CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03955055Updated Jul 10, 2023Results posted

Study of Early Endocapsule (EC) in Clinical Decision Unit Versus Standard of Care Work-up for GI Bleeding

An interventional study of Video Capsule Endoscopy in Gastro Intestinal Bleeding, Hematemesis and Melena, sponsored by Christopher Marshall. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-07-10.

Sponsored by Christopher Marshall · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
35
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study will evaluate the use of the Olympus EndoCapsule EC-10 video capsule compared with the standard of care workup for patients in the Clinical Decision Unit who have symptoms of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Patients will be eligible if they have any symptoms of GI bleeding, either vomiting blood or symptoms without vomiting blood.

Patients randomized to the early capsule arm will have an immediate video capsule endoscopy. Patients randomized to the standard of care arm will have no study intervention and will follow the treating physician's diagnostic workup.

The primary goal of the study is to compare how often a source of bleeding is identified in patients in the two groups.

Read the detailed description

After 40 years of considering gastrointestinal bleeding as upper or lower and largely ignoring the small intestine, there is accumulating evidence that the conventional approach to the assessment of non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding (NHGIB) could be improved by early deployment of a video capsule as the first diagnostic test. Currently, video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is considered the gold standard diagnostic test for small intestinal bleeding after upper and lower endoscopy. However, video capsule endoscopy is an underutilized, minimally invasive tool that can improve rates of detection, minimize patient discomfort, and shorten the length of hospital stay for many patients. In a recent study at University of Massachusetts Worcester (UMass) of 336 patients who presented to the Emergency Department (ED) with complaints of gastrointestinal bleeding only 36 patients (10.7%) were given a video capsule during their stay.1

Traditionally, in patients with hematemesis (H), upper endoscopy has been the diagnostic and therapeutic modality of choice. However, recent data from a randomized clinical trial suggests that when video capsule endoscopy is used as the primary diagnostic tool, the investigators were able to safely define those patients that require admission from those that can be discharged for later follow-up 2. In this cohort, 30% of patients could be safely discharged and undergo endoscopy, if necessary within 48 hours, as an outpatient. This data is consistent with internal epidemiological data from UMass where nearly 30% of patients who were admitted did not receive any endoscopic evaluation as in-patients.

Similarly, a randomized controlled trial has recently shown that patients with NHGIB may benefit from early VCE. In this population, the detection of active bleeding with video capsule as the first procedure was 63% compared with 27% for the standard of care approach. The study did not demonstrate a significant reduction in length stay since this was not part of the trial design. No attempt was made to change physician behavior. The study was too small to demonstrate a reduction in procedures, but there was a modest reduction in healthcare costs despite the addition of the video capsule. The study encountered no adverse events. Readmission rates were not significantly reduced but there were no re-admissions in the capsule group for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding where there were four in the standard of care group.

The hypothesis is that both signs and symptoms provide poor localization as to the origin of bleeding in NHGIB. Data from the previous study suggests that the ingestion of a video capsule in the emergency department could quickly and non-invasively provide clinicians accurate data as to the origin of the bleeding. This information could provide a guide to further management of the patient. Video capsule endoscopy is able to visualize bleeding in the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, small intestine and right colon, thereby eliminating the guess work of deciding which endoscopic approach to use.

The study plans to use the clinical decision unit for two reasons. This unit provides an ideal site for the early safe deployment of a video capsule or initiation of a standard of care workup for either or NHGIB. Second, in those patients who are demonstrated not to be bleeding in either group by capsule endoscopy or standard of care workup may be discharged home safely without being admitted, thereby saving significant costs. It is known that 80% of patients stop bleeding spontaneously. Thus, the earlier they are examined the more likely the origin of the bleeding is likely to be found and appropriate management instituted.

The use of capsule endoscopy has been approved by the FDA since 2001 for small intestinal bleeding obscure GI Bleeding. It is very safe, no deaths associated with its use have been reported. More than 3 million capsules have been deployed and obstruction and perforation are extremely rare.

Interest in the broader use of VCE is accumulating. A pilot study on the use of early use of VCE in acute NHGIB showed a 50% reduction to time to diagnosis in 24 patients. More recently studies of VCE deployed in the ED, in patients with upper GI bleeding showed improved management. The UMass group recently demonstrated that the closer a video capsule is performed to the time of bleeding the higher the likelihood of locating the sources and the higher the therapeutic intervention rate.

This protocol is logical step to prospectively examine this concept in a large randomized prospective trial for both H and NHGIB. The questions are, can early capsule intervention decrease time to diagnosis, numbers of procedures, admission rate and hospital length of stay in patients with H and NHGIB.

