Skip to content

Surefire Catheter Versus Standard End-hole Microcatheter: A Pilot Study

Surefire Catheter Versus Standard End-hole Microcatheter in Yttrium-90 Distribution and Tissue Penetration: A Pilot Study

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02446925
Enrollment
8
Registered
2015-05-18
Start date
2015-05-01
Completion date
2018-12-19
Last updated
2022-07-28

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

Conditions

Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Brief summary

The Surefire Infusion System is a novel catheter initially developed to prevent reflux of embolic material into non-target vascular territories. Further research has demonstrated improved penetration and distribution of embolic material into treated arterial territories. The purpose of this study is to compare Y-90 glass microsphere distribution and penetration into cancerous tissue within the liver between a standard endhole catheter and the Surefire Infusion System.

Detailed description

Yttrium-90 (Y-90) radioembolization is a minimally invasive trans-arterial treatment for primary and secondary hepatic malignancies that relies on tumor hypervascularity for concentration of radioactive microspheres. The Surefire® Infusion System (SIS) (Westminster, CO) was developed to reduce non-target embolization which can result in morbid complications, especially those involving radioembolic or drug eluting microspheres. Prior to its introduction, radioembolization and other trans-arterial therapies have been performed with standard end-hole catheters. In addition to providing protection against non-target embolization, studies have demonstrated improved penetration of embolic material (tantalum microspheres and Tc-99M labeled MAA) with the use of the SIS when compared to conventional end-hole catheters. To date, no study has demonstrated improved distribution and penetration of yttrium-90 glass microspheres with the use of the Surefire catheter versus a standard end-hole catheter. Y-90 distribution can be evaluated with the use of immediate post-delivery PET/CT imaging as it creates its own pair production and can be imaged in the immediate post delivery period. PET/CT will demonstrate distribution and the dose to tumors can be calculated. The investigators propose a pilot study comparing yttrium-90 tumor distribution and concentration in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the use of the SIS versus a standard end-hole catheter.

Interventions

DEVICESurefire® Infusion System

Utilization of Surefire® Infusion System for Y-90 glass microsphere embolization

DEVICEStandard End-hole catheter

Utilization of Standard End-hole catheter for Y-90 glass microsphere embolization

Sponsors

Surefire Medical, Inc.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Wright State University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
DEVICE_FEASIBILITY
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Lobar-only treatments * Patients with biopsy or radiographically proven hepatocellular carcinoma who are not candidates for transplant, surgical resection or ablative therapy * Patients 18 years of age and older * Patients who are able to provide written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with Barcelona-Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) Stage C disease, * Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥ 3, * Patients who are unable to tolerate Y-90, * Patients with arterial anatomy unsuitable to place Surefire catheter, * Patients with uncorrectable coagulopathy, * Patients with platelets less than 50 (uncorrectable), * Bilirubin \>3 mg/dl, * AST or ALT\>5x upper limit of normal, * Patients who are unable to tolerate angiography, * Patients with \< 3 months to live, * Patients who meet the standard Y-90

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Y-90 distribution and concentration as determined by post embolization PET-CTUp to 12 monthsY-90 distribution and concentration within targeted hepatocellular carcinoma as determined by post embolization PET-CT.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Secondary outcome (fluoro time duration)Up to 12 monthsfluoro time duration
Secondary outcome (number of vessels requiring coiling)Up to 12 monthsnumber of vessels requiring coiling
Secondary outcome (tumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors)Up to 12 monthstumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (m-RECIST criteria)
Secondary outcome- toxicities (per standard labs: Total bilirubin; Aspartate aminotransferase (AST); Alanine aminotransferase (ALT); Albumin; International Normalized Ratio (INR); Creatinine; Alpha Fetoprotein (AFP))Up to 12 monthstoxicities (per standard labs: Total bilirubin; Aspartate aminotransferase (AST); Alanine aminotransferase (ALT); Albumin; International Normalized Ratio (INR); Creatinine; Alpha Fetoprotein (AFP))
Secondary outcome (time to progression of tumor)Up to 12 monthstime to progression of tumor
Secondary outcome (length of duration for arteriogram)Up to 12 monthslength of duration for arteriogram
Secondary outcome (MELD)Up to 12 monthsModel for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)
Secondary outcome (CPS)Up to 12 monthsChilds-Pugh Score (CPS)
Secondary outcome (non-target embolization)Up to 12 monthsnon-target embolization
Secondary outcome (time to death from first treatment)Up to 12 monthstime to death from first treatment
Secondary outcome (vessel injury)Up to 12 monthsvessel injury

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026