Skip to content

Endoscopic Mucosal Injection Versus Ultrasound-Guided Injection of Triamcinolone to Treat Subglottic Stenosis

Comparison of the Safety and Economics of Translaryngeal Endoscopic Mucosal Injection Versus Ultrasound-Guided Injection of Triamcinolone for the Treatment of Subglottic Stenosis: a Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Study.

Status
Recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06275269
Enrollment
40
Registered
2024-02-23
Start date
2024-03-10
Completion date
2025-12-31
Last updated
2025-02-10

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

Conditions

Subglottic Stenosis

Keywords

Subglottic Stenosis, Triamcinolone, Translaryngeal Endoscopic Mucosal Injection, Ultrasound-Guided Injection

Brief summary

This study employs a multicenter, randomized controlled trial method, where patients meeting the inclusion criteria for subglottic stenosis are randomly divided into two groups. These groups are respectively undergoing translaryngeal endoscopic mucosal injection and ultrasound-guided injection of triamcinolone treatment. The comparison will focus on various indicators such as therapeutic effect, incidence of adverse reactions, treatment costs, and hospital resource utilization between the two groups. The safety and effectiveness will be compared to determine the relative merits of the two treatment methods.

Interventions

Ultrasound-Guided Triamcinolone Injection

PROCEDURETranslaryngeal Endoscopic Mucosal Injection

Translaryngeal Endoscopic Mucosal Injection of Triamcinolone

Sponsors

China-Japan Friendship Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* 1: Diagnosed with subglottic stenosis through laryngoscopic examination or imaging studies such as CT. * 2: Experiencing symptoms related to subglottic stenosis, such as breathing difficulties, hoarseness, etc.

Exclusion criteria

* 1: Severe cardiopulmonary dysfunction, patients extremely debilitated and unable to tolerate the procedure. * 2: Patients allergic to lidocaine, midazolam, triamcinolone, or any of their components. * 3: Pregnant or lactating women. * 4: Unstable angina, congestive heart failure, severe bronchial asthma. * 5: Severe hypertension and arrhythmias, hemodynamically unstable, and severe respiratory failure (PaO2 \<60mmHg after oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation). * 6: Known coagulation dysfunction, inability to stop anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, aspirin, or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before treatment. * 7: Patients do not agree to participate in this study. * 8: Participation in other studies within the last three months and not withdrawn or concluded, or having received triamcinolone treatment less than 1 month ago. * 9: Researchers believe there are any circumstances making the patient unsuitable for inclusion.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Incidence of Short-Term Postoperative Complicationsone week after interventionFollow-up on short-term postoperative complications (including pneumothorax, bleeding, wound infection, pain, fever, etc.)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Overall medical expenses incurred by patientsone week after interventionOverall medical expenses incurred

Countries

China

Contacts

Primary ContactGang Hou, PI
hougangcmu@163.com01084206250
Backup ContactMingming Deng, Phd
isdeng1017@163.com18801336854

Outcome results

None listed

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