Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
This study compares robotic-assisted navigation and manual CT-guided needle localization for lung nodules under 20 mm. It aims to evaluate localization success, procedure duration, CT scans, and complication rates.
Full description
This is a prospective, single-center, non-inferiority clinical study designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a robotic-assisted navigation system for lung nodule localization compared to traditional manual CT-guided needle localization. The study will be conducted between June 2024 and December 2024, involving 100 patients with lung nodules smaller than 20 mm in diameter. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either CT-guided manual needle localization or robotic-assisted needle localization. The primary outcome measure will be the localization success rate, defined as the ability to accurately locate the nodule and guide the needle to the target site for biopsy or surgery. Secondary outcome measures will include procedural duration, the number of CT scans required, total dose-length product (DLP), first-pass success rate, localization success within a single needle adjustment, and complication rate.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
(Ⅰ) isolated pulmonary nodules with a maximum diameter of less than 20 mm; (Ⅱ) the presence of pure ground-glass opacity (GGO) or mixed GGO (solid to tumor ratio < 0.5) on CT with clinical or radiological suspicion of malignancy; (Ⅲ) patient with a peripheral nodule, located in the outer third of the lung parenchyma, with its edge situated at least 5 mm away from the pleural surface; (Ⅳ) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score of 0-1, indicating suitability for surgical intervention.
Exclusion criteria
(Ⅰ) nodule location obstructed by the scapula, precluding needle access; (Ⅱ) proximity of the nodule to major blood vessels, defined as within 2 cm; (Ⅲ) requirement for localization of multiple pulmonary nodules.
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
100 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal