St Mark's Conventional Endoscopy versus transNasal endoscopy Trial

ISRCTN ISRCTN77474635
DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN77474635
Secondary identifying numbers Protocol V 2.0
Submission date
12/03/2011
Registration date
29/03/2011
Last edited
08/04/2014
Recruitment status
No longer recruiting
Overall study status
Completed
Condition category
Digestive System
Prospectively registered
Protocol
Statistical analysis plan
Results
Individual participant data
Record updated in last year

Plain English summary of protocol

Not provided at time of registration

Contact information

Dr Chris Fraser
Scientific

Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy
St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute
Watford Road
Harrow
London
HA1 3UJ
United Kingdom

Study information

Study designRandomised controlled study (parallel design)
Primary study designInterventional
Secondary study designRandomised controlled trial
Study setting(s)Hospital
Study typeTreatment
Participant information sheet Not available in web format, please use the contact details below to request a patient information sheet
Scientific titleSt Mark's Conventional Endoscopy versus transNasal oesophagogastroduodenoscopy Trial
Study acronymSCENT
Study objectivesIn a UK setting, transnasal OGD (tOGD) is non-inferior to conventional (oral) OGD (cOGD) in terms of patient safety, diagnostic capability and feasibility. We also hypothesise that tOGD is superior to cOGD in terms of patient satisfaction
Ethics approval(s)Harrow Research Ethics Committee (North London REC 3) on the 11/06/2008: Reference number 08/H0719/24.
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studiedUpper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (OGD)
Intervention1. Transnasal OGD versus conventional (oral) OGD - a comparison of two routinely performed endoscopy procedures
2. Patients receved either a conventional OGD or a transnasal OGD only once and did not require any additional drugs or follow-up in relation to the study
Intervention typeOther
Primary outcome measurePatient tolerance, feasibility and safety of tOGD procedures (done using 4.9mm and 5.9mm ultrathin (UT) endoscopes) as compared to cOGD procedures (done using standard 9.0mm or UT 4.9mm and 5.9mm endoscopes)
Secondary outcome measures1. Patient tolerance, feasibility and safety of tOGD procedures (done using 4.9mm UT endoscopes)as compared to tOGD procedeures (done using 5.9mm ultrathin (UT) endoscopes).
2. Patient tolerance, feasibility and safety of tOGD procedures done using 4.9mm and 5.9mm ultrathin (UT) endoscopes) and cOGD procedeures (done under sedation using standard 9.0mm or UT 4.9mm and 5.9mm endoscopes)
3. Patient tolerance, feasibility and safety of tOGD procedures done using 4.9mm and 5.9mm ultrathin (UT) endoscopes) and cOGD procedeures (done without use of sedation using standard 9.0mm or UT 4.9mm and 5.9mm endoscopes)
Overall study start date01/09/2008
Completion date30/11/2009

Eligibility

Participant type(s)Patient
Age groupAdult
SexBoth
Target number of participants200
Key inclusion criteria1. Adult patients referred for diagnostic OGD to St Mark’s Hospital Endoscopy Unit
2. Patients who are able to give informed consent
Key exclusion criteria1. Patients who are unwilling to have a tOGD
2. Patients with a history of nasal trauma or nasal surgery
3. Patients with a history of recurrent epistaxis
4. Patients with a history of haemorrhagic tendency or who are on anticoagulation
5. Patients with a history of severe co-morbidity (especially respiratory disease) as judged by the investigators
6. Patients already participating in another trial
7. Patients lacking capacity to give informed consent
Date of first enrolment01/09/2008
Date of final enrolment30/11/2009

Locations

Countries of recruitment

  • England
  • United Kingdom

Study participating centre

Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy
London
HA1 3UJ
United Kingdom

Sponsor information

North West London Hospitals NHS Trust (UK)
Hospital/treatment centre

R&D Department
Northwick Park Hospital
Watford Road
Harrow
London
HA1 3UJ
England
United Kingdom

ROR logo "ROR" https://ror.org/04cntmc13

Funders

Funder type

Research organisation

Self funded by the investigators

No information available

Research support received from Endoscopy UK and Fujinon (Europe) in the form of loan endoscopes

No information available

Endoscopy Research Fellowship Grant and Keymed-Olympus (UK) in the form of loan endoscopes

No information available

Results and Publications

Intention to publish date
Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to shareNo
IPD sharing plan summaryNot provided at time of registration
Publication and dissemination planNot provided at time of registration
IPD sharing plan