Skip to content

Haemostatic Gel Prophylaxis for Post Duodenal Endoscopic Resection Bleeding

Randomised Controlled Trial of Haemostatic Gel Prophylaxis for Post Duodenal Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding In Patients with Advanced Mucosal Neoplasia in the Duodenum

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12620000208909
Enrollment
93
Registered
2020-02-20
Start date
2020-10-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2026-09-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

This study aims to evaluate the effect of a gel on postoperative bleeding in patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection for advanced mucosal/submucosal neoplasia. Who is it for? You may be eligible to join this study if you are aged 18 years or above, and are scheduled to undergo endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for ampullary lesions or duodenal lesions. Study details Participants in this study will be randomly allocated (by chance) to one of two groups. Participants in one group will undergo standard treatment for the prevention of bleeding, which involves routine endoscopic measures such as placing clips at sites of bleeding. Participants in the other group will have a haemostatic gel (Purastat, 3D-Matrix) applied endoscopically in addition to the standard measures such as the endoscopic clips. Following the procedure, we will compare the rates of clinically significant bleeding between the two groups. We will also record and compare any adverse events. We hope that the gel can reduce the risk of post EMR bleeding.

Interventions

Advanced endoscopic resection (ER) techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) have provided a minimally invasive alternative to surgery for curative management of advanced mucosal neoplasia. The safety profile and outcomes of ER techniques are significantly better than surgical resection however significant post resection bleeding remains an ongoing challenge. There is currently no consistently recommended strategy to reduce the risk of post-ER bleeding that has been adopted as stand

Advanced endoscopic resection (ER) techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) have provided a minimally invasive alternative to surgery for curative management of advanced mucosal neoplasia. The safety profile and outcomes of ER techniques are significantly better than surgical resection however significant post resection bleeding remains an ongoing challenge. There is currently no consistently recommended strategy to reduce the risk of post-ER bleeding that has been adopted as standard of care. ER in the duodenum carries the highest risk for for post ER bleeding based on anatomical location. This rate is particularly high with ER of and around the ampulla/ampullectomy (~20%). A recently introduced haemostatic gel (Purastat, 3D-Matrix) that acts as a self assembling nanoparticle matrix has demonstrated efficacy as a topical haemostat in controlling oozing bleeding in a number of anatomical locations including applications in ENT, Gynaecology, and endoscopy. All patients will be given high dose PPI prophylactically and undergo standard resection technique as outlined below for EMR and Ampullectomy. The control subjects will have these interventions ALONE, while the intervention arm will have these interventions in ADDITION to gel matrix. EMR: o Gelofusine + chromo of choice + 1:100,000 adrenaline in all injections unless adrenaline contraindicated o Snare of choice but must use Endocut diathermy o Intraprocedural haemostasis defined as clips only to active bleeding point or to area of injury not to close the entire defect o Adjunctive therapy permitted for fibrosis/islands: avulsion, o Salvage Purastat allowed in both arms if uncontrollable oozing bleeding intraprocedurally Ampullectomy o Resection of laterally spreading component as per duodenal EMR protocol o Snare based resection of the ampulla without injection into the ampulla with the aim of en-bloc ampullary resection. o Intraprocedural haemostasis as indicated/clinician preference however clips only to active bleeding point or to area of MP injury not to close the entire defect o Routine placement of plastic PD stent (except if known pancreas divisum) o Routine biliary stenting o Salvage Purastat allowed in both arms if uncontrollable oozing bleeding intraprocedurally We hypothesise that the application of the topical haemostatic gel to the duodenum will reduce the rate of clinically significant bleeding. We will be applying aliquots of 1-5mLs of the gel matrix; the exact amount will be determined by the size of the defect remaining post excision of the target lesion. Gel will be applied endoscopically via the proceduralist until the entire defect has been covered.

Sponsors

Liverpool Hospital
Lead SponsorHospital

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Blinded (masking used) (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

All patients must be 18 years old or above Single agent (excluding aspirin) or multiple anti-thrombotic agent use ceased within 1 week prior to the procedure* For patients with ampullary lesions; - Single ampullary lesion - 10mm or greater in size - Resection via hot ampullectomy, inject/EMR of adjacent lateral spreading component - Morphology: 0-Is, 0-IIa/b/c or combination For patients with duodenal Lesions - 2 or less lesions - 15mm or greater - Resection via hot EMR - Morphology: 0-Is, 0-IIa/b/c or combination, submucosal lesions *Antithrombotic therapy other than single agent aspirin is defined as either 1) patients taking one of; warfarin, apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, clopidogrel, prasugrel, asasantin, or any heparin based therapy, OR 2) multiple anti-thrombotic agents (combination of any of the aforementioned therapies and/or aspirin).

Exclusion criteria

• Unable to provide informed consent • Age <18 years old • Pregnant • Allergy to Purastat • “Cold” EMR

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Sep 19, 2026