[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"leadSponsorName\":\"Beni-Suef University\",\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:":612},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":7,"results":8},null,75,0,25,[9,43,65,92,123,147,167,191,210,233,255,273,292,316,341,362,385,414,440,466,489,512,541,563,589],{"id":10,"slug":11,"hasResults":12,"nctId":13,"briefTitle":14,"officialTitle":15,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":21,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":25,"briefSummary":27,"conditions":28,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":31,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":32,"startDateStruct":35,"completionDateStruct":37,"leadSponsor":39,"locationsCount":42},"100644159","outcomes-of-ridge-splitting-versus-sausage-technique-100644159",false,"NCT07664605","Outcomes of Ridge Splitting Versus Sausage Technique","Outcomes Of Ridge Splitting Versus Sausage Technique With Simultaneous Implant Placement For Augmenting Mandibular Horizontal Bone Defects.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients with deficient bone volume between (2 : 3.5 ) mm\n2. Patients must have installed functional implant for no less than 3 months- enough time to allow for bone augmentation changes.\n3. Patients with no defect in the gingival tissues.\n4. Patients with un-remarkable medical compromising conditions\n5. Patients with good oral hygiene at time of the examination\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients with compromising medical condition.\n2. Patients with severe bone resorption.\n3. Patients with D1 or D2 bone.\n4. Bone height \\\u003C10mm",true,"ALL","20 Years","75 Years",{"count":22,"type":23},30,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[26],"NA","The current study aims to increase the width of the alveolar bone in defective mandibular ridge with simultaneous implant placement and enhance the implant stability",[29],"Bone Loss, Alveolar","RECRUITING","2026-06-20",{"date":33,"type":34},"2026-06-24","ACTUAL",{"date":36,"type":23},"2026-06-01",{"date":38,"type":23},"2026-12-01",{"name":40,"class":41},"Beni-Suef University","OTHER",1,{"id":44,"slug":45,"hasResults":12,"nctId":46,"briefTitle":47,"officialTitle":48,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":49,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":51,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":53,"briefSummary":54,"conditions":55,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":57,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":58,"startDateStruct":60,"completionDateStruct":62,"leadSponsor":64,"locationsCount":42},"100507272","efficacy-of-ultrasound-guided-pifb-versus-lidocaine-infusion-on-postoperative-pain-after-sternotomy-100507272","NCT05885230","Efficacy of Ultrasound Guided PIFB Versus Lidocaine Infusion on Postoperative Pain After Sternotomy","The Efficacy of Ultrasound-guided Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plain Block Versus Lidocaine Infusion on Acute and Chronic Post-sternotomy Pain; A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. age between 18 and 75 years.\n2. patient scheduled to undergo elective on-pump cardiac surgery with sternotomy.\n3. American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of physical status \\\u003C IV.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. emergency surgery.\n2. off-pump surgery.\n3. redo surgery.\n4. ejection fraction less than 35%.\n5. refusal of the patient.\n6. known hypersensitivity to LA.\n7. chronic opioid use or chronic pain patient.\n8. psychiatric problems or communication difficulties.\n9. liver insufficiency (defined as a serum bilirubin ≥ 34 μmol\u002Fl, albumin ≤ 35 g\u002Fdl, INR ≥ 1.7).\n10. renal insufficiency (defined as a glomerular filtration rate \\\u003C 44 ml\u002Fmin).\n11. obstructive sleep apnea syndrom.\n12. coexisting hematologic disorders.\n13. pregnancy or breastfeeding.","18 Years",{"count":52,"type":23},138,[26],"Chronic pain is a common complication after cardiothoracic surgery. The prevalence of post-sternoyomy pain syndrome (PSPS) ranges from 33% to 91%. Exact pathogenetic mechanisms for developing chronic pain after sternotomy are unknown. Apart from intraoperative nerve damage and subsequent postoperative neuropathic pain, operation techniques, age, sex, pre-existing pain, genetic and psychosocial factors, severe postoperative pain, and analgesic management are suspected to have an impact on the development of PSPS .",[56],"Cardiac Surgery","2026-06-18",{"date":59,"type":34},"2026-06-23",{"date":61,"type":34},"2023-05-01",{"date":63,"type":23},"2027-05",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":66,"slug":67,"hasResults":12,"nctId":68,"briefTitle":69,"officialTitle":70,"acronym":71,"eligibilityCriteria":72,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":73,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":75,"briefSummary":76,"conditions":77,"keywords":80,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":84,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":85,"startDateStruct":87,"completionDateStruct":89,"leadSponsor":91,"locationsCount":42},"100642198","suprapubic-drainage-during-transurethral-cystolithotripsy-for-large-bladder-stones-100642198","NCT07642440","Suprapubic Drainage During Transurethral Cystolithotripsy for Large Bladder Stones","Transurethral Cystolithotripsy With Versus Without Adjunctive Suprapubic Tube Drainage for Bladder Stones >2 cm: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","SPT-CYSTO Tria","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 18 years or older.\n* Radiologically confirmed bladder stone with maximum diameter greater than 2 cm.\n* Scheduled for elective transurethral cystolithotripsy.\n* Sterile urine culture before surgery, or adequately treated urinary tract infection according to culture sensitivity.\n* Fit for spinal or general anesthesia.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Urethral stricture preventing safe cystoscopic access.\n* Active uncontrolled urinary tract infection or sepsis.\n* Neurogenic bladder with severely impaired bladder emptying requiring chronic catheterization.\n* History of bladder cancer or suspected bladder tumor requiring simultaneous transurethral resection of bladder tumor.\n* Coagulopathy or uncorrected bleeding tendency.\n* Patients requiring concomitant transurethral resection of the prostate, Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, or other prostate surgery in the same session.\n* Previous pelvic radiotherapy or major lower urinary tract reconstruction.\n* Pregnancy.\n* Refusal to participate.",{"count":74,"type":23},140,[26],"Bladder stones larger than 2 cm are commonly treated by endoscopic fragmentation through the urethra. During transurethral cystolithotripsy for large stones, the procedure may be prolonged because of poor visibility, stone dust, bladder overdistension, and repeated need for irrigation or evacuation.\n\nThis randomized controlled trial will compare standal Holmium:YAG laser cystolithotripsy using a 17 Fr cystoscope sheath with the same procedure plus an adjunctive 8 Fr suprapubic catheter used only for bladder drainage during the operation. The suprapubic catheter will not be used for stone fragmentation or stone extraction.\n\nThe main outcome will be total operative time. Secondary outcomes will include fragmentation and clearance time, laser activation time, total laser energy, irrigation volume, visibility-related interruptions, stone-free rate at 30 days, complications, catheter duration, postoperative pain, and hospital stay.",[78,79],"Bladder Stone","Cystolithiasis",[81,82,83],"Transurethral cystolithotripsy","Suprapubic drainage","Suprapubic catheter","2026-06-15",{"date":86,"type":34},"2026-06-16",{"date":88,"type":34},"2026-06-08",{"date":90,"type":23},"2028-06",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":93,"slug":94,"hasResults":12,"nctId":95,"briefTitle":96,"officialTitle":97,"acronym":98,"eligibilityCriteria":99,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":101,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":102,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":104,"briefSummary":106,"conditions":107,"keywords":111,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":116,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":117,"startDateStruct":119,"completionDateStruct":120,"leadSponsor":122,"locationsCount":42},"100641769","phase-4-tamsulosin-with-or-without-tadalafil-for-trial-without-catheter-after-acute-urinary-retention-due-to-benign-prostatic-hyperplasia-100641769","NCT07654413","Tamsulosin With or Without Tadalafil for Trial Without Catheter After Acute Urinary Retention Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia","Tamsulosin With Versus Without Tadalafil for Trial Without Catheter After Acute Urinary Retention Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Trial","TAMS-TAD-TWOC","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patient aged 50 years or older.\n* First episode of spontaneous painful acute urinary retention.\n* Successful urethral catheterization at presentation.\n* Drained urine volume at presentation of at least 300 mL.\n* Clinical impression of benign prostatic obstruction or benign prostatic hyperplasia based on history, digital rectal examination, and\u002For ultrasound evidence of enlarged prostate.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Previous episode of acute urinary retention.\n* Chronic painless urinary retention phenotype.\n* Active urinary tract infection or sepsis.\n* Gross hematuria with clot retention.\n* Suspected or known urethral stricture.\n* Neurogenic bladder or major neurologic disease affecting voiding.\n* History of prostate cancer or bladder cancer.\n* Previous prostate surgery.\n* Current use of nitrates or guanylate cyclase stimulators.\n* Contraindication to tadalafil or tamsulosin.\n* Severe hypotension or unstable cardiovascular disease.\n* Severe renal impairment.\n* Severe hepatic impairment.\n* Current or recent use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors before enrollment.","MALE","50 Years",{"count":103,"type":23},320,[105],"PHASE4","Acute urinary retention is a common emergency in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. After bladder drainage with a urethral catheter, patients usually undergo a trial without catheter to determine whether they can pass urine again without recatheterization.\n\nThis study will evaluate whether adding tadalafil 5 mg once daily to tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily improves the chance of successful trial without catheter in men with first-episode acute urinary retention due to presumed benign prostatic hyperplasia.\n\nParticipants will be randomly assigned to receive either tamsulosin plus tadalafil or tamsulosin plus a matching placebo. Study medication will start within 24 hours after catheterization. The catheter will be removed on Day 7. If the first trial without catheter fails, the catheter will be reinserted and a second rescue trial without catheter will be performed on Day 14.\n\nThe main outcome is overall catheter-free success by Day 14. Participants will also be followed for recurrent urinary retention, post-void residual urine, urinary flow, catheter-related complications, drug-related adverse events, and the need for benign prostatic hyperplasia-related surgery within 3 months.",[108,109,110],"Acute Urinary Retention","Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia","Benign Prostatic Obstruction",[112,113,114,115,109],"Trial Without Catheter","TWOC","Tamsulosin","Tadalafil","2026-06-12",{"date":118,"type":34},"2026-06-17",{"date":88,"type":34},{"date":121,"type":23},"2027-12",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":124,"slug":125,"hasResults":12,"nctId":126,"briefTitle":127,"officialTitle":128,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":129,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":50,"maxAge":130,"enrollmentInfo":131,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":133,"briefSummary":134,"conditions":135,"keywords":138,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":142,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":143,"startDateStruct":144,"completionDateