Skip to content

Standing type magnetically guided capsule versus gastroscopy for gastric examination

Observing the overall consistency and safety of magnetic control capsule gastroscopy compared with traditional gastroscopy for the detection of focal lesions in the stomach: a self-control, blind-state comparison, multi-center clinical study

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ChiCTR
Registry ID
ChiCTR1800018346
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2018-09-12
Start date
2018-04-17
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2018-09-17

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

Conditions

Gastric diseases

Interventions

Gold Standard:Conventional gastroscopy
Index test:Standing&#32
magnetically&#32

Sponsors

Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to 69 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Subjects voluntarily participate in the trial and sign an informed consent form; 2. Aged 18-70 years old; 3. Height =1.4m; 4. Indications for compliance with gastroscopy: (1) Physical examination; (2) High-risk groups of upper gastrointestinal cancer, including family history, irregular eating habits, alcoholism, etc.; (3) There are suspicious symptoms of the digestive system, such as abdominal distension, abdominal pain, nausea, upper abdomen burning, etc; (4) Digestive system diseases require regular examination, including gastritis and ulcers; (5) Other patients who have a clear or suspected stomach disease who require gastroscopy; 5. Ability to communicate well with researchers and comply with test requirements.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: (1) dysphagia or symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction, suspected or known intestinal stenosis, fistula, history of upper gastrointestinal surgery or abdominal surgery altering gastrointestinal anatomy; (2) congestive heart failure, renal insufficiency, under therapeutic anticoagulation, in poor general condition (American Society of Anesthesiologists class III/IV), metallic parts, a pacemaker or other implanted electromedical devices, or artificial heart valves; (3) pregnancy or suspected pregnancy; (4) exclusion criteria for standard magnetic resonance imaging examination such as the presence of surgical metallic devices, even though its low magnetic field technically would not interfere with such devices; or (5) currently participating in another clinical study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
overall compliance rate;positive compliance rate;negative compliance rate;

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Patient preference;adverse events;Gastric cleanliness;mucosal visualization;

Countries

China

Contacts

Public ContactLiu Side

Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University

liuside2011@163.com+86 020 61641537

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ChiCTR (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026