CTNAV II : Multicentric Evaluation of IMACTIS-CT Navigation System
- Conditions
- BiopsyPunctionAblationDrainage
- Interventions
- Device: Navigation station (IMACTIS-CT®)Device: CT
- Registration Number
- NCT01896219
- Lead Sponsor
- University Hospital, Grenoble
- Brief Summary
Estimate the medical service of a system of navigation (IMACTIS-CT®)in terms of SAFETY, EFFICIENCY and PERFORMANCE, in comparison with the reference method during gestures of interventional radiology under scan in the thoraco-abdominal level.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 464
- More or equal the 18 years old
- Patient for whom an indication of diagnostic or therapeutic percutaneous interventional gesture in the thoraco-abdominal level under CT guidance is prescribed
- Patient affiliated to social security or similarly regime
- Patient signed consent for participation in the study.
- Patient with a medical device using a magnetic field (eg, patient with a pacemaker)
- Patient who presents ferromagnetic foreign bodies intracorporeal close to the working zone of Radiologist, and that can interact with the medical device
- Pregnant women and lactating mothers
- Ward of court or under guardianship
- Person deprived of freedom by judicial or administrative decision
- Person under legal protection
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Gesture performed under Navigation-assisted procedure (NAV) Navigation station (IMACTIS-CT®) Use of the IMACTIS-CT® Navigation System Gesture performed under control tomodensitometric (CT) CT Conventional
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Estimate the medical service of a system of navigation (IMACTIS-CT ®) in terms of SAFETY, EFFICIENCY and PERFORMANCE, in comparison with the reference method during interventional radiology gestures 2 hours Three criteria are estimated:
* Safety: number of major complications (due to gesture)
* Efficiency: number of targets achieved
* Performance: number of scancontrol made during the puncture
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Comparison (IMACTIS-CT ® vs References) of the operator satisfaction during his gesture. 2 hours Scale of quantitative satisfaction
Comparison (IMACTIS-CT ® vs. Reference) of the radiation dose delivered during the puncture. 2 hours Evaluation of delivered medical service by carrying out a sub-group analysis according to the stratification of the difficulty of gesture 2 hours Evaluation of the navigation system use by the operators, based on needle holder localization files 2 hours Comparison of the duration of needle setting up procedure between IMACTIS-CT® and the reference method. 2 hours
Trial Locations
- Locations (3)
Ambroise Paré University Hospital
🇫🇷Boulogne Billancourt, Hauts-de-Seine, France
University Hospital
🇫🇷Lille, Nord, France
University Hospital of Saint-Louis
🇫🇷Paris, France