Randomized Trial of UI-EWD vs. Conventional Endoscopic Therapy for Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Randomized Controlled Multi-Center Non-Inferiority Trial of UI-EWD (Nexpowder™) vs. Conventional Treatment as First-Line Endoscopic Therapy for Patients With High-Risk Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (TREET)
Medtronic - MITG
278 participants
Jun 21, 2024
INTERVENTIONAL
Conditions
Summary
A prospective, multi-center, noninferiority randomized controlled trial designed to compare the efficacy of UI-EWD (Nexpowder™) hemostatic powder versus conventional endoscopic hemostatic therapy in patients presenting with acute overt gastrointestinal bleeding which is found at endoscopy to be due to one of the following sources: a gastric or duodenal ulcer with active bleeding (spurting or oozing) or a non-bleeding visible vessel; an esophageal, gastric or duodenal tumor with active bleeding or a non-bleeding visible vessel; a gastric or duodenal Dieulafoy lesion with active bleeding or a non-bleeding visible vessel; or an actively bleeding Mallory-Weiss tear.
Eligibility
Plain Language Summary
Simplified for easier understanding
This summary was AI-generated to explain the trial in plain language. It is not medical advice. Always discuss eligibility with your doctor before enrolling in a clinical trial.
Interested in this trial?
Get notified about updates and connect with the research team.
Interventions
Hemostatic powder administered at index endoscopy
Conventional endoscopic therapy (bipolar electrocoagulation or clips or argon plasma coagulation, with or without epinephrine injection) administered at index endoscopy
Locations(14)
View Full Details on ClinicalTrials.gov
For the most up-to-date information, visit the official listing.
NCT06188585