ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT03921502PECASUpdated Mar 11, 2025

Clinical Trial Comparing ERCP vs ERCP and Transmural Gall Bladder Drainage

An interventional study of Gall bladder transmural drainage with LAMS in Bile Duct; Obstruction, With Calculus and Choledocholithiasis, sponsored by Hospital del Rio Hortega. Recruiting at 1 site in Spain. Open to participants aged 75 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-03-11.

Sponsored by Hospital del Rio Hortega · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Aug 2019; still recruiting 7 years 3 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
150
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
75 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Cholelithiasis occurs in 10-20% of the general population. Up to 18% of these subjects will present symptoms. In patients with symptomatic choledocholithiasis who are not candidates for surgery with indication for ERCP, transmural drainage of the gallbladder reduces the risk of recurrence.

The investigators propose a multicentric double-blind randomized trial. Our primary objective is to assess whether ERCP associated with transmural gallbladder drainage is able to reduce biliary disease income compared with ERCP in patients not candidates for surgery with symptomatic choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis during one year of follow-up. Also the investigators will analyze the proportion of technical success and complications.

The study population includes all patients older than 75 years with symptomatic choledocholithiasis. An estimated 75 subjects per group (ERCP alone and ERCP and transmural drainage) are needed.

Read the detailed description
  1. Introduction Cholelithiasis occurs in 10-20% of the general population (1). Up to 18% of these subjects will present symptoms and, of these, 1.5% will present an episode of pancreatitis, cholecystitis or acute cholangitis (2). In this way, the pathology associated with biliary lithiasis is the first digestive cause of hospital admission (3).

    The treatment of the pathology associated with biliary lithiasis therefore deals with two problems, controlling the acute process and preventing new episodes. In general, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the recommended method to reduce the risk of recurrence.

  2. Hypothesis

    Conceptual hypothesis:

    In patients with symptomatic choledocholithiasis who are not candidates for surgery with indication for ERCP, transmural drainage of the gallbladder reduces the risk of recurrence.

    Operational hypothesis:

    In subjects> 75 years with symptomatic choledocholithiasis, performing an ERCP with sphincterotomy and transmural drainage of the gallbladder vs. ERCP with sphincterotomy reduces the risk of admission due to complications of cholelithiasis during a 1-year follow-up period.

  3. Objectives.

    Primary objective:

    • To assess whether ERCP associated with transmural gallbladder drainage is able to reduce biliary disease income compared with ERCP in patients not candidates for surgery with symptomatic choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis during one year of follow-up.

    Secondary objectives:

    • Describe the proportion of technical successes and complications associated with transmural biliary drainage, ERCP and those associated with admission.
    • Compare the proportion of income from non-biliary causes in both groups.
    • Compare mortality during admission and during follow-up in both groups.
    • To compare the incidence of biliary and non-biliary admissions during the follow-up year in both groups.
    • Compare the hospital costs of the index income and those generated in the 12 months of follow-up between the patients assigned to the control group and the experimental group.
  4. Design Multicentric double-blind randomized trial
  5. Methods Study population The study population includes all patients older than 75 years with symptomatic choledocholithiasis. This includes the pictures of acute cholangitis, obstructive jaundice or biliary colic secondary to choledocholithiasis. Participation in the study will be offered to all consecutive patients who meet inclusion criteria and do not present exclusion criteria diagnosed in the participating centers once the project is started until the estimated sample size is completed (see below). Given that in these patients the usual clinical practice is the realization of an ERCP, they will be identified from the ERCP requests received in the endoscopy units.

Intervention Patients who meet the inclusion criteria and do not present any exclusion criteria will be invited to participate in the study. Between the formalization of the request and the endoscopic exploration the informed consent will be completed according to the law 41/2002 of autonomy of the patient without that for that reason the relationship with his doctor is altered or there is any prejudice in his treatment.

  1. Endoscopic act

    It will be held at the Rio Hortega University Hospital, the University General Hospital of Alicante or the Ramón y Cajal University Hospital. First, ERCP will be performed. Subsequently, an endoscopic ultrasound will be performed to rule out local causes of exclusion. If there is no contraindication, randomization and placement of transmural vesicular drainage will be carried out if assigned to the intervention group:

