Disclaimer: This site aggregates publicly available data from official government sources (FDA, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, SEC EDGAR) for general reference only. It does NOT constitute medical advice, diagnosis, treatment recommendations, or investment advice.

Clinical Trial

OTSC vs. Angiographic Embolization in Patients With Refractory Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

NCT: NCT04902248 · RECRUITING

NCT IDNCT04902248
StatusRECRUITING
Start Date2021-11-27
Completion2026-11-30
SponsorChinese University of Hong Kong (OTHER)
First posted
Last updated

Brief Summary

In the management of patients with acute upper non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, further bleeding is the most important adverse factor predictive of mortality. In the United Kingdom Audit on acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, clinical evidence of further bleeding was reported in 13% of patients following the first endoscopy and 27% of them died. The use of OTSC has emerged as an alternative before angiographic embolization(TAE) which is often considered most definitive. We propose to define the algorithm in the management of patients with refractory bleeding from their peptic ulcers or other non variceal causes. We hypothesize that endoscopic use of OTSC compares favourably with TAE and both lead to similar outcomes. An equivalence of the two modalities may mean that endoscopic application of OTSC should be attempted before TAE as often we need to document further bleeds with endoscopy and a second treatment should be instituted at the same time.

Official Source

View on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov API. For the most current status, refer to the official record.

↑