ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07466719Updated Mar 12, 2026

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Manual Syringing Versus Pneumatic Pressure Bag for Blood Transfusion in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section With Major Obstetric Hemorrhage

An interventional study of Manual syringing and pneumatic pressure bag in Obstetric Hemostasis, Intravascular Hemolysis and Major Obstetric Hemorrhage, sponsored by Aswan University. Recruiting at 1 site in Egypt. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 45 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-12.

Sponsored by Aswan University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Apr 2026, 7 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Registered 6 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Sep 2025, registered Mar 2026).
  • Started Sep 2025; still recruiting 1 year 2 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
50
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 45 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the safety and efficacy of manual syringing versus pneumatic pressure bags for blood transfusion in patients experiencing major obstetric hemorrhage during a cesarean section. It will also evaluate the effectiveness of these methods in rapidly stabilizing patient vital signs. The main questions it aims to answer are:Does manual syringing result in a higher incidence of hemolysis (red blood cell destruction) compared to pneumatic pressure bags?Which method is more effective and faster at achieving hemodynamic stability (restoring normal blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen levels)?Are there differences between the two methods regarding total blood product usage, transfusion-related complications, and the length of hospital stay?Researchers will compare manual syringing (using 20 mL syringes) to pneumatic pressure bags (inflated to 300 mmHg) to determine which is safer and more efficient for emergency transfusions in resource-constrained environments.Participants will:Be women aged 18-45 years undergoing a cesarean section who are diagnosed with major obstetric hemorrhage (blood loss >1000 mL or hemodynamic instability).Be randomly assigned to one of two groups to receive their blood transfusion through either the manual syringe method or a pneumatic pressure bag.Receive standard vascular access through multiple peripheral and jugular cannulae.Undergo close monitoring of vital signs to determine the time to stabilization.Provide blood samples at baseline and six hours post-transfusion to measure markers of hemolysis, specifically Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) and indirect bilirubin levels.Be monitored for any transfusion-related complications, such as allergic reactions or acute kidney injury, during their hospital stay and for major complications up to 30 days postoperatively

Read the detailed description

This prospective, single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial (Phase III) is designed to evaluate and compare two common methods for rapid blood transfusion-manual syringing and pneumatic pressure bags-in the specific context of major obstetric hemorrhage (MOH) during cesarean sections. The study is conducted at Aswan University Hospital in Egypt, where both techniques are currently employed in emergency settings, yet a systematic evaluation of their relative safety and clinical efficacy is lacking.Background and RationaleMajor obstetric hemorrhage remains a leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide, particularly in developing countries where it accounts for approximately 27% of maternal deaths. During a cesarean section, a blood loss exceeding 1000 mL is defined by the World Health Organization as postpartum hemorrhage, requiring immediate intervention to restore circulating volume and prevent life-threatening complications.In resource-limited environments, clinicians often rely on:Manual Syringing: Using 20 mL syringes to manually push blood into the patient, a method that is fast and inexpensive but carries a high risk of red blood cell (RBC) destruction (hemolysis) due to shear stress.Pneumatic Pressure Bags: Applying 300 mmHg of external pressure to the blood bag, which may offer more controlled infusion but requires specialized equipment and may still carry hemolysis risks.Study ObjectivesThe primary objective is to compare the safety of these two methods by measuring the incidence of hemolysis through surrogate laboratory markers. Secondary objectives focus on clinical efficacy, including the speed of hemodynamic stabilization and overall patient outcomes.Methodology and InterventionParticipants are randomized in a 1:1 ratio using computer-generated sequences and sealed envelopes. All patients receive standardized vascular access consisting of two 18-gauge peripheral cannulae and one 16-gauge external jugular cannula.Group 1 (Manual Syringing): Blood is administered using 20 mL syringes.Group 2 (Pressure Bag): Blood is administered via pneumatic pressure bags set at a constant 300 mmHg.Due to the nature of the interventions, the clinical team and patients cannot be blinded. However, the study employs triple-blinding for the outcome assessors (laboratory personnel and data collectors) and the statistical analysts to minimize bias.Outcomes and Safety MonitoringThe study measures primary safety outcomes using Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) and indirect bilirubin levels taken at baseline and six hours post-transfusion. Hemodynamic stability is strictly defined as maintaining a systolic blood pressure $\ge90$ mmHg, a heart rate $\le100$ bpm, and oxygen saturation $\ge95\%$ for at least 30 minutes.To ensure participant safety, the protocol includes a mitigation strategy: if significant hemolysis is suspected, the transfusion will be halted immediately, and the patient will receive supportive care, including hydration and electrolyte monitoring.Sample Size and AnalysisThe study aims to enroll 50 participants (25 per group), which includes an over-sampling buffer from the calculated requirement of 44 total participants to maintain a 95% confidence level and 90% power. Data analysis will utilize independent t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables and Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests for categorical outcomes

