Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
Phase 4 N=108 Randomized Treatment

Efficacy and Cost Analysis of Plastic Stent Compare to Metallic Stent in Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

Enrolled (actual)
108
Serious AEs
32.4%
Results posted
Dec 2011
Primary outcome: Primary: Proportion of Patients With Adequate Biliary Drainage in Metallic Stent and Plastic Stent Group.(ITT Analysis) — .7037037; .46296 proportion of participants — p=0.011

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 4
Interventions
biliary stent (self expandable metallic stent) (Device); PS (Device)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Khon Kaen University
Primary completion
Apr 2010

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Proportion of Patients With Adequate Biliary Drainage in Metallic Stent and Plastic Stent Group.(ITT Analysis)
.7037037; .46296 0.011 sig
PRIMARY
Proportion of Patients With Adequate Biliary Drainage in Metallic Stent and Plastic Stent Group.(Per Protocol Analysis)
0.822; 0.543 0.004 sig
SECONDARY
Patients Survival Times
126; 49 0.0021 sig
SECONDARY
Cost Effective Ratio of Metallic and Plastic Stent
10742; 19085

Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the adequacy of unilateral endoscopic biliary drainage using metallic stent with plastic stent in unresectable, complex, hilar, cholangiocarcinoma and cost analysis.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Unresectable complex hilar cholangiocarcinoma which diagnosis and staging based on computed tomography(CT) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP)

Exclusion Criteria

  • Patients with ASA 4 or 5
  • Patients with liver failure.
  • Patients unable to comply with follow-up
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00721175). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search