Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment (EPSIT) Versus Sinus Laser Closure (SiLaC) Versus Lay Open Technique : Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment (EPSIT) Versus Sinus Laser Closure (SiLaC) Versus Lay Open Technique
Aim of the work To compare Sinus Laser closure versus lay open technique versus Endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment as regards recurrence rate, operative data, postoperative pain, intra and postoperative complications, healing time and return to daily activity..
| Medienart: |
|
|---|
Klinische Studie| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2020 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2020 |
| Enthalten in: |
ClinicalTrials.gov - (2020) vom: 09. Juni Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2020 |
|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Links: |
Volltext [kostenfrei] |
|---|
| Themen: |
610 |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Source: Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record., First posted: June 5, 2020, Last downloaded: ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on June 14, 2021, Last updated: June 15, 2021 |
|---|
| Study ID: |
NCT04418336 |
|---|---|
| Veröffentlichungen zur Studie: |
|
| fisyears: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
CTG003414825 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | CTG003414825 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230425221544.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 210408s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-627)CTG003414825 | ||
| 035 | |a (UBBS_Klinische_Studien)NCT04418336 | ||
| 035 | |a (UBBS_Klinische_Studien)R.19.04.495.R1 - 2019/05/12 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment (EPSIT) Versus Sinus Laser Closure (SiLaC) Versus Lay Open Technique |b Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment (EPSIT) Versus Sinus Laser Closure (SiLaC) Versus Lay Open Technique |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Source: Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record., First posted: June 5, 2020, Last downloaded: ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on June 14, 2021, Last updated: June 15, 2021 | ||
| 520 | |a Aim of the work To compare Sinus Laser closure versus lay open technique versus Endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment as regards recurrence rate, operative data, postoperative pain, intra and postoperative complications, healing time and return to daily activity. | ||
| 650 | 2 | |a Pilonidal Sinus | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Medical Condition: Pilonidal Sinus | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Study Type: Interventional | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Recruitment Status: Recruiting | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 610 | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t ClinicalTrials.gov |g (2020) vom: 09. Juni |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2020 |g day:09 |g month:06 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT04418336 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_CTG | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2020 |b 09 |c 06 | ||