02

Conditions studied

  • Obstetric Hemostasis
  • Intravascular Hemolysis
  • Major Obstetric Hemorrhage
  • Manual Syringing Transfusion
  • Pneumatic Pressure Bag Transfusion

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Major Obstetric Hemorrhage,
  • Manual Syringing Transfusion
  • Pneumatic Pressure Bag Transfusion
  • Intravascular Hemolysis
03

In context

Hemolysis

120 studies on the registry are indexed under Hemolysis; 22 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 50 is close to the median of 49 across 78 interventional studies indexed under Hemolysis.

Browse Hemolysis studies →

Lead sponsor

Aswan University is the lead sponsor of 47 studies on the registry; 21 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 45 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
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

  • Women aged 18-45 years undergoing cesarean section
  • Diagnosed major obstetric hemorrhage (blood loss ≥1000 mL or hemodynamic instability requiring transfusion)
  • Written for participation

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pre-existing hemolytic conditions (e.g., sickle cell disease, thalassemia)
  • Known to blood products
  • Severe baseline coagulopathy (defined as > 2.0 or count \< 50,000/mm³) or established disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) prior to randomization
  • Refusal to receive blood transfusion
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(4)

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.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Hypersensitivity

An allergy, or another reaction of the immune system, to a substance. “Hypersensitivity to the study drug” means a known allergic reaction to it — not every side effect a medicine can have.

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.

Platelets

Blood cells that help blood clot. Too few raises the risk of bleeding and bruising. A usual adult range is about 150–400 × 10⁹/L (150,000–400,000 per µL); each lab has its own reference range.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
50 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Manual Syringing with 20 mL Syringes.

    Participants in this arm receive blood products administered manually by clinical staff using 20 mL syringes through 18-gauge peripheral and 16-gauge external jugular cannulae

    Device: Manual syringing

  • Experimental
    Blood transfusion via pneumatic pressure bags set at 300 mmHg

    Participants in this arm receive blood products administered using a pneumatic pressure bag inflated to a constant 300 mmHg through 18-gauge peripheral and 16-gauge external jugular cannulae

    Device: pneumatic pressure bag

Interventions

  • DeviceManual syringing

    Participants in this arm receive blood products administered manually by clinical staff using 20 mL syringes through 18-gauge peripheral and 16-gauge external jugular cannulae

  • Devicepneumatic pressure bag

    Participants in this arm receive blood products administered using a pneumatic pressure bag inflated to a constant 300 mmHg through 18-gauge peripheral and 16-gauge external jugular cannulae

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Hemolysis incidence evaluated using surrogate markers

    The primary outcome of this study is Hemolysis incidence evaluated using surrogate markers: 1\. Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) levels,

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 hours post transfusion

  2. Hemolysis incidence evaluated using surrogate markers: Indirect bilirubin levels

    The primary outcome of this study is Hemolysis incidence evaluated using surrogate markers: 2\. Indirect bilirubin levels

    Time frame: From enrollment until 6 hours post operative

Secondary outcomes

  1. Achievement of hemodynamic stability

    Achievement of hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing cesarean section complicated by major obstetric hemorrhage, comparing manual syringe transfusion versus pneumatic pressure bag transfusion. Hemodynamic stability is defined as the sustained achievement of the following for at least 30 minutes: Systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥90 mmHg, Heart rate ≤100 beats per minute (bpm), Oxygen saturation ≥95%.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 hours post transfusion

