Clinical trialPhase 4Completed
RCT Steel (Wallstent®) vs Nitinol (Wallflex®) Bile Duct Stent for Palliation of Malignant Obstruction
- Outcome
- Finished, no results posted
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Status
- Completed
- Study type
- Interventional
- Start
- May 2009
- Expected end
- May 2013
- Enrollment
- 400 participants
- Sites
- 11
- Primary outcomes
- confirmed stent failure
- Sponsor
- Other
- Results posted
- No
- Last update
- 8 April 2014
These are registry fields. A trial card, with population, design, endpoints and result direction each tied to a quote, is not in the data yet.
Ask this document
Answers come only from this document’s own text, as highlighted quotes. If it doesn’t say, you are told so instead of given a guess.
Try
Source text
Brief summary public domain (ClinicalTrials.gov)
Less than 20% of patients with malignant distal bile duct (BD) obstruction (often pancreatic cancer) are suitable for resection surgery.In the rest,palliation treatment comes into focus. Jaundice caused by BD obstruction gives pain, infection (cholangitis), often itching and increased weight loss, and the patient is stigmatized by the deep yellow colour of the skin.Therefore palliation with endoscopic stenting by ERCP-technique is important. Modern self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are now widely used in this context. Comparison in a RCT between steel and nitinol SEMS has never been performed. The steel stent (Wallstent®) is the "original",is widely used, and has more expanding power. Nitinol stents are softer and claimed to be easier to insert,and are more and more popular.A newly developed nitinol stent (Wallflex®)may have these advantages, but is some 120 Euros more expensive. Regarding the most important outcome measure, time to stent failure (obstruction), no one knows if there is any difference.Our hypothesis is that there is no difference in this main outcome endpoint.
Detailed description public domain (ClinicalTrials.gov)
Secondary outcome measures (compare above) are complications caused by the stent or stent insertion and technical ease to insert the stent. To discover a 12% difference between the 2 groups, regarding patency, 400 patients must be included in the trial, alfa 0.05, beta 0.8. Investigators know from previous trials (Single center trial South Hospital GIE 2006;63:986-995 and a newly finished similar swedish multicenter trial,prel data DDW- 09)that the 9 hospitals recruited will be able to include this no of patients in approximately 2.5 years. Investigators will have a shortest follow-up period of 10 months, followup will be by phone with standard questions connected to stent failure, which is defined clinically AND by a new ERCP with intervention because of an obstructed stent.