Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 5:25 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-26 @ 7:14 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT03457350
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2022-05-03
First Post:
2018-02-22
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Office Hysteroscopy Versus Cervical Probing for Cervical Stenosis
Sponsor:
Woman's Health University Hospital, Egypt
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Small-caliber Office Hysteroscopy Versus Blind Cervical Probing for Tight Primary Cervical Stenosis in Nulliparous Women: a Preliminary Study
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2022-04
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
This study aims to estimate if performing a small caliber office hysteroscopic cervical negotiation would succeed to bypass tight markedly stenotic cervix in comparison to blind cervical probing done under general anesthesia. Moreover, the investigators test the impact of drawing a detailed diagram after this procedure on the success of ET in participants with failed mock or actual trials of embryo transfer (ET).
Detailed Description:
It comprises 122 nulliprous women with failed cervical sounding on vaginal examination in the office. Participants were divided into 2 groups. Group A comprised 64 cases subjected to small-caliber office hysteroscopic cervical negotiation while 58 cases were subjected to cervical probing under general anesthesia. Main outcome measures included success to bypass primary cervical stenosis and complication rate
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: