Wound Heal Clinical Trial
Official title:
Violet-Blue Light Inactivation of Bacteria in Chronic Wounds
Verified date | May 2024 |
Source | Bispebjerg Hospital |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
This four-week prospective clinical investigation will assess the safety and feasibility of a medical device without CE-marking. The medical device is a light-emitting-diode (LED) and is manufactured by VulCur MedTech Aps. Violet-blue light treatment is tested on a total of twenty-two patients with chronic wounds, divided into three groups, each group only receiving one dosage. Three dosages (low, medium and high) of violet-blue light treatment is tested. ID 1-7 are assigned to the low group, ID 8-15 are assigned to medium group and ID 16-22 are assigned to the high dosage group.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 22 |
Est. completion date | May 1, 2024 |
Est. primary completion date | May 1, 2024 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Men, women and non-binaries fulfilling all inclusion criteria - Age >18 - Patients with a chronic wound defined > 6 weeks - Wound Area > 1 cm and < 25 cm - Patient can understand Danish - Patient can comply with protocol - Patient is fully informed about the study and has given informed consent Exclusion Criteria: - Clinical infection in the wound requiring systemic or local antibiotics - Current intake of antibiotics or locally applied (within 7 days before baseline) - Known or suspected cancer in the wound - Previous Photodermatitis and/or Photosensitivity - Previous Porphyria and/or hypersensitivity to porphyrins - Known congenital or acquired immunodeficiency - Newly adjusted or newly started systemic immunomodulate treatment >4 weeks - Treatment with haemodialysis - Dementia - Participating in other clinical wound healing studies in the last 30 days - Judgement by the investigator that the patient is not suited for study participation - Pregnant or breastfeeding women. (All fertile women who is not on safe contraception will need a negative pregnancy test performed at baseline. Safe contraception includes cobber and hormone Intra Uterine Device and Hormone anticonception drugs. Sterility is defined as have had surgical sterilisation and being postmenopausal) |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Denmark | Danish Wound Healing Center, Bispebjerg Hospital | Copenhagen | Northwest |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Bispebjerg Hospital | Hvidovre University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark |
Denmark,
Bjarnsholt T, Kirketerp-Moller K, Jensen PO, Madsen KG, Phipps R, Krogfelt K, Hoiby N, Givskov M. Why chronic wounds will not heal: a novel hypothesis. Wound Repair Regen. 2008 Jan-Feb;16(1):2-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2007.00283.x. — View Citation
Dai T, Gupta A, Huang YY, Yin R, Murray CK, Vrahas MS, Sherwood ME, Tegos GP, Hamblin MR. Blue light rescues mice from potentially fatal Pseudomonas aeruginosa burn infection: efficacy, safety, and mechanism of action. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Mar;57(3):1238-45. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01652-12. Epub 2012 Dec 21. — View Citation
Enwemeka CS. Antimicrobial blue light: an emerging alternative to antibiotics. Photomed Laser Surg. 2013 Nov;31(11):509-11. doi: 10.1089/pho.2013.9871. Epub 2013 Oct 18. No abstract available. — View Citation
Leanse LG, Dos Anjos C, Mushtaq S, Dai T. Antimicrobial blue light: A 'Magic Bullet' for the 21st century and beyond? Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2022 Jan;180:114057. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2021.114057. Epub 2021 Nov 18. — View Citation
Liebmann J, Born M, Kolb-Bachofen V. Blue-light irradiation regulates proliferation and differentiation in human skin cells. J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Jan;130(1):259-69. doi: 10.1038/jid.2009.194. — View Citation
Malone M, Bjarnsholt T, McBain AJ, James GA, Stoodley P, Leaper D, Tachi M, Schultz G, Swanson T, Wolcott RD. The prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data. J Wound Care. 2017 Jan 2;26(1):20-25. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.1.20. — View Citation
Plattfaut I, Demir E, Fuchs PC, Schiefer JL, Sturmer EK, Bruning AKE, Oplander C. Characterization of Blue Light Treatment for Infected Wounds: Antibacterial Efficacy of 420, 455, and 480 nm Light-Emitting Diode Arrays Against Common Skin Pathogens Versus Blue Light-Induced Skin Cell Toxicity. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2021 May;39(5):339-348. doi: 10.1089/photob.2020.4932. — View Citation
Tomb RM, White TA, Coia JE, Anderson JG, MacGregor SJ, Maclean M. Review of the Comparative Susceptibility of Microbial Species to Photoinactivation Using 380-480 nm Violet-Blue Light. Photochem Photobiol. 2018 May;94(3):445-458. doi: 10.1111/php.12883. Epub 2018 Mar 31. — View Citation
Wang Y, Wang Y, Wang Y, Murray CK, Hamblin MR, Hooper DC, Dai T. Antimicrobial blue light inactivation of pathogenic microbes: State of the art. Drug Resist Updat. 2017 Nov;33-35:1-22. doi: 10.1016/j.drup.2017.10.002. Epub 2017 Oct 13. — View Citation
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Overall Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) adjusted to the skin. The violet-blue light treatment will be considered safe when less than 30 % have an overall CTCAE score larger than Grade 2 CTCAE. The overall CTCAE score for each patient is based on the one CTCAE score with the most severe grading. | 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Baseline Clinical Wound Assessment | Evaluates wound symptoms (Exudate, necrosis, maceration, granulation, Oedema,) and skin symptoms (eczema, Erythema, Hyperpigmentation, Hypopogmentation, epthilializing) at a 4 step scale from none to mild, moderate, severe. | Baseline, 1 week | |
Secondary | Clinical Wound Assessment | Evaluates wound symptoms (Exudate, necrosis, maceration, granulation, Oedema,) and skin symptoms (eczema, Erythema, Hyperpigmentation, Hypopogmentation, epthilializing) at a 4 step scale from none to mild, moderate, severe. | Pre-intervention, up to 3 weeks | |
Secondary | Follow up Clinical Wound Assessment | Evaluates wound symptoms (Exudate, necrosis, maceration, granulation, Oedema,) and skin symptoms (eczema, Erythema, Hyperpigmentation, Hypopogmentation, epthilializing) at a 4 step scale from none to mild, moderate, severe. | Follow Up, up to 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Numeric Rating Scale (1-10) | Pain scale in relation to treatment. Higher scores indicate more pain. | Post-intervention, up to 3 weeks | |
Secondary | Wong Baker FACES (1-10) | Visual Pain scale in relation to treatment. Higher scores indicate more pain. | Post-intervention, up to 3 weeks | |
Secondary | Investigator Questionnaire | Usability of the medical device is tested with the system usability Scale (SUS) testing 10 items on a 5 step scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. | 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Patient Questionnaire | Evaluating Participant perceived; pain, time consumption and satisfaction through 20 items.
Question 1-13 can be answered on a 5 step scale from "to a very high degree" till "not at all", including possibility to answer "dont know" and "not relevant". Item 14-20 can be answered with "Yes", "No" and "Dont Know". |
4 weeks | |
Secondary | Mean time of visit | Total time for the visit will be measured in minutes. | For every visit, up to 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Mean time of Treatment Procedure | For every treatment visit, time used for the treatment with the FlashHeal Device is measured.
Time is measured in minutes. |
Post-intervention, up to 3 weeks | |
Secondary | Baseline Mean Bacterial Load | E-Swabs, Essen Rotary Technique performed at baseline, follow-up and before and after treatment with FlashHeal Device. Bacteria will be cultured for aerobe and anaerobe species. | 1 week | |
Secondary | Pre-intervention Mean Bacterial Load | E-Swabs, Essen Rotary Technique performed at baseline, follow-up and before and after treatment with FlashHeal Device. Bacteria will be cultured for aerobe and anaerobe species. | Pre-intervention, up to 3 weeks | |
Secondary | Post-intervention Mean Bacterial Load | E-Swabs, Essen Rotary Technique performed at baseline, follow-up and before and after treatment with FlashHeal Device. Bacteria will be cultured for aerobe and anaerobe species. | Post-intervention, up to 3 weeks | |
Secondary | Mean Bacterial Load at Follow Up | E-Swabs, Essen Rotary Technique performed at baseline, follow-up and before and after treatment with FlashHeal Device. Bacteria will be cultured for aerobe and anaerobe species. | Follow up, up to 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Baseline Wound Fluid | Swab for wound fluid performed once every week using the Essen Rotary Technique, testing for 6-10 cytokines assessing the inflammatory microenvironment. | Baseline, 1 Week | |
Secondary | Change from Baseline Wound Fluid Composition Week 1 to Week 2 | Swab for wound fluid performed once every week using the Essen Rotary Technique, testing for 6-10 cytokines assessing the inflammatory microenvironment. | 2 Weeks | |
Secondary | Change from Baseline Wound Fluid Composition Week 1 to Week 3 | Swab for wound fluid performed once every week using the Essen Rotary Technique, testing for 6-10 cytokines assessing the inflammatory microenvironment. | 3 Weeks | |
Secondary | Change from Baseline Wound Fluid Composition Week 1 to Week 4 | Swab for wound fluid performed once every week using the Essen Rotary Technique, testing for 6-10 cytokines assessing the inflammatory microenvironment. | 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Baseline Wound Size Week 1 | Clinical Photography is performed once every week. Hereafter the wound is analysed with the ImageJ software to calculate wound size in cm2. | Baseline, week 1 | |
Secondary | Change from Baseline Wound Size Week 1 to Week 2 | Clinical Photography is performed once every week. Hereafter the wound is analysed with the ImageJ software to calculate wound size in cm2. | 2 Weeks | |
Secondary | Change from Baseline Wound Size Week 1 to Week 3 | Clinical Photography is performed once every week. Hereafter the wound is analysed with the ImageJ software to calculate wound size in cm2. | 3 Weeks | |
Secondary | Change from Baseline Wound Size Week 1 to Week 4 | Clinical Photography is performed once every week. Hereafter the wound is analysed with the ImageJ software to calculate wound size in cm2. | Follow Up, 4 weeks | |
Secondary | Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE). The CTCAE is adjusted to the skin. | Post-intervention, 2 weeks | |
Secondary | Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE). The CTCAE is adjusted to the skin. | 30 minutes Post-intervention, 2 weeks | |
Secondary | Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE). The CTCAE is adjusted to the skin. | 24 hours Post-intervention, 2 weeks | |
Secondary | Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE). The CTCAE is adjusted to the skin. | 48 hours Post-intervention, 2 weeks | |
Secondary | Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE).
The CTCAE is adjusted to the skin. |
120 hours Post-intervention, 2 weeks | |
Secondary | Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE) | Safety is measured as the absence of Adverse Events (AE) skin reactions. Adverse event skin reactions are assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events U.S Department of Health and Human Services version 5.0, Nov 27, 2017 (CTCAE).
The CTCAE is adjusted to the skin. |
Follow Up, 4 weeks |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT05023135 -
DeepView SnapShot Portable (DV-SSP): Device Training Study
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT03459547 -
Soft Peri-implant Tissue Around Different Abutment Materials
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05608187 -
Evaluating Safety and Biological Effect on Wound Healing of ILP100-Topical in Subjects With Diabetic Foot Ulcers
|
Phase 2 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT03649308 -
Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Compared to Traditional Care After Skin Grafting
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT04596124 -
Effectiveness and Tolerability of Fitostimoline Plus Cream and Gauze vs Connettivina Bio Plus Cream and Gauze
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03285542 -
Prospective Randomized Trial of Dermabond Prineo in Total Knee Arthroplasty
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05689775 -
Reconstruction After Abdominoperineal Resection With Robot-assisted Harvest of VRAM Flap
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT05474911 -
PILONIDAL SINUS: CONVENTIONAL CARE VERSUS NEGATIVE PRESSURE THERAPY.
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT04849143 -
The Effectiveness of Stingless Bee Honey (Kelulut Honey) Versus Gel in Diabetic Wound Bed Preparation
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03596112 -
The Difference in Wound Size Reduction Comparing Two Frequently Used Wound Dressings in Everyday Care
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05169814 -
Micro/Nanobubbles (MNBs) for Treatment of Acute and Chronic Wounds
|
Early Phase 1 | |
Completed |
NCT04545476 -
Enhanced Secondary Intention Healing vs. Standard Secondary Intention Healing in Mohs Surgical Defects on the Head and Distal Lower Extremities
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT06020157 -
Comparison of Simple and Continuous Suture Techniques in Oral Surgery
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05133570 -
Study Evaluating the Effectiveness of Treatment With Vista Care®, in Arterial Ulcers of the Lower Extremities
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT04901325 -
Baricitinib in the Treatment of Adults With Pyoderma Gangrenosum (PG)
|
Phase 2 | |
Withdrawn |
NCT03668665 -
Influencing Wound Healing Through the Application of Hyaluronic Acid With Perfluorodecalin and Physalis Angulata Extract After Split Skin Removal From the Thigh - A Study in "Split Wound Design"
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT03703479 -
Effect of A-PRF After Removal of Wisdom Teeth
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03204851 -
Microlyte Dressing in the Management of Wounds
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT06117436 -
Impact of Cilostazol Versus Cilostazol and Selenium Combination on the Healing of Diabetic Foot Ulcer Patients
|
Phase 2/Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT05618912 -
Scar Appearance After Postoperative Hydrocolloid Dressing Versus Standard Petrolatum Ointment
|
N/A |