Skip to content

PerClot Compared to Usual Care in Gynaecology Procedures

A Prospective, Multi-Centre, Randomized, Safety and Effectiveness Study of PerClot Compared to Usual Care When Used During Gynaecology Procedures

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02835391
Enrollment
90
Registered
2016-07-18
Start date
2015-11-30
Completion date
2017-08-31
Last updated
2017-09-01

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

Conditions

Cancer, Endometriosis, Menorrhagia, Ovarian Cyst, Uterine Fibroids

Brief summary

This study is a post market, multi-centre, randomised study evaluating PerClot compared to usual care. PerClot is a CE marked device and is currently used as a haemostat in gynaecological surgery throughout Europe. The purpose of this study is to collect additional post market data on its use in this indication.

Detailed description

This study is a post market, multi-centre, randomised study evaluating PerClot compared to usual care. All subjects in this randomized study will undergo a laparoscopic or open gynecological procedure such as hysterectomy, cystectomy, myomectomy, endometrial excision or ablation. Subjects will be randomized to receive PerClot or usual care. This research will utilize a multi-center, prospective, randomized controlled study. The study will be conducted in2 study sites in Europe. An assumed sample of 90 subjects will be enrolled to evaluate the time to haemostasis. The enrollment of subjects to receive treatment will be based upon specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subjects will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive either PerClot or usual care. Data collected from both arms will be compared. Usual care will be at the discretion of the surgeon and may include any other haemostat or diathermy/electrocautery.

Interventions

DEVICEPerClot

Haemostatic device for the control of bleeding from capillary, venous or arteriolar vessels by pressure, ligature or other conventional means is either ineffective or impractical.

DEVICEFloseal, Surgicel, Surgiflo, Arista

Haemostatic device for the control of bleeding

PROCEDUREElectrocautery/Diatermy

Procedure for the control of bleeding

Sponsors

CryoLife Europa
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Subject is ≥ 18 years of age * Subject is undergoing gynecological procedure * Subject is willing and able to comply with the protocol and follow up period * Subject is willing and able to give written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* • Subject with a history of pelvic or abdominal radiotherapy (within 8 weeks) * Subject is pregnant or actively breastfeeding * Subject has a ruptured ectopic pregnancy * Subject has a medical history of abnormal coagulopathy or bleeding * Subject has a sensitivity to starch or starch derived materials * Subject has active or potential infection at the surgical site * Subject is currently enrolled in another study

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
achievement of haemostasis (yes/no).measured up to 10 minutes after applicationvisual observation of cessation of bleeding

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Absence of re-intervention for post-operative bleedingwithin 30 days of initial surgeryNo return to OR for bleeding

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Absence of proven infectionwithin 30 days of initial surgeryNo positive culture of blood results which indicate infection
Absence of bleeding related adverse eventswithin 30 days of initial surgeryNo adverse events which are specifically caused by bleeding

Countries

Spain

Outcome results

None listed

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