ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05010811Updated Aug 30, 2021

Two Cases of Pulmonary Cysticercosis Manifesting as Pleural Effusion: Case Report and Literature Review

An observational study in Cysticercosis, sponsored by Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University. Completed. Open to participants aged 45 Years to 67 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-08-30.

Sponsored by Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
2
Ages
45 Years to 67 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Isolation lung cysticercosis reports are rare in literature. Most lung lesions were characterized by nodules. The investigators access one case which was characterized with pulmonary cavity and pleural effusion by Gupta N, et al in 2015 from PUBMED and Medline. But pleural effusion and exudative lesions is reported for the first time.

Read the detailed description

Cysticercosis is an important public health problem in developing countries. The major involvement sites are the central nervous system and the eyes,although striated muscles and subcutaneous tissues are frequently involved in the disseminated form of disease. Pulmonary involvement in cysticercosis is very rare and ill-defined nodular shadows distributed throughout the lung is the usual radiological presentation. Only one case of cysticercosis presenting as lung cavity with pleural effusion has been reported so far in literature. The investigators describe two cases in which pleural effusion due to cysticercosis were detected on X and CT.

02

Conditions studied

  • Cysticercosis

Keywords

  • Cysticercosis
  • pleural effusion
  • pulmonary
03

In context

Cysticercosis

10 studies on the registry are indexed under Cysticercosis; 2 are open to participants now.

Browse Cysticercosis studies →

Lead sponsor

Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University is the lead sponsor of 1,047 studies on the registry; 502 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
45 Years to 67 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Two patients with pleural effusion presenting with chest tightness and chest pain were enrolled in this study with a definitive diagnosis of cysticercosis confirmed by pleural effusion examination

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

  1. Clinical diagnosis of Pulmonary Cysticercosis。
  2. With pleural effusion

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

1.No cysticercosis was found by or antibody test

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.

Biopsy and archival tissue

A biopsy takes a small piece of tissue to examine. “Archival tissue” is a sample already taken, for example at diagnosis, and kept by the hospital.

Whether a stored sample will do depends on when it was taken, how much there is and what the study needs. Ask whether the study accepts your stored sample or needs a new biopsy.

05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
2 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Amount of pleural effusion

    cm

    Time frame: 9 months

  2. Rate of Eosinophil ratio

    Percentage(%)

    Time frame: 9 months

  3. Changes of lesions under chest radiography or CT

    no change, change, complete absorption

    Time frame: 9 months

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Oct 2016 to primary completion in Jan 2017, 2 months.

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

Registered
Jul 11, 2021
First posted
Aug 18, 2021
StartActual
Oct 22, 2016
Primary completionActual
Jan 18, 2017
CompletionActual
Apr 28, 2017
Last update
Aug 30, 2021
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 Aug 30, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05010811
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 18, 2021
Start date
Oct 22, 2016
Primary completion
Jan 18, 2017
Completion
Apr 28, 2017
Last update
Aug 30, 2021

Study contacts

Pingli Wang, MD
study director · the same research center

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 Sep 2016. 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