Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Underwater Versus Conventional Preventive Coagulation for Intraprocedural Vessel Management During Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM)

8. Mai 2026 aktualisiert von: Mohan Ramchandani, Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India

Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) has become an established, minimally invasive therapy for achalasia and esophageal motility disorders. Submucosal tunnelling is a critical phase of POEM and requires meticulous haemostasis to avoid bleeding, loss of orientation, reduced visibility, and prolonged procedural time.

The current standard method of vessel coagulation during POEM involves conventional coagulation under CO₂ insufflation using the hybrid knife (HK). However, this approach can require additional hemostatic devices-most commonly coagulation forceps-particularly when dealing with large-calibre vessels or resistant bleeding.

A novel technique-underwater preventive coagulation-leverages water as a conductive medium. Preliminary evidence suggests that:

  • electrosurgical current in water is focalized at the interface of the vessel,
  • allowing a soft sealing of the vessel wall,
  • reducing the risk of vessel rupture or unintended deep thermal injury,
  • and potentially eliminating the need to convert to coagulation forceps. Pilot data from our center demonstrate that underwater prophylactic sealing of large vessels during POEM is feasible, safe, and associated with markedly reduced need for rescue coagulation forceps. The technique is already used in practice but lacks systematic evidence from prospective randomized trials.

This study is designed to provide high-quality evidence on whether underwater vessel coagulation improves haemostatic efficiency, reduces intra-procedural bleeding, and minimizes device changes during POEM.

All POEM procedures will be performed under general anesthesia in the supine position using Fujifilm high-definition gastroscopes with a 2.8 mm channel and transparent distal cap.

Steps (Both Arms)

  1. Identify the esophagogastric junction (EGJ).
  2. Inject saline + methylene blue submucosally.
  3. Create a 2 cm mucosal incision at 5-6 o'clock position, 10 cm above EGJ.
  4. Enter the submucosal space.
  5. Perform submucosal tunnelling down to EGJ and 2-3 cm into cardia.

  6. Perform vessel haemostasis according to group allocation:

    • Underwater coagulation (intervention)
    • CO₂-based conventional coagulation (control)
  7. Perform circular myotomy (with occasional full-thickness myotomy when indicated).
  8. Close the mucosal entry using hemostatic clips.
  9. Record procedure time, instrument exchanges, bleeding events, and forceps usage.

Equipment

  • Hybrid Knife (Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH)
  • VIO 3 generator + ERBEJet 2 water-jet system
  • Methylene-blue tinted saline
  • Electrosurgical settings: ENDO CUT Q 2-3-3 for mucosal incision and myotomy

Studienübersicht

Status

Rekrutierung

Bedingungen

Intervention / Behandlung

Detaillierte Beschreibung

Primary Objective

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1. Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and 2. Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation. Secondary Objectives

  1. To compare composite forceps use (rescue + prophylactic) between groups.
  2. To evaluate the frequency of prophylactic-only forceps use.
  3. To compare total number of forceps applications per procedure.
  4. To determine differences in intra-procedural bleeding episodes.
  5. To compare procedural efficiency (procedure time, number of instrument exchanges).
  6. To compare hematological and inflammatory markers (Hb drop, Hct, CRP, WBC).
  7. To compare delayed bleeding rates within 30 days.
  8. To evaluate overall complication rates (intra- and post-procedural).
  9. To assess patient-reported outcomes (pain, tolerability). A prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial.

Study Arms Intervention Arm: Underwater Coagulation

  • Vessel coagulation performed entirely underwater using the Hybrid Knife.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.
  • Physiological saline instilled to completely displace air around the target vessel.

Control Arm: Conventional Coagulation (CO₂ Setting)

  • Standard vessel isolation and coagulation under CO₂ insufflation.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.

Studientyp

Beobachtungs

Einschreibung (Geschätzt)

120

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienkontakt

Studieren Sie die Kontaktsicherung

Studienorte

  • Indien
    • Telangana
      • Hyderabad, Telangana, Indien, 500082
        • Rekrutierung
        • Asian Institute of Gastroenterology Hospital
        • Kontakt:
        • Kontakt:

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

  • Erwachsene
  • Älterer Erwachsener

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Probenahmeverfahren

Wahrscheinlichkeitsstichprobe

Studienpopulation

120 (60 in each arm)

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Age ≥ 18 years
  2. Diagnosis of achalasia or esophageal motility disorder planned for POEM
  3. Ability to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Anticoagulant or antithrombotic therapy not safely stoppable
  2. Known coagulopathy or platelet disorder
  3. Esophageal/gastric varices
  4. Previous POEM or Heller's myotomy
  5. Prior treatment for same condition
  6. Inability or refusal to consent
  7. Visualized vessels smaller than the HK inner diameter (1.2 mm)

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

Kohorten und Interventionen

Gruppe / Kohorte
Intervention / Behandlung
Under Water Coagulation

Intervention Arm: Underwater Coagulation

  • Vessel coagulation performed entirely underwater using the Hybrid Knife.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.
  • Physiological saline instilled to completely displace air around the target vessel.
Sonstiges: Under Water Preventive Coagulation

Leverages water as a conductive medium. Preliminary evidence suggests that:

  1. electrosurgical current in water is focalized at the interface of the vessel,
  2. allowing a soft sealing of the vessel wall,
  3. reducing the risk of vessel rupture or unintended deep thermal injury,
  4. and potentially eliminating the need to convert to coagulation forceps.
Conventional Coagulation

Control Arm: Conventional Coagulation (CO₂ Setting)

  • Standard vessel isolation and coagulation under CO₂ insufflation.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:
Zeitfenster: 60 minutes
  1. Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and
  2. Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation.
60 minutes

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
To compare composite forceps use (rescue + prophylactic) between groups.
Zeitfenster: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To evaluate the frequency of prophylactic-only forceps use.
Zeitfenster: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To compare total number of forceps applications per procedure.
Zeitfenster: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To determine differences in intra-procedural bleeding episodes
Zeitfenster: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To compare procedural efficiency (procedure time, number of instrument exchanges
Zeitfenster: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To compare hematological and inflammatory markers (Hb drop, Hct, CRP, WBC)
Zeitfenster: 24 hours

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
24 hours
To compare delayed bleeding rates
Zeitfenster: 30 days
To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
30 days
To evaluate overall complication rates (intra- and post-procedural)
Zeitfenster: 24 hours

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
24 hours
To assess patient-reported outcomes (pain, tolerability).
Zeitfenster: 72 hours

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
72 hours

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Sponsor

Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India

Ermittler

  • Studienleiter: Mohan Dr Ramchandani, MD DM, Asian Institute Of Gastroenterology

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

1. Februar 2026

Primärer Abschluss (Geschätzt)

10. Mai 2027

Studienabschluss (Geschätzt)

30. Dezember 2027

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

4. Mai 2026

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

4. Mai 2026

Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)

8. Mai 2026

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

12. Mai 2026

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

8. Mai 2026

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Mai 2026

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Andere Studien-ID-Nummern

  • POEM UWC 2026

Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt

Nein

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt

Nein

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Klinische Studien zur Under Water Preventive Coagulation

Suchen Sie nach ähnlichen Studien

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

CROs by country

CROs in Serbia

Bedingungen

Seltene Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

Nahrungsergänzungsmittel

Sponsor / Mitarbeiter

Standorte

Abonnieren