NCT04148170

Brief Summary

The purpose of the current work is to assess the efficiency and success rate of endodiathermy probe followed by intubation in children more than 2 years compared to the success rate of intubation (as a standard method) which varies from 75% to 85% in several studies

Trial Health

43
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
80

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for phase_2

Timeline
Completed

Started Mar 2020

Shorter than P25 for phase_2

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
unknown

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

October 27, 2019

Completed
5 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

November 1, 2019

Completed
4 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

March 1, 2020

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

June 1, 2020

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

September 1, 2020

Completed
Last Updated

November 1, 2019

Status Verified

October 1, 2019

Enrollment Period

3 months

First QC Date

October 27, 2019

Last Update Submit

October 30, 2019

Conditions

Keywords

Endodiathermy Probe and Intubation Versus Intubation Only

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • recanalization of nasolacrimal duct

    compare the efficiency of endodiathermy probe followed by intubation versus probing with metal probe followed by intubation by 1. epiphora (overflow of tears onto the face) 2. increase tear film meniscus ( more than 1mm in height) 3. mucous discharge 4. Fluorescein disappearance test (Normally, little or no dye remains after 5 minutes. Prolonged retention is indicative of inadequate lacrimal drainage)

    6 months

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • complication

    6 months

Study Arms (2)

classic intubation

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

children suffer from congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction will have probing with metal probe and then intubation with bicanlicular silicon tube.

Procedure: Endodiathermy Probe and Intubation Versus Intubation

endodiathermy probe

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

children suffer from congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction will have probing with endodiathermy probe and then intubation with bicanlicular silicon tube

Procedure: Endodiathermy Probe and Intubation Versus Intubation

Interventions

children suffer from congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction will have probing with endodiathermy probe and then intubation with bicanlicular silicon tube

classic intubationendodiathermy probe

Eligibility Criteria

Age2 Years - 7 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsChild (0-17)

You may qualify if:

  • Children in the age group above 2 years old
  • No history of previous probing.
  • No history of previous intubation.
  • Children with no any other association or congenital anomalies cause watery eye.
  • children suffer from congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

You may not qualify if:

  • children less than 2 years old.
  • previous probing.
  • previous intubation.
  • children with any other congenital anomalies as congenital ectropion , congenital entropion
  • children suffer from any upper lacrimal anomalies as obstruction or stenosis.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Abo El Resh Pedriatric Hospital Cairo University

Cairo, 31111, Egypt

RECRUITING

Related Publications (1)

  • Suranagi PV, Poornima MS; Smruthi; Banagar B. Regarding a novel technique to recanalize the nasolacrimal duct with endodiathermy bipolar probe. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep;62(9):971. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.143956. No abstract available.

Study Officials

  • tamer gawdat, professor

    professor of ophthalmology cairo university

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

mohamed hafez ibrahim

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 2
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT
Masking Details
all will be know the surgical procedure but participant will know only that he will be treated but cant understand type of procedure done
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: Group (I): 80 eyes of children suffer from congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction will have probing with metal probe and then intubation with bicanlicular silicon tube. Group (II): 80 eyes of children suffer from congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction will have probing with endodiathermy probe and then intubation with bicanlicular silicon tube.
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology.

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

October 27, 2019

First Posted

November 1, 2019

Study Start

March 1, 2020

Primary Completion

June 1, 2020

Study Completion

September 1, 2020

Last Updated

November 1, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-10

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will share

after finishiny my research can share my data

Shared Documents
STUDY PROTOCOL, ICF
Time Frame
1 year untill 1 year and 6 months
Access Criteria
after finish my study

Locations