02

Conditions studied

  • Gastro Intestinal Bleeding
  • Hematemesis
  • Melena

Keywords

  • Gastro Intestinal Bleeding
03

In context

Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage

339 studies on the registry are indexed under Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; 79 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 35 is below the median of 87 across 211 interventional studies indexed under Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.

Browse Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Christopher Marshall as lead sponsor.

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

04

Who can participate

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Age greater than 18 years old
  • New onset of hematemesis, melena or hematochezia
  • Able to sign consent
  • Hemodynamically stable (that is, blood pressure >100/60 or pulse \<110 at the time of consent)
  • Emergency Department must plan to admit patient to the hospital or Clinical Decision Unit
  • If patients have pacemakers and/or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), they will be placed on telemetry

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • adults unable to consent
  • individuals who are not yet adults (infants, children, teenagers)
  • pregnant women
  • prisoners
  • prior history of gastroparesis
  • prior history of gastric or small bowel surgery
  • prior history of inflammatory bowel disease
  • concern for infectious colitis
  • evidence of dysphagia at the time of presentation
  • presence of small amounts of bright red blood per rectum
  • allergy to metoclopramide or erythromycin
  • code status of do not resuscitate/do not intubate (DNR/DNI) or comfort measures only (CMO)
  • prior history of abdominal radiation
  • abdominal pain suggesting an acute abdomen or obstruction.
  • patients who cannot undergo surgery
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
35 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Early Capsule Group

    The intervention for subjects in this arm will be to have a video capsule deployed as soon as possible after presentation to the clinical decision unit. Information from the video capsule will be obtained and reviewed to determine location of bleeding. Once that information has been obtained a decision will be made on which endoscopic test is most pertinent in finding and treating the source of bleeding.

    Device: Video Capsule Endoscopy

  • No intervention
    Standard of Care Work-up

    In this arm, patients will receive "standard of care workup" for non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding. This could include upper endoscopy, colonoscopy, and additional capsule or small bowel enteroscopy depending on the subject's presentation and the results of the workup performed by the gastroenterology team. For patients requiring a video capsule endoscopy as part of "standard of care workup" the patients will be given the same Olympus video capsule that is used in the "Early Capsule" group.

Interventions

  • DeviceVideo Capsule Endoscopy

    Patients will swallow a video capsule as soon as possible (immediately or within 10 hours, if patient is not fasting).

    Also known as: Olympus EndoCapsule EC-10

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Rate of Detection of Bleeding

    Rate of detection of active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding \[blood clot or visible vessel\]

    Time frame: Enrollment to time of detection of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner

  2. Time to Detection of Bleeding

    Time to detection of active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding \[blood clot or visible vessel\]

    Time frame: Enrollment to time of detection of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner

Secondary outcomes

  1. Admission Rate

    Rate of in-patient admissions to the hospital

    Time frame: Enrollment to time of admission as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner

  2. Re-admission Rate

    Rate of in-patient re-admissions to the hospital

    Time frame: Enrollment to 720 hours

  3. Hospital Length of Stay

    Length of hospital stay measured in hours

    Time frame: Enrollment to time of discharge as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner

  4. Endoscopic Procedures

    Number of endoscopic procedures performed

    Time frame: Enrollment to 720 hours

  5. Therapeutic Procedures

    Number of therapeutic procedures performed

    Time frame: Enrollment to 720 hours

Other outcomes

  1. Complication Rates

    Percentage of participants who experienced a complication.

    Time frame: Enrollment to 720 hours

  2. Blood Product Transfusions

    Number of blood products transfused

    Time frame: Enrollment to one year

07

Results

Posted Jul 10, 2023
Limitations and caveats
The trial was designed before the coronavirus pandemic began and several aspects of the trial were significantly impacted due to the pandemic. The Clinical Decision Unit was effectively closed and endoscopic procedures were limited. While we increased some enrollment in 2021, we were not able to meet our goals due to these unexpected constraints.

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Started1520
Completed1418
Not completed12

Outcome measures

PrimaryRate of Detection of Bleeding

Rate of detection of active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding \[blood clot or visible vessel\]

Time frame:
Enrollment to time of detection of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Rate of Detection of Bleeding
ParticipantsEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Rate of Detection of Bleeding1111
PrimaryTime to Detection of Bleeding

Time to detection of active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding \[blood clot or visible vessel\]

Time frame:
Enrollment to time of detection of bleeding as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner
Reported as:
Mean · hours
Time to Detection of Bleeding
hoursEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Time to Detection of Bleeding20.9 ± 1.917.7 ± 9.5
SecondaryAdmission Rate

Rate of in-patient admissions to the hospital

Time frame:
Enrollment to time of admission as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Admission Rate
ParticipantsEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Admission Rate1420
SecondaryRe-admission Rate

Rate of in-patient re-admissions to the hospital

Time frame:
Enrollment to 720 hours
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Re-admission Rate
ParticipantsEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Re-admission Rate42
SecondaryHospital Length of Stay

Length of hospital stay measured in hours

Time frame:
Enrollment to time of discharge as measured in hours, up to 720 hours, whichever is sooner
Reported as:
Mean · hours
Hospital Length of Stay
hoursEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Hospital Length of Stay143.7 ± 102.3140.9 ± 80.5
SecondaryEndoscopic Procedures

Number of endoscopic procedures performed

Time frame:
Enrollment to 720 hours
Reported as:
Mean · procedures
Endoscopic Procedures
proceduresEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Endoscopic Procedures1.9 ± 0.661.35 ± 0.67
SecondaryTherapeutic Procedures

Number of therapeutic procedures performed

Time frame:
Enrollment to 720 hours
Reported as:
Mean · procedures
Therapeutic Procedures
proceduresEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Therapeutic Procedures0.29 ± 0.470.35 ± 0.59
Other pre-specifiedComplication Rates

Percentage of participants who experienced a complication.

Time frame:
Enrollment to 720 hours
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Complication Rates
ParticipantsEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Complication Rates64
Other pre-specifiedBlood Product Transfusions

Number of blood products transfused

Time frame:
Enrollment to one year
Reported as:
Mean · units of packed red blood cells
Blood Product Transfusions
units of packed red blood cellsEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Blood Product Transfusions1.8 ± 1.62.2 ± 2.7

Adverse events

Collected over 30 days. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Early Capsule Group0/14 (0%)4/14 (28.6%)1/14 (7.1%)
Standard of Care Work-up2/20 (10%)3/20 (15%)0/20 (0%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
MelenaGastrointestinal disorders1/140/20
Gastrointestinal BleedingGastrointestinal disorders1/141/20
Acute allergic reactionImmune system disorders1/140/20
CoronavirusRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders1/140/20
Shortness of breathRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders0/141/20
HypoxemiaCardiac disorders0/141/20
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventEarly Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-up
Capsule retentionGastrointestinal disorders1/140/20

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Early Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-upTotal
Mean63.47 ± 11.2766.45 ± 16.0965.17 ± 14.11
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Early Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-upTotal
Female369
Male121426
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Early Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-upTotal
Hispanic or Latino000
Not Hispanic or Latino142034
Unknown or Not Reported101
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Early Capsule GroupStandard of Care Work-upTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native101
Asian112
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American011
White131831
More than one race000
Unknown or Not Reported000
08

Study locations

1 site
  • UMass Memorial Medical Center
    Worcester, Massachusetts 01655, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Marya NB, Jawaid S, Foley A, Han S, Patel K, Maranda L, Kaufman D, Bhattacharya K, Marshall C, Tennyson J, Cave DR. A randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy of early video capsule endoscopy with standard of care in the approach to nonhematemesis GI bleeding (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jan;89(1):33-43.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.06.016. Epub 2018 Jun 20. PubMed 29935143 ↗
  • Singh A, Marshall C, Chaudhuri B, Okoli C, Foley A, Person SD, Bhattacharya K, Cave DR. Timing of video capsule endoscopy relative to overt obscure GI bleeding: implications from a retrospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):761-6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.11.041. Epub 2013 Feb 1. PubMed 23375526 ↗
  • Jawaid S, Gondal B, Singh, A, Marshall C, and Cave D. The epidemiology of gastrointestinal bleeding in an academic emergency department as a basis for reconfiguring the conventional approach to its diagnosis and management. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2013;77:Supplement, Page AB483.
  • Jawaid S, Marya N, Gondal B, Maranda L, Marshall C, Charpentier J, Singh A, Foley A, and Cave D. . A reconsideration of the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal bleeding based on its epidemiology and outcomes analysis. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2014;79:Supplement, Page AB231.

Study documents

  • Study protocol · May 15, 2019
  • Statistical analysis plan · May 15, 2019
  • Informed consent form · Jun 6, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 10, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03955055
Lead sponsor
Christopher Marshall
Collaborators
Olympus Corporation of the Americas
Responsible party
Christopher Marshall (Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of Massachusetts, Worcester) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
May 17, 2019
Start date
Feb 4, 2020
Primary completion
Apr 9, 2022
Completion
Apr 9, 2022
Results posted
Jul 10, 2023
Last update
Jul 10, 2023

Study contacts

Christopher Marshall, MD
principal investigator · UMass Medical School Assistant Professor of Medicine

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

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