    • Control group: An ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy will be performed. The performance of other techniques (balloon extraction, dilation, placement of biliary prosthesis ...) is at the expense of the endoscopist. The procedure will be performed under direct sedation with propofol controlled by the endoscopist team, and with CO2 (carbon dioxide) insufflation.
    • Intervention group: ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy will be performed. The performance of other techniques (balloon extraction, dilation, placement of biliary prosthesis ...) is at the expense of the endoscopist. After this, transmural drainage of the gallbladder will be performed by placing a LAMS (lumen apposing metal stent) Axios (Boston Scientific) usually 15x10 mm or 10x10 mm to allow direct cholecystoscopy with a conventional gastroscope or transnasal gastroscope. The placement of the drainage will be performed in the same endoscopic act, by means of an Olympus® sectorial echoendoscope, assisted with X-rays, which allows puncturing the vesicle from the gastric antrum or the duodenal bulb to generate a cholecysto-gastrostomy or cholecysto-duodenostomy respectively. After the puncture of the vesicle from the most optimal anatomical point, it will be tutored with guidance and a Hot Axios® LAMS will be placed on it to generate the anastomosis between the aforementioned structures. After the placement of the prosthesis, it will be subject to the decision of the endoscopist to perform cholescystoscopy to perform the maneuvers it deems appropriate (extraction of stones, taking biopsies, resection of polyps ...). The performance of both procedures will be performed under direct sedation with propofol controlled by the endoscopist team, and with CO2 insufflation, according to the usual practice of the HURH (Universitary Hospital Río Hortega) Endoscopy Unit.
  2. Hospitalization:

After the procedure, the hospital management is in the hands of its responsible physicians in plant at the requesting center. A report will be delivered that does not show if the patient has had the LAMS implanted or not. Therefore, physicians responsible for plant management will not receive information about the assigned group or whether transmural vesicular drainage has been performed.

C.3) Follow-up:

It will be held in each of the participating centers. It will consist of 4 face-to-face visits (after 1 day, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after the procedure) and 2 phone calls (7 days after the procedure and 9 months). In the case of institutionalized patients or those with serious mobility problems, in-person visits may be made by telephone in an exceptional manner. The physician responsible for the follow-up will be blinded as to the procedure performed (it will not be specified if transmural drainage was performed in the endoscopic report, nor will images of the drainage be included in the discharge report available in the electronic medical record until after the completion of the study or if complications are suspected). During the follow-up visits, it will be confirmed that the prosthesis remains normalized by abdominal ultrasound.

Sample size Assuming a proportion of readmissions of biliary cause of 25% in the control group and 7% in the experimental group, with an alpha risk of 5% and a power of 80% and using the arc transformation sine given the proportion of the experimental group, an estimated 60 subjects per group are needed. Given the age of the patients to be included and the mortality associated with the underlying disease, a proportion of losses of 20% is estimated, which would require 75 patients per group. The annual number of ERCP performed at the Río Hortega university hospital ranges from 1,000 to 1100. Assuming also a number of examinations to be carried out in the collaborating centers, with the inclusion and exclusion criteria exposed, a recruitment interval of 12-18 months is estimated.

Randomization It will be done once the patient agrees to participate in the work and has verified the absence of exclusion criteria. To avoid imbalances between the groups, it will be stratified by baseline diagnosis (cholangitis vs others), given that the mortality during admission associated with acute cholangitis is significantly greater than in the rest of the included conditions. Within each stratum a pure randomization will be carried out by means of a sequence generated by computer where the probability of belonging to each group will be 0.5. For each stratum, there will be a total of n numbered closed opaque envelopes (where n = total sample size) that will be stored in the endoscopy unit and will be opened consecutively as participants are included.

Adverse effects monitoring The adverse effects identified during the study will be classified according to the classification of ASGE (for adverse endoscopic effects) for those associated with hospitalization. According to the interval from the procedure they will be divided between postprocedure (in the first 7 days from the same) and late (after this time). Its relationship with the procedure will be classified as definitive, probable, possible or improbable.

Data Collect The data collection will be done by the main researcher or collaborating researchers through a data collection notebook (CRD) anonymously and dissociated from the clinical information by means of a patient identification code.

  1. Data management Data from the data collection notebooks will be merged by the main researcher or collaborating researchers anonymously, encrypted and decoupled from the clinical information by means of a patient identification code (ID), in a database made through the application RedCap available through the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology and the data will be downloaded in the form of an Excel file (Microsoft Corporation,USA). The responsible researcher will define an ID for each participant. The data entered in the database will be anonymous and the database will be protected with a password to which only the researchers will have access.

The unified file will be kept in the Río Hortega University Hospital and will be maintained until the end of the study. Regarding the application of the Organic Law on Data Protection 15/1999 and Royal Decree 1720/2007 that develops it, it should be noted that the protocol defined in the project oriented to epidemiological analysis, determines that the files will record information completely anonymized.