  2. Total volume of blood products administered

    Total volume of blood products administered

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 hours post transfusion

  3. Transfusion-related complications

    Transfusion-related complications such as: * Acute kidney injury, * Transfusion reactions

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 6 hours post transfusion

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Grossberg AJ, Fowl DA, Merritt BT, Nackley GM, Polit-Moran JA, Savona CL, Galwankar SC. Comparing the Push-Pull Technique to Pressure Bag for Administration of Blood Products: A Prospective Nonblinded Observation Simulation-based Study (CoPP toP Study). J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2024 Oct-Dec;17(4):208-211. doi: 10.4103/jets.jets_14_24. Epub 2024 Nov 5. PubMed 39911470 ↗
  • Abdul-Kadir R, McLintock C, Ducloy AS, El-Refaey H, England A, Federici AB, Grotegut CA, Halimeh S, Herman JH, Hofer S, James AH, Kouides PA, Paidas MJ, Peyvandi F, Winikoff R. Evaluation and management of postpartum hemorrhage: consensus from an international expert panel. Transfusion. 2014 Jul;54(7):1756-68. doi: 10.1111/trf.12550. Epub 2014 Mar 12. PubMed 24617726 ↗
  • Orsi KCSC, Kita VY, de Souza AHP, Tsunemi MH, Avelar AFM. Neonatal Transfusion Practice: Hemolysis Markers After In Vitro Infusion of Packed Red Blood Cells by the Gravitational Method or Syringe Pump in a Peripheral Catheter. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2021 Oct-Dec 01;35(4):E40-E49. doi: 10.1097/JPN.0000000000000571. PubMed 34726655 ↗
  • Choi YJ, Huh H, Bae GE, Ko EJ, Choi SU, Park SH, Lim CH, Shin HW, Lee HW, Yoon SZ. Effect of varying external pneumatic pressure on hemolysis and red blood cell elongation index in fresh and aged blood: Randomized laboratory research. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jul;97(28):e11460. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011460. PubMed 29995802 ↗
  • De Villiers WL, Murray AA, Levin AI. Expediting red blood cell transfusions by syringing causes significant hemolysis. Transfusion. 2017 Nov;57(11):2747-2751. doi: 10.1111/trf.14283. Epub 2017 Aug 20. PubMed 28833178 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Individual participant data will not be shared for the following reasons: Privacy and Confidentiality: The study involves sensitive maternal health data, and the current protocol is designed to restrict data access strictly to the primary research team to ensure participant anonymity. Institutional Policy: In accordance with the standards of Aswan University Hospital, data is stored in secure, password-protected databases with access limited to authorized investigators only. Ethical Constraints: The informed consent signed by participants specifies that their data will be used solely for the purposes of this specific research study and will not be made available for secondary use by outside researchers

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

Started Sep 2025 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Apr 2026, 7 months after the start.

Of 28 interventional studies with no phase under Hemolysis, half reached primary completion within 11 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 3 and three quarters within 35. This study's planned 7 months is below that.

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

Registered
Mar 6, 2026
First posted
Mar 12, 2026
StartActual
Sep 1, 2025
Primary completionEst.
Apr 1, 2026
CompletionEst.
Apr 1, 2026
Last update
Mar 12, 2026
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 12, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07466719
Lead sponsor
Aswan University
Responsible party
Soudy Salah Hammad (lecturer of anesthesia,ICU, pain management, Aswan University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 12, 2026
Start date
Sep 1, 2025
Primary completion
Apr 1, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Apr 1, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 12, 2026

Study contacts

Soudy Hammad, lecturer of anesthesia,SICU,
Contact
soudi.salah@aswu.edu.eg
+201014761523 ext. +201017446683
Tarek Hemaida, lecturer
Contact
dr.tarek@aswu.edu.eg
+201007363190
Mohammed Saeed, lecturer
study chair · Aswan University-Faculty of Medicine-New Aswan City

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