ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT03455881TEDUpdated Mar 8, 2023

Phenotypic and Genetic Assessment of Tracheal and Esophageal Birth Defects in Patients

An observational study in Tracheoesophageal Fistula, Esophageal Atresia and Laryngeal Cleft, sponsored by Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-03-08.

Sponsored by Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Jan 2025, 1 year 10 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Mar 2018; still recruiting 8 years 7 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
360
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The investigators propose a preliminary study performing exome sequencing on samples from patients and their biologically related family members with tracheal and esophageal birth defects (TED). The purpose of this study is to determine if patients diagnosed with TED and similar disorders carry distinct mutations that lead to predisposition.

The investigators will use advanced, non-invasive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques to assess tracheal esophageal, lung, and cardiac morphology and function in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) patients. MRI techniques is done exclusively if patient is clinically treated at primary study location and if patient has not yet had their initial esophageal repair.

Read the detailed description

TEDs (tracheal esophageal birth defects) are a life threatening congenital disorder with multiple long term complications. Occurring in 1 in 2,500 to 4,500 live births, TEDs include tracheal malformations such as tracheomalacia, laryngotracheoesophageal clefts, tracheal agenesis, tracheal stenosis, tracheal bronchus, esophageal bronchus and esophageal malformations such as esophageal atresia (EA), tracheal esophageal fistula (TEF), and esophageal duplication. TEDs likely have a genetic basis, but in most cases the specific mutations are unknown. The most commonly diagnosed TED, requiring neonatal hospitalization, is EA/TEF. The familial recurrence rate of EA/TEF is 1% suggesting many result from de novo mutations and while environmental factors may have a minor influence, the mechanisms are unclear. The investigators hypothesize that patients diagnosed with TED and similar disorders carry distinct mutations that lead to predisposition. Currently the diagnosis is confirmed only with a plain chest x-ray showing a coiled feeding tube within the upper esophageal pouch. This approach does not determine the anatomic subtype of EA/TEF, the number or location of TEFs, the size of the gap between proximal and distal esophagus, or the presence of tracheomalacia. Many have evaluated preoperative laryngotracheo-bronchoscopy (LTB) and others have evaluated preoperative computerized tomography (CT) scanning to decrease the unknown factors associated with x-ray, but despite their potential benefits, they have great drawbacks. Therefore, there is a compelling need to develop noninvasive non ionizing imaging methods to evaluate TED infants. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is an ideal candidate to fill this role in that it provides non-invasive high resolution anatomic and functional information. Here the investigators propose a preliminary study performing exome sequencing on samples from these patients and their biologically related family members. The investigators will also use advanced, non-invasive MR imaging techniques to assess TE, lung, and cardiac morphology and function in NICU patients.

02

Conditions studied

  • Tracheoesophageal Fistula
  • Esophageal Atresia
  • Laryngeal Cleft
  • Tracheal Stenosis
  • Bronchial Stenosis
  • Esophageal Bronchus
  • Congenital High Airway Obstruction Syndrome

Keywords

  • TEF
  • EA
  • Tracheal Esophageal birth Defect (TED)
03

In context

Esophageal Atresia

37 studies on the registry are indexed under Esophageal Atresia; 12 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 360 is above the median of 50 across 19 observational studies indexed under Esophageal Atresia.

Browse Esophageal Atresia studies →

Lead sponsor

Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati is the lead sponsor of 673 studies on the registry; 130 are open to participants now.

Of its 57 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 31 (54%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Approximately 100 NICU TED patient/parent trios for the NICU TED Genetic cohort.

Approximately 100 NICU TED patients for the NICU TED MRI cohort. These patients will also be in the NICU TED cohort.

Approximately 155 TED patient/parent trios from the Esophageal Center for the Esophageal Center Genetic cohort.

Approximately 5 NICU infants with normal tracheal and esophageal anatomy for the NICU Control MRI cohort.

Eligibility criteria

TED Genetic Cohort:

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patient that has been diagnosed by clinical team with a congenital TED OR family member to the TED diagnosed patient.
  • Willingness to donate biological specimens.
  • Ability to consent/assent as appropriate.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unable to determine or unavailable parent trio.
  • Unable to provide DNA sample.
  • Inability to provide consent.

NICU TED Genetic Cohort:

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Infant born between 24 and 42 weeks PMA.
  • TED diagnosed by clinical team.
  • Inpatient in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) OR family member to the inpatient in the NICU.
  • Willingness to donate biological specimens.
  • Ability to consent/assent as appropriate.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unable to determine or unavailable parent trio.
  • Unable to provide DNA sample.
  • Inability to provide consent.