  1. Statistical analysis It will be done through the STATA program (StataCorp, 2013. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, StataCorp LP).

Descriptive analysis In the quantitative variables the arithmetic average and the standard deviation will be calculated (the variables that do not follow a normal distribution will be described with median, minimum, maximum and interquartile range), and the categorical ones will be expressed as percentages and their 95% confidence intervals .

Hypothesis contrast The analysis of the primary objective, the hospital admission of biliary cause, will be carried out through the Z test of homogeneity without using the correction of Yates. The confidence interval of the difference between the two groups will also be estimated. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, regardless of the endoscopic treatment received after randomization.

02

Conditions studied

  • Bile Duct; Obstruction, With Calculus
  • Choledocholithiasis

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Choledocholithiasis
  • Gall Bladder drainage
  • LAMS
03

In context

Choledocholithiasis

109 studies on the registry are indexed under Choledocholithiasis; 24 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 150 is above the median of 100 across 76 interventional studies indexed under Choledocholithiasis.

Browse Choledocholithiasis studies →

Lead sponsor

Hospital del Rio Hortega is the lead sponsor of 27 studies on the registry; 7 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
75 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Symptomatic choledocholithiasis (choledocholithiasis demonstrated radiologically or highly suspected by clinical data (acute cholangitis or obstructive jaundice), analytical and imaging according to the criteria of high probability of choledocholithiasis established in the clinical guidelines (ASGE Guide).
  • Discarded for surgical treatment due to age, comorbidity or refusal of the patient.
  • Age>75 years

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Charlson comorbidity scale adjusted to age \<4.
  • Hepatobiliary surgery or previous superior digestive tract.
  • Ascitis.
  • Inability to tolerate sedation of endoscopy, perforation of the digestive tract or other to endoscopy.
  • Coagulopathy with (international normalized ratio) > 1.5 not correctable or thrombocytopenia \<50000 / mm3 not correctable.
  • Other diagnoses at admission (acute cholecystitis, acute pancreatitis, biliopancreatic neoplasia).
  • Hemodynamic instability.
  • Urgent procedure performed after hours
  • No availability of expert material / endoscopist in drainage.
  • Anatomical impossibility of performing biliary drainage (absence of vesicular distension, contact between gallbladder and stomach or duodenum, contact area \<10 mm).
  • Baseline (Easthern Cooperative Oncology Group) > = 4
  • Expectancy of survival \<6 months.
  • Refusal to participate.
  • Distance between the gallbladder and upper digestive tract> 1cm, scleroatrophic vesicle, lack of stable acoustic window for drainage
  • ERCP failed (inhability to dain common bile duct)
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(3)

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.

INR, PT and aPTT (clotting tests)

Blood tests of how long blood takes to clot. The INR is the prothrombin time (PT) put on a common scale; about 1 is usual for someone not taking a blood thinner.

Criteria often make an exception for people on a blood thinner such as warfarin, whose INR is raised on purpose.

ECOG performance status

A scale of how much an illness limits everyday activity. For people being assessed to join a study, scores run from 0 (fully active) to 4; lower is more active.

0
Fully active, no restrictions.
1
Limited in strenuous activity, but walking and able to do light work, such as housework or office work.
2
Walking and able to look after yourself, but unable to work; up and about more than half of waking hours.
3
Able to look after yourself only in part; in bed or a chair more than half of waking hours.
4
Unable to look after yourself at all; in bed or a chair all day.

Studies most often ask for 0–1 or 0–2. Your doctor gives the score; the WHO scale uses the same steps. The full scale also has 5, which records death.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
150 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    ERCP with sphincterotomy + gall bladder drainage with LAMS

    An ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy will be performed. The performance of other techniques (balloon extraction, dilation, placement of biliary prosthesis ...) is at the expense of the endoscopist. After this, transmural drainage of the gallbladder will be performed by placing a LAMS Axios (Boston Scientific) usually 15x10 mm or 10x10 mm to allow direct cholecystoscopy with a conventional gastroscope or transnasal gastroscope. The placement of the drainage will be performed in the same endoscopic act, by means of an Olympus® sectorial echoendoscope, assisted with X-rays, which allows puncturing the vesicle from the gastric antrum or the duodenal bulb to generate a cholecysto-gastrostomy or cholecysto-duodenostomy respectively. After the puncture of the vesicle from the most optimal anatomical point, it will be tutored with guidance and a Hot Axios® PAL will be placed on it to generate the anastomosis between the aforementioned structures.

