Laceration of Skin Clinical Trial
Official title:
A Randomized, Controlled, Post-market Clinical Investigation to Evaluate Zip Surgical Skin Closure Device in Comparison of Using Standard of Care Sutures for Laceration Repair in Pediatrics in an Emergency Department
A prospective, randomized, controlled post-market clinical investigation that will enroll pediatric subjects requiring laceration repair. The investigation population will consist of 30 subjects fulfilling the eligibility criteria for the clinical investigation. The subjects will be randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to either the Zip 4 Surgical Skin Closure Device group or the Standard of Care sutures group.
The commercial use of the Zip device has demonstrated applicability and acceptance in many
medical specialties, including laceration closure in the Emergency Department setting.
However, while clinical studies have demonstrated quantitative performance benefits of the
device in orthopedic, dermatology, cardiac and cardiology specialties, no quantitative
studies have been conducted in the Emergency Department setting with the device with which
emergency medicine physicians may make quantitative, informed treatment choices. The Sponsor
(ZipLine Medical) and the study doctor (investigator) have furthermore identified the
pediatric patient population presenting for laceration repair in the Emergency Department as
a group that may uniquely benefit from the use of the Zip device.
Standard care for wounds of this type require cleaning the wound, anesthetizing the wound and
closing the wound with sutures that typically require subsequent removal at a later date. The
Zip device is non-invasive and therefore requires no injected anesthesia or sedation for
wound closure. In addition, the referenced clinical studies have demonstrated at least a 3
times speed advantage over sutures. The Zip device ease of use and consistency of outcomes
enables less skilled or experienced caregivers to perform fast, efficient and excellent wound
closure, which can improve department and staff efficiency, patient throughput and overall
patient satisfaction. Finally, the Zip device may be removed by the patient or parent at
home, eliminating a return-to-clinic visit for removal.
ZipLine Medical believes that the demonstrated benefits of the Zip device will be more
pronounced with the specified pediatric population due to reduced procedure time, elimination
of injected anesthesia and elimination of a return visit for suture removal. ZipLine Medical
believes that this will reduce fear and anxiety in pediatric patients. Furthermore, ZipLine
Medical believes that the Zip device can improve Emergency Department efficiency and patient
throughput, reduce overall healthcare cost and improve overall patient (and parent)
satisfaction.
;
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Terminated |
NCT03528512 -
IN Ketamine vs IN Midazolam and Fentanyl for Laceration Repair
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT06274073 -
Double-dorsal Versus Single-volar Digital Block
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05934669 -
IN Midazolam vs IN Dexmedetomidine vs IN Ketamine During Minimal Procedures in Pediatric ED
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT04091672 -
RECELL® System Combined With Meshed Autograft for Reduction of Donor Skin Harvesting in Soft Tissue Reconstruction
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04617041 -
Assessment of DAFILON® Suture Material for Skin Closure
|
||
Completed |
NCT04536493 -
Comparison of 2 Application Techniques for LET Gel Used Prior to Simple Laceration Repair
|
Phase 4 | |
Recruiting |
NCT03628690 -
A Post-Market Study of BandGrip in Traumatic Wound Closure Compared to Suture
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05383495 -
Anxiolysis for Laceration Repair in Children
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT03475901 -
Virtual Reality for Anxiolysis During Laceration Repair in the Pediatric Emergency Room
|
N/A |