NICU TED MRI Cohort:

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Infant born between 24 and 42 weeks PMA.
  • TED diagnosed by clinical team.
  • Inpatient in the CCHMC (Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center) NICU.
  • Clinically stable and adequate temperature control to tolerate MRI as determined by the primary clinical team.
  • Infant and biological parents are participating in the NICU TED cohort.
  • Ability to consent/assent as appropriate.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Infant is on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).
  • Evidence of congenital diseases that may affect ability to tolerate MRI.
  • Standard MRI exclusion criteria as set forth by the CCHMC Department of Radiology. This includes any from tracheostomy tubes that are not MR compatible.
  • Inability to provide consent.

NICU Control MRI Cohort:

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Infant born between 24 and 42 weeks post menstrual age (PMA).
  • No tracheal or esophageal defects.
  • Inpatient in the CCHMC NICU.
  • Clinically stable and adequate temperature control to tolerate MRI as determined by the primary clinical team.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Infant is on ECMO.
  • Evidence of congenital diseases that may affect ability to tolerate MRI.
  • Standard MRI exclusion criteria as set forth by the CCHMC Department of Radiology. This includes any contraindications from tracheostomy tubes that are not MR compatible.
  • Inability to provide consent.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
360 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No
Biospecimen retention
Samples with dna

Groups and cohorts

  • NICU TED Genetic Cohort

    This study involves one inpatient biofluid collection encounter from the subject, one biofluid collection encounter from each biological parent, and an optional biofluid collection encounter from other biological family members.

  • NICU TED MRI Cohort

    This study involves up to three inpatient NICU MRI encounters. The first MRI may be done before surgical repair if the clinical team feels the infant is clinically stable. The second MRI may be completed post-surgical repair of TED. An additional 3rd MRI may be done prior to the time of discharge from the NICU. The pre repair, post-surgical, and pre discharge MRIs will provide valuable data for the understanding of tracheal esophageal malformation disorders and may provide clinical guidance for the participant's care.

  • TED Genetic Cohort

    This study involves one biofluid collection encounter from the subject, one biofluid collection encounter from each biological parent, and an optional biofluid collection encounter from other biological family members.

  • NICU Control MRI Cohort

    This study involves two inpatient NICU MRI encounters. The first MRI will occur within the first month of life, and the second MRI will occur prior to discharge.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Genomic Sequencing

    Identify novel genes and mutations in patients with TEDs using trio genomic sequencing of TED patients and their parents.

    Time frame: 1 day

  2. Anatomic phenotypes using MRI

    Investigate the esophageal, tracheal, mediastinal and pulmonary anatomy in patients with TEDs.

    Time frame: 1 day

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in the anatomic phenotype using MRI

    Investigate the esophageal, tracheal, mediastinal and pulmonary anatomy in patients with TEDs before and after surgical repair.