    Procedure: Gall bladder transmural drainage with LAMS

  • Active comparator
    ERCP with sphincterotomy

    An ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy will be performed. The performance of other techniques (balloon extraction, dilation, placement of biliary prosthesis ...) is at the expense of the endoscopist.

    Procedure: Gall bladder transmural drainage with LAMS

Interventions

  • ProcedureGall bladder transmural drainage with LAMS

    Placing a PAL Axios (Boston Scientific) usually 15x10 mm or 10x10 mm to allow direct cholecystoscopy with a conventional gastroscope or transnasal gastroscope. The placement of the drainage will be performed in the same endoscopic act, by means of an Olympus® sectorial echoendoscope, assisted with X-rays, which allows puncturing the vesicle from the gastric antrum or the duodenal bulb to generate a cholecysto-gastrostomy or cholecysto-duodenostomy respectively. After the puncture of the vesicle from the most optimal anatomical point, it will be tutored with guidance and a Hot Axios® PAL 15x10 mm or 10x10 mm will be \*placed on it to generate the anastomosis between the aforementioned structures.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of paticipants readmitted due to biliary pathology

    Rate of participants readmitted due to biliary pathology (cholecystitis, cholangitis, pancreatitis, hepatic abscess...) in each group

    Time frame: 1 year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of participants with technical success

    Number of participants with correct placement of the stent from the gastric or duodenal lumen to the gallbladder, together with the documentation of bile flow and / or contrast through it.

    Time frame: 1 day

  2. Number of dead participants

    Rate of deaths in each group

    Time frame: 1 year

  3. Hospital costs (euros)

    Hospital costs (euros) during the period of follow up, including the baseline admission

    Time frame: 1 year

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Lee TH, Park DH, Lee SS, Seo DW, Park SH, Lee SK, Kim MH, Kim SJ. Outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting for symptomatic gallbladder diseases: a multicenter prospective follow-up study. Endoscopy. 2011 Aug;43(8):702-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1256226. Epub 2011 Mar 21. PubMed 21425042 ↗
  • Choi JH, Lee SS, Choi JH, Park DH, Seo DW, Lee SK, Kim MH. Long-term outcomes after endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis. Endoscopy. 2014 Aug;46(8):656-61. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1365720. Epub 2014 Jun 30. PubMed 24977397 ↗
  • Walter D, Teoh AY, Itoi T, Perez-Miranda M, Larghi A, Sanchez-Yague A, Siersema PD, Vleggaar FP. EUS-guided gall bladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent: a prospective long-term evaluation. Gut. 2016 Jan;65(1):6-8. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309925. Epub 2015 Jun 3. No abstract available. PubMed 26041748 ↗
  • Kahaleh M, Perez-Miranda M, Artifon EL, Sharaiha RZ, Kedia P, Penas I, De la Serna C, Kumta NA, Marson F, Gaidhane M, Boumitri C, Parra V, Rondon Clavo CM, Giovannini M. International collaborative study on EUS-guided gallbladder drainage: Are we ready for prime time? Dig Liver Dis. 2016 Sep;48(9):1054-7. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2016.05.021. Epub 2016 Jun 3. PubMed 27328985 ↗
  • de la Serna-Higuera C, Perez-Miranda M, Gil-Simon P, Ruiz-Zorrilla R, Diez-Redondo P, Alcaide N, Sancho-del Val L, Nunez-Rodriguez H. EUS-guided transenteric gallbladder drainage with a new fistula-forming, lumen-apposing metal stent. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Feb;77(2):303-8. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.021. Epub 2012 Dec 1. No abstract available. PubMed 23206813 ↗
  • McCarthy ST, Tujios S, Fontana RJ, Rahnama-Moghadam S, Elmunzer BJ, Kwon RS, Wamsteker EJ, Anderson MA, Scheiman JM, Elta GH, Piraka CR. Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Stent Placement Is Safe and Effective in High-Risk Patients Without Cirrhosis. Dig Dis Sci. 2015 Aug;60(8):2516-22. doi: 10.1007/s10620-014-3371-4. Epub 2014 Oct 7. PubMed 25287001 ↗
  • Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, Tsuchiya T, Kurihara T, Ishii K, Tsuji S, Ikeuchi N, Tsukamoto S, Takeuchi M, Kawai T, Moriyasu F. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis in whom percutaneous transhepatic approach is contraindicated or anatomically impossible (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Sep;68(3):455-60. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.02.052. Epub 2008 Jun 17. PubMed 18561927 ↗
  • Sodergren MH, Markar S, Pucher PH, Badran IA, Jiao LR, Darzi A. Safety of transvaginal hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2015 Aug;29(8):2077-90. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3915-x. Epub 2014 Nov 26. PubMed 25424364 ↗
  • McGillicuddy EA, Schuster KM, Barre K, Suarez L, Hall MR, Kaml GJ, Davis KA, Longo WE. Non-operative management of acute cholecystitis in the elderly. Br J Surg. 2012 Sep;99(9):1254-61. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8836. Epub 2012 Jul 24. PubMed 22829411 ↗
  • Garcia-Alonso FJ, de Lucas Gallego M, Bonillo Cambrodon D, Algaba A, de la Poza G, Martin-Mateos RM, Bermejo F. Gallstone-related disease in the elderly: is there room for improvement? Dig Dis Sci. 2015 Jun;60(6):1770-7. doi: 10.1007/s10620-014-3497-4. Epub 2015 Jan 11. PubMed 25577265 ↗
  • Trust MD, Sheffield KM, Boyd CA, Benarroch-Gampel J, Zhang D, Townsend CM Jr, Riall TS. Gallstone pancreatitis in older patients: Are we operating enough? Surgery. 2011 Sep;150(3):515-25. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2011.07.072. PubMed 21878238 ↗
  • Prevalence of gallstone disease in an Italian adult female population. Rome Group for the Epidemiology and Prevention of Cholelithiasis (GREPCO). Am J Epidemiol. 1984 May;119(5):796-805. PubMed 6720676 ↗
  • Itoi T, Tsuyuguchi T, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Pitt HA, Kim MH, Belli G, Mayumi T, Yoshida M, Miura F, Buchler MW, Gouma DJ, Garden OJ, Jagannath P, Gomi H, Kimura Y, Higuchi R; Tokyo Guideline Revision Committee. TG13 indications and techniques for biliary drainage in acute cholangitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2013 Jan;20(1):71-80. doi: 10.1007/s00534-012-0569-8. PubMed 23307008 ↗
  • Working Group IAP/APA Acute Pancreatitis Guidelines. IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2013 Jul-Aug;13(4 Suppl 2):e1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2013.07.063. PubMed 24054878 ↗
  • Riall TS, Zhang D, Townsend CM Jr, Kuo YF, Goodwin JS. Failure to perform cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis in elderly patients is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost. J Am Coll Surg. 2010 May;210(5):668-77, 677-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.12.031. PubMed 20421027 ↗
  • Peery AF, Crockett SD, Barritt AS, Dellon ES, Eluri S, Gangarosa LM, Jensen ET, Lund JL, Pasricha S, Runge T, Schmidt M, Shaheen NJ, Sandler RS. Burden of Gastrointestinal, Liver, and Pancreatic Diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2015 Dec;149(7):1731-1741.e3. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.08.045. Epub 2015 Aug 29. PubMed 26327134 ↗
  • McSherry CK, Ferstenberg H, Calhoun WF, Lahman E, Virshup M. The natural history of diagnosed gallstone disease in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Ann Surg. 1985 Jul;202(1):59-63. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198507000-00009. PubMed 4015212 ↗
  • Kratzer W, Mason RA, Kachele V. Prevalence of gallstones in sonographic surveys worldwide. J Clin Ultrasound. 1999 Jan;27(1):1-7. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0096(199901)27:13.0.co;2-h. PubMed 9888092 ↗

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Aug 2019 to primary completion in Dec 2022, 40 months.

Of 41 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Choledocholithiasis, half reached primary completion within 21 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 36. This study's 40 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 43 studies reached it within 21 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 36.

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

Registered
Apr 13, 2019
First posted
Apr 19, 2019
StartActual
Aug 1, 2019
Primary completionActual
Dec 1, 2022
CompletionEst.
May 1, 2026
Last update
Mar 11, 2025
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 11, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03921502
Lead sponsor
Hospital del Rio Hortega
Collaborators
Hospital Universitario Ramon y Cajal, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante
Responsible party
Marina de Benito Sanz (Principal investigator, Hospital del Rio Hortega) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 19, 2019
Start date
Aug 1, 2019
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2022
Completion
May 1, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 11, 2025

Study contacts

Marina de Benito Sanz, MD
Contact
mbenitosa@saludcastillayleon.es
983420400 ext. 84326
Manuel Pérez-Miranda Castillo, MD, PhD
Contact
mperezmiranda@saludcastillayleon.es
983420400 ext. 84408
Ana Y Carbajo López, MD
principal investigator · Hospital Río Hortega

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
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