Skip to content

AR US Versus sUS or Fluoroscopic Injections for Shoulder Punction

Comparison of Time for Prucedure, and Effectiveness Between Augmented Reality Enhanced Ultrasound-guided Versus Standard Ultrasound or Fluoroscopic Injections

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06053892
Enrollment
2
Registered
2023-09-26
Start date
2023-06-13
Completion date
2025-01-31
Last updated
2025-09-08

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

Conditions

Ultrasound, Interventions

Brief summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to prospectively evaluate the potential benefits of injections with Augmented Reality enhanced Ulrasound versus standard Ultrasound or fluoroscopy participants where assigend for fluoroscopic joint injections oder for Ultrasound guided injection. The main question\[s\] it aims to answer are: * The primary objective is to evaluate the duration of the different interventions * the count of needle passes * assess the reduction of radiation exposure using AR US rather than fluoroscopic guidance for joint injections

Detailed description

Patients assigned for standard Ultrasound or fluoroscopic joint injection are informed about the trial. Participants are randomly assigned to the study or control intervention. 1:1 randomization is used. In both groups, data on duration of the intervention, count of needle passes, correctness of injection location and radiation exposure will be collected. The outcome measures will be compared between the groups.

Interventions

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTPuncture

Shoulder puncture with the newly designed technique using AR to overlie the US image to the imaged anatomical structures in comparision to standard US and flurosopic-guidance.

Sponsors

Balgrist University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE

Masking description

The assignment into the study groups is going to be performed by 1:1 randomization using randomisation cards which are drawn by author-ised study staff.

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* \- Patients 18 to 99 years of age * Patients assigned for fluoroscopic guided injections (including MR arthrographies) * Patients assigned for US guided injections (including MR arthrographies)

Exclusion criteria

* \- Patients who are not willing to be part of the study * Contraindication against fluoroscopic guided injection * Women who are pregnant or breast feeding (Pregnancy assessment is part of the routine prior to fluoroscopic joint injections. No pregnancy test will be done for this study.)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Augmented reality sonography is less time consuming10 minutesPuncturing shoulders with Augmented reality sonography is faster (measuring the time in minutes and seconds) than when using standard sonography- from point of entry the skin until the target

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Sonography is more efficient than fluoroscopic- guidance in shoulder puncturing10 minutes (ml aspirated) to 3 days (laboratory results)More fluid (measured in ml) can be aspirated with lower false negative results (laboratory results) when puncutring shoulders with US-guidance in comparison to fluoroscopic guidance

Countries

Switzerland

Outcome results

None listed

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