Clinical Study on the Selection of Endoscopic Varicose Disconnection Strategy Based on Natural Portal Shunt with Portal Hypertension
NCT ID: NCT06883071
Last Updated: 2025-03-19
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.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
32 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-07-01
2027-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Research objectives: By collecting case data, blood tests, gastroscopy reports, and CTP examination results of GV patients, endoscopic secondary prevention interruption surgery is performed on them. Compare the varicose vein elimination rate, amount of tissue glue used, rebleeding rate, complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, treatment costs, etc. of GV patients after endoscopic treatment, and evaluate the efficacy of different endoscopic treatment methods. At the same time, combined with factors such as etiology, liver function grade, and gender, formulate the best strategy for endoscopic interruption treatment of GV patients.
Key scientific issues to be addressed: a. Compare the efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastric varices with natural portosystemic shunts b. Provide a basis for strategic selection for endoscopic devascularization of gastric varices 5. Research methods, technical routes and schedule Research methods
1. Clinical trial registration All patients complied with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine.
2. Patient inclusion and related examinations 32 patients with GV were included, with the following inclusion criteria: 1. Age ≥ 18 years; 2. History of liver cirrhosis and previous portal hypertension bleeding; 3. Endoscopic and abdominal CT assessment of IGV1 varicose veins and presence of SPSS; 4. Patients agreed to EUS treatment Exclusion criteria: 1. Previous treatment for portal hypertension bleeding (including endoscopy, intervention, and surgery); 2. Patients with critical illness, pregnant patients, immunodeficiency diseases (such as systemic lupus erythematosus), and mental illness; 3. Patients who refused endoscopic treatment
3. Implementation of the plan:
All patients with complete hemodynamic characteristics of gastric varicose veins and stable vital signs were treated with endoscopic interruption of flow and signed a consent form for treatment; all patients were randomly divided into 2 groups (random table established), with 16 patients in each group. Group A: endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided spring plug combined with ECI: Spring plug was placed to limit flow in varicose veins determined by EUS, and then tissue glue was injected under EUS to block varicose veins. Group B: Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug flow limiting combined with ECI: After partial endoscopic titanium clip flow limiting, spring coils were placed in the varicose veins under ultrasound (EUS) guidance to determine the inflow and outflow tracts and to inject woven glue. Patients in both groups underwent CTP and gastroscopy follow-up at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the initial treatment, and additional endoscopic treatment was performed if necessary; if bleeding occurred again during the period, timely treatment was given according to the condition (drugs, endoscopy, intervention or surgery); if other complications occurred, if they did not affect the study, the planned plan was continued.
4. Comparative analysis of results:
The postoperative bleeding rate of patients in the two groups after gastroscopy diagnosis and treatment was observed and compared (including a. short-term bleeding rate within 72 hours: hematemesis or black stool; systolic blood pressure decreased by \>20 mmHg or heart rate increased by \>20 times/min; in the absence of blood transfusion: hemoglobin decreased by \>30 g/L; b. rebleeding: active bleeding occurred within 6 months; differences in hospitalization time and cost, as well as gender, age, etiology, basic liver function, etc. were further compared.)
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Efficacy and Safety of EUS-Guided Therapy Versus BRTO for Gastric Varices With Shunt
NCT04828369
Evaluation of EUS in Preventing Rebleeding After Endoscopic Cyanoacrylate Injection for Gastric Varices
NCT05515861
Gastric Variceal Ligation Versus Gastric Variceal Obturation for Secondary Prophylaxis of Gastric Varices
NCT03729921
Endoscopic Sclerotherapy and/or Ligation Versus Portacaval Shunt for Bleeding Gastric Varices
NCT00820781
Efficacy and Safety of Contrast EUS-Guided Tissue Glue/Coil Devascularization vs. BRTO for Preventing Recurrent Gastric Variceal Bleeding
NCT07049146
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
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
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group A
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided spring plug combined with ECI
Group A: Spring plug combined with ECI under the guidance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS): Spring plug was placed to limit the flow of varicose veins by EUS, and then tissue glue was injected under EUS to block the varicose veins. Group B: Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug placement to limit the flow combined with ECI: After partial titanium clip flow limitation under endoscopy, spring coil combined with tissue glue injection was placed in the varicose veins by judging the inflow and outflow tracts under the guidance of ultrasound (EUS).
Group B
Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug placement for flow limiting combined with ECI
Group A: Spring plug combined with ECI under the guidance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS): Spring plug was placed to limit the flow of varicose veins by EUS, and then tissue glue was injected under EUS to block the varicose veins. Group B: Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug placement to limit the flow combined with ECI: After partial titanium clip flow limitation under endoscopy, spring coil combined with tissue glue injection was placed in the varicose veins by judging the inflow and outflow tracts under the guidance of ultrasound (EUS).
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided spring plug combined with ECI
Group A: Spring plug combined with ECI under the guidance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS): Spring plug was placed to limit the flow of varicose veins by EUS, and then tissue glue was injected under EUS to block the varicose veins. Group B: Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug placement to limit the flow combined with ECI: After partial titanium clip flow limitation under endoscopy, spring coil combined with tissue glue injection was placed in the varicose veins by judging the inflow and outflow tracts under the guidance of ultrasound (EUS).
Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug placement for flow limiting combined with ECI
Group A: Spring plug combined with ECI under the guidance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS): Spring plug was placed to limit the flow of varicose veins by EUS, and then tissue glue was injected under EUS to block the varicose veins. Group B: Titanium clip plus EUS-guided spring plug placement to limit the flow combined with ECI: After partial titanium clip flow limitation under endoscopy, spring coil combined with tissue glue injection was placed in the varicose veins by judging the inflow and outflow tracts under the guidance of ultrasound (EUS).
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University
OTHER
Zhejiang University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Xiaolong Zheng
Experimental researcher
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
YAN2024-0545
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.