The Effectiveness of Video-capsule Endoscopy in Gastrointestinal Bleeding of Obscure Origin
Information source: McGill University Health Center
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on August 23, 2015 Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
Condition(s) targeted: Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Intervention: Capsule GIVEN IMAGING (Device); Push-Enteroscopy (Procedure)
Phase: Phase 3
Status: Completed
Sponsored by: McGill University Health Center
Summary
The study objective is to compare the cost-effectiveness of VCE to push enteroscopy in
patients with gastrointestinal bleeding of obscure origin with a negative initial work-up.
Clinical Details
Study design: Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Single Blind (Subject), Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
Primary outcome: The primary outcome measure is the detection rate of clinically significant lesions thought to be responsible for the patients with gastrointestinal bleeding of obscure origin
Secondary outcome: resolution of the anemia/recurrent bleedingblood transfusion requirements Number of required imaging tests (i.e: gastroscopy, colonoscopy, etc) hospitalization/length of stay days away from usual activities (protocol unrelated) patient satisfaction
Detailed description:
Background: The introduction of the wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) may dramatically alter
the management of patients with small bowel disease such as chronic gastrointestinal
bleeding of obscure origin (CGB). Yet, to date, this non invasive technique has undergone
widespread diffusion in the absence of properly designed prospective comparative
cost-effectiveness evaluations.
Objectives: To examine the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of a novel approach
employing WCE compared to that of push enteroscopy (PE).
Hypothesis: WCE is more cost-effective than PE in patients with CGB. Study design: We
propose a randomized clinical trial comparing WCE to PE. Study population: Patients with CGB
having undergone initial normal assessment with gastroscopy, colonoscopy and radiological
examination of the small bowel.
Outcomes: Primary objective: To compare the detection rates of "clinically significant"
small bowel lesions using WCE versus PE in CGB patients randomized to either modality.
Secondary objectives: To determine the "cure rate" for each technique after 6 months, the
cost-effectiveness of WCE versus PE, the type of small bowel lesions most likely to impact
on clinical care, inter-rater variability in reading WCE examinations, the feasibility of
WCE interpretation by a dedicated technician, the safety of each imaging modality, and to
compare patient satisfaction and quality of life between the two groups.
Eligibility
Minimum age: 18 Years.
Maximum age: N/A.
Gender(s): Both.
Criteria:
Inclusion Criteria:
- Age > 18 years old
- Normal gastroscopy, colonoscopy and small bowel follow through in the last 3 months
Exclusion Criteria:
- Demonstrable source of blood outside the GI tract
- Significant cardiopulmonary disease
- Suspicion of strictures or fistulae of the GI tract
- Pregnancy
- Numerous small intestinal diverticula
- Zenker's diverticulum
- Extensive Crohn's enteritis
Locations and Contacts
Montreal General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec H3G1A4, Canada
Additional Information
Starting date: October 2003
Last updated: August 25, 2011
|