    Time frame: Change in MRI from pre-repair to discharge

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Brosens E, Ploeg M, van Bever Y, Koopmans AE, IJsselstijn H, Rottier RJ, Wijnen R, Tibboel D, de Klein A. Clinical and etiological heterogeneity in patients with tracheo-esophageal malformations and associated anomalies. Eur J Med Genet. 2014 Aug;57(8):440-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2014.05.009. Epub 2014 Jun 13. PubMed 24931924 ↗
  • Sfeir R, Michaud L, Salleron J, Gottrand F. Epidemiology of esophageal atresia. Dis Esophagus. 2013 May-Jun;26(4):354-5. doi: 10.1111/dote.12051. PubMed 23679022 ↗
  • Sfeir R, Michaud L, Sharma D, Richard F, Gottrand F. National Esophageal Atresia Register. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2015 Dec;25(6):497-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1569466. Epub 2015 Dec 7. PubMed 26642387 ↗
  • McMullen KP, Karnes PS, Moir CR, Michels VV. Familial recurrence of tracheoesophageal fistula and associated malformations. Am J Med Genet. 1996 Jun 28;63(4):525-8. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8628(19960628)63:43.0.CO;2-N. PubMed 8826429 ↗
  • Oddsberg J, Jia C, Nilsson E, Ye W, Lagergren J. Influence of maternal parity, age, and ethnicity on risk of esophageal atresia in the infant in a population-based study. J Pediatr Surg. 2008 Sep;43(9):1660-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.11.021. PubMed 18779003 ↗
  • Parolini F, Boroni G, Stefini S, Agapiti C, Bazzana T, Alberti D. Role of preoperative tracheobronchoscopy in newborns with esophageal atresia: A review. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Oct 16;6(10):482-7. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v6.i10.482. PubMed 25324919 ↗
  • Zani A, Eaton S, Hoellwarth ME, Puri P, Tovar J, Fasching G, Bagolan P, Lukac M, Wijnen R, Kuebler JF, Cecchetto G, Rintala R, Pierro A. International survey on the management of esophageal atresia. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2014 Feb;24(1):3-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1350058. Epub 2013 Aug 9. PubMed 23934626 ↗
  • Lal D, Miyano G, Juang D, Sharp NE, St Peter SD. Current patterns of practice and technique in the repair of esophageal atresia and tracheoesophageal fistua: an IPEG survey. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013 Jul;23(7):635-8. doi: 10.1089/lap.2013.0210. Epub 2013 Jun 12. PubMed 23758564 ↗
  • Sharma N, Srinivas M. Laryngotracheobronchoscopy prior to esophageal atresia and tracheoesophageal fistula repair--its use and importance. J Pediatr Surg. 2014 Feb;49(2):367-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.09.009. PubMed 24528988 ↗
  • Atzori P, Iacobelli BD, Bottero S, Spirydakis J, Laviani R, Trucchi A, Braguglia A, Bagolan P. Preoperative tracheobronchoscopy in newborns with esophageal atresia: does it matter? J Pediatr Surg. 2006 Jun;41(6):1054-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2006.01.074. PubMed 16769333 ↗
  • Pigna A, Gentili A, Landuzzi V, Lima M, Baroncini S. Bronchoscopy in newborns with esophageal atresia. Pediatr Med Chir. 2002 Jul-Aug;24(4):297-301. PubMed 12197089 ↗
  • Mahalik SK, Sodhi KS, Narasimhan KL, Rao KL. Role of preoperative 3D CT reconstruction for evaluation of patients with esophageal atresia and tracheoesophageal fistula. Pediatr Surg Int. 2012 Oct;28(10):961-6. doi: 10.1007/s00383-012-3111-9. Epub 2012 Jun 22. PubMed 22722826 ↗
  • Ngerncham M, Lee EY, Zurakowski D, Tracy DA, Jennings R. Tracheobronchomalacia in pediatric patients with esophageal atresia: comparison of diagnostic laryngoscopy/bronchoscopy and dynamic airway multidetector computed tomography. J Pediatr Surg. 2015 Mar;50(3):402-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.08.021. Epub 2014 Oct 1. PubMed 25746697 ↗
  • Pedersen RN, Calzolari E, Husby S, Garne E; EUROCAT Working group. Oesophageal atresia: prevalence, prenatal diagnosis and associated anomalies in 23 European regions. Arch Dis Child. 2012 Mar;97(3):227-32. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2011-300597. Epub 2012 Jan 13. PubMed 22247246 ↗
  • Teague WJ, Karpelowsky J. Surgical management of oesophageal atresia. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2016 Jun;19:10-5. doi: 10.1016/j.prrv.2016.04.003. Epub 2016 Apr 21. PubMed 27217220 ↗
  • Vissers LE, de Ligt J, Gilissen C, Janssen I, Steehouwer M, de Vries P, van Lier B, Arts P, Wieskamp N, del Rosario M, van Bon BW, Hoischen A, de Vries BB, Brunner HG, Veltman JA. A de novo paradigm for mental retardation. Nat Genet. 2010 Dec;42(12):1109-12. doi: 10.1038/ng.712. Epub 2010 Nov 14. PubMed 21076407 ↗
  • Tkach JA, Hillman NH, Jobe AH, Loew W, Pratt RG, Daniels BR, Kallapur SG, Kline-Fath BM, Merhar SL, Giaquinto RO, Winter PM, Li Y, Ikegami M, Whitsett JA, Dumoulin CL. An MRI system for imaging neonates in the NICU: initial feasibility study. Pediatr Radiol. 2012 Nov;42(11):1347-56. doi: 10.1007/s00247-012-2444-9. Epub 2012 Jun 27. PubMed 22735927 ↗
  • Mathur AM, Neil JJ, McKinstry RC, Inder TE. Transport, monitoring, and successful brain MR imaging in unsedated neonates. Pediatr Radiol. 2008 Mar;38(3):260-4. doi: 10.1007/s00247-007-0705-9. Epub 2007 Dec 19. PubMed 18175110 ↗
  • Windram J, Grosse-Wortmann L, Shariat M, Greer ML, Crawford MW, Yoo SJ. Cardiovascular MRI without sedation or general anesthesia using a feed-and-sleep technique in neonates and infants. Pediatr Radiol. 2012 Feb;42(2):183-7. doi: 10.1007/s00247-011-2219-8. Epub 2011 Aug 23. PubMed 21861089 ↗
09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Started Mar 2018 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Jan 2025, 82 months after the start.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 12, 2018
First posted
Mar 7, 2018
StartActual
Mar 28, 2018
Primary completionEst.
Jan 2025
CompletionEst.
Jan 2026
Last update
Mar 8, 2023
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 8, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03455881
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 7, 2018
Start date
Mar 28, 2018
Primary completion
Jan 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 8, 2023

Study contacts

Paul Kingma, MD, PhD
Contact
paul.kingma@cchmc.org
(513)636-2995
Paul Kingma, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion