsequently underwent a colonoscopy on the same day or the next day. However, if a culprit lesion was identified during PE and the patient was considered at risk for undergoing colonoscopy, the colonoscopy was not performed and was presumed to be negative.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Patients admitted to the hospital for acute gastrointestinal bleeding, presenting with symptoms of melena.
3. Patients who have undergone esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) without identification of the source of gastrointestinal bleeding.
4. Patients who have signed informed consent to participate in the study.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients with unstable vital signs before undergoing push enteroscopy.
3. Patients with conditions that contraindicate endoscopy, such as severe asthma or serious cardiac conditions.
4. Patients with a history of bleeding disorders or uncorrectable coagulation abnormalities.
5. Patients who have contraindications to bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol.
6. Pregnant patients.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Siriraj Hospital
OTHER
Mahidol University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Julajak Limsrivilai
Associate Professor
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Gastroenterology division, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
Bangkok, , Thailand
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Si 484/2019
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.