Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction Clinical Trial
Official title:
AspireAssist for Palliative Venting Gastrostomy in Malignant Bowel Obstruction Patients
Verified date | January 2023 |
Source | Case Comprehensive Cancer Center |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
Individuals with cancer causing an intestinal or stomach obstruction often require gastric drainage to prevent symptoms of nausea, vomiting, and to prevent aspiration. This is often achieved by a nasogastric (NG) tube, although prolonged NG tube use can lead to unwanted side effects like ulcers, bleeding, and they are generally uncomfortable. Gastric drainage through the use of a percutaneously placed endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube has been used in people with cancer since the 1980s. This allows relief of symptoms of malignant bowel obstruction though venting of stomach contents. Decompressive PEG tubes are routinely used in individuals with malignant obstruction, although these tubes tend to get clogged from food blocking the tube. The AspireAssist is a weight loss device that allows participants to remove a large amount of the food in their stomachs after each meal to help them to lose weight via an aspiration device attached to the abdominal portion of the tube which allows instillation of water into the stomach, followed by aspiration of the gastric contents into a receptacle or the toilet. The device is placed endoscopically in an identical fashion to a standard PEG tube. Although most commonly used for weight loss, the device is FDA cleared to be used as a venting tube as well. The purpose of this study is to determine if the AspireAssist provides an improved quality of life when compared with a standard venting gastrostomy tube for participants with malignant bowel obstructions.
Status | Withdrawn |
Enrollment | 0 |
Est. completion date | August 1, 2023 |
Est. primary completion date | July 1, 2023 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Malignant (cancer of any type) gastric or small bowel obstruction referred to surgery for placement of a venting gastrostomy tube for gastric decompression - Able to demonstrate the ability to use the AspireAssist prior to placement Exclusion Criteria: - Those who are immobile and unable to at least sit up in bed to vent the gastrostomy tube. - Undergoing placement of a gastrostomy tube for any other indication other than malignant small bowel or gastric outlet obstruction. - Absolute contraindications to gastrostomy tube placement, such as occluding oral or esophageal tumors |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
United States | Cleveland Clinic, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center | Cleveland | Ohio |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Case Comprehensive Cancer Center |
United States,
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Number of tube related complications per day | Number of tube related complications per day, including tube clogging, skin infection, dislodgement, etc. | at 30 days | |
Primary | Patient satisfaction and ease of use survey scores | Patient satisfaction and ease of use survey, with scores ranging from 0-15 with lower scores corresponding to higher satisfaction with the tube | At baseline | |
Primary | Patient satisfaction and ease of use survey scores | Patient satisfaction and ease of use survey, with scores ranging from 0-15 with lower scores corresponding to higher satisfaction with the tube | At 7 days from the date of tube placement | |
Primary | Patient satisfaction and ease of use survey scores | Patient satisfaction and ease of use survey, with scores ranging from 0-15 with lower scores corresponding to higher satisfaction with the tube | At 30 days from the date of tube placement | |
Primary | Quality of life as measured by Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) | Quality of life as measured by Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS), with scores ranging from 0-100 with higher scores corresponding to worse outcomes | At baseline | |
Primary | Quality of life as measured by Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) | Quality of life as measured by ESAS, with scores ranging from 0-100 with higher scores corresponding to worse outcomes | At 7 days from the date of tube placement | |
Primary | Quality of life as measured by Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) | Quality of life as measured by ESAS, with scores ranging from 0-100 with higher scores corresponding to worse outcomes | At 30 days from the date of tube placement | |
Secondary | Number of decompressions per day | Number of decompressions per day | at 30 days | |
Secondary | Number of ED visits or readmissions for tube related problems | Number of ED visits or readmissions for tube related problems | at 30 days | |
Secondary | Number of calls or office visits for nausea or tube related issues | Number of calls or office visits for nausea or tube related issues | at 30 days | |
Secondary | Ability to eat/drink assessed via GOOSS | Ability to eat/drink assessed via GOOSS, with scores ranging from o to 3, with higher scores indicating higher levels of oral intake.
Pre and postoperative GOOSS scores will be compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test with a p <0.05 being considered significant |
At baseline | |
Secondary | Ability to eat/drink assessed via GOOSS | Ability to eat/drink assessed via GOOSS, with scores ranging from o to 3, with higher scores indicating higher levels of oral intake.
Pre and postoperative GOOSS scores will be compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test with a p <0.05 being considered significant |
At 1 week from the date of tube placement | |
Secondary | Ability to eat/drink assessed via GOOSS | Ability to eat/drink assessed via GOOSS, with scores ranging from o to 3, with higher scores indicating higher levels of oral intake.
Pre and postoperative GOOSS scores will be compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test with a p <0.05 being considered significant |
At 30 days from the date of tube placement |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05564143 -
Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Versus Surgical Gastroenterostomy for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT06128018 -
Comparing Endoscopic Ultrasound vs Surgical Gastrojejunostomy for Management of GOO.
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT04810377 -
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gastroenterostomy for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT02440724 -
The Usefulness of Self-expandable Metal Stents(SEMS) for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: a Prospective Study Using New Designed Stents
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05986890 -
Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Loop Gastrojejunostomy for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction
|
N/A |