CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03968757Updated Jun 12, 2023

Assessing the Safety and Performance of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler in Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass Surgery

An observational study in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Obesity, sponsored by Duomed. Completed at 1 site in Belgium. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-06-12.

Sponsored by Duomed · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
150
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this observational registry is to evaluate the safety and performance of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads from Ezisurg Medical used in laparoscopic RYGB surgery to create anastomoses. The goal of the study will be achieved by assessing the device performance and reporting of peri- and postoperative complications in a prospectively maintained database.

02

Conditions studied

  • Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass
  • Obesity
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Obese patients eligible for laparoscopic RYGB surgery. This registry will collect data from 150 laparoscopic RYGB procedures in which anastomoses are created with the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical).

Inclusion criteria

  1. Age at study entry is at least 18 years.
  2. Patient must sign and date the informed consent form prior to the index-procedure. If the patient is not able to give informed consent, a legally authorized representative must give informed consent on his/her behalf.
  3. Patient has a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 with one of more related co-morbidities.
  4. Patient has a BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patient is pregnant.
  2. History of bariatric surgery.
  3. Patient is known to be, or suspected of being unable to comply with the study protocol or proposed follow-up visits (e.g. no permanent address, known to be non-compliant or presenting an unstable psychiatric history).
04

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
150 participants (actual)
Target follow-up
24 Months
Patient registry
Yes

Groups and cohorts

  • Obese patients eligible for laparoscopic RYGB surgery.

    Device: easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

Interventions

  • DeviceeasyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Device for creation of anastomoses during laparoscopic RYGB surgery manufactured by Ezisurg Medical.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. To evaluate the safety of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of participants with peri-operative anastomotic leaks and intraluminal/intraperitoneal bleeding.

    Time frame: at index-procedure

  2. To evaluate the safety of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of participants with post-operative anastomotic leaks and intraluminal/intraperitoneal bleeding.

    Time frame: at discharge, up to 1 week

  3. To evaluate the safety of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of participants with post-operative anastomotic leaks and intraluminal/intraperitoneal bleeding.

    Time frame: at 6 weeks follow-up

  4. To evaluate the safety of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of participants with post-operative anastomotic leaks and intraluminal/intraperitoneal bleeding.

    Time frame: at 6 months follow-up

  5. To evaluate the safety of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of participants with postoperative anastomotic leaks and intraluminal/intraperitoneal bleeding.

    Time frame: at 12 months follow-up

  6. To evaluate the safety of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of participants with post-operative anastomotic leaks and intraluminal/intraperitoneal bleeding.

    Time frame: at 24 months follow-up

Secondary outcomes

  1. To evaluate the performance of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting Stapler and reloads (Ezisurg Medical)

    Number of procedures with technical success, defined as laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass formation as intended without technical difficulties and without conversion to open laparotomy.

    Time frame: at index-procedure

  2. To evaluate the performance of the easyEndoTM Universal Linear Cutting

    Assessment of device performance (e.g. sharpness of the blade, staple-line formation, etc.).

    Time frame: at index-procedure

  3. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with peri-operative complications such as but not limited to: peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis/stricture, internal hernia, small bowel obstruction, ulceration, fistula formation, ventral hernia, iatrogenic splenic injury, wound infection, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure, gallstones, arrhythmia, stroke, infarction, death.

    Time frame: at index-procedure

  4. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with post-operative complications such as but not limited to: peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis/stricture, internal hernia, small bowel obstruction, ulceration, fistula formation, ventral hernia, iatrogenic splenic injury, wound infection, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure, gallstones, arrhythmia, stroke, infarction, death.

    Time frame: at discharge, up to 1 week

  5. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with post-operative complications such as but not limited to: peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis/stricture, internal hernia, small bowel obstruction, ulceration, fistula formation, ventral hernia, iatrogenic splenic injury, wound infection, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure, gallstones, arrhythmia, stroke, infarction, death.

    Time frame: at 6 weeks follow-up

  6. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with post-operative complications such as but not limited to: peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis/stricture, internal hernia, small bowel obstruction, ulceration, fistula formation, ventral hernia, iatrogenic splenic injury, wound infection, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure, gallstones, arrhythmia, stroke, infarction, death.

    Time frame: at 6 months follow-up

  7. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with post-operative complications such as but not limited to: peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis/stricture, internal hernia, small bowel obstruction, ulceration, fistula formation, ventral hernia, iatrogenic splenic injury, wound infection, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure, gallstones, arrhythmia, stroke, infarction, death.

    Time frame: at 12 months follow-up

  8. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with post-operative complications such as but not limited to: peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis/stricture, internal hernia, small bowel obstruction, ulceration, fistula formation, ventral hernia, iatrogenic splenic injury, wound infection, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure, gallstones, arrhythmia, stroke, infarction, death.

    Time frame: at 24 months follow-up

  9. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with bariatric surgery related re-interventions since the laparoscopic RYGB procedure.

    Time frame: at discharge, up to 1 week

  10. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with bariatric surgery related re-interventions since the laparoscopic RYGB procedure.

    Time frame: at 6 weeks follow-up

  11. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with bariatric surgery related re-interventions since the laparoscopic RYGB procedure.

    Time frame: at 6 months follow-up

  12. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with bariatric surgery related re-interventions since the laparoscopic RYGB procedure.

    Time frame: at 12 months follow-up

  13. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Number of participants with bariatric surgery related re-interventions since the laparoscopic RYGB procedure.

    Time frame: at 24 months follow-up

  14. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Change of patient's weight

    Time frame: at 6 weeks follow-up

  15. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Change of patient's weight

    Time frame: at 6 months follow-up

  16. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Change of patient's weight

    Time frame: at 12 months follow-up

  17. To evaluate the efficacy of the laparoscopic RYGB surgery

    Change of patient's weight

    Time frame: at 24 months follow-up

06

Study locations

1 site
  • AZ Sint-Jan Brugge
    Brugge, West Flanders 8000, Belgium
07

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03968757
Lead sponsor
Duomed
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 30, 2019
Start date
Jul 4, 2019
Primary completion
Apr 25, 2023
Completion
Jun 7, 2023
Last update
Jun 12, 2023

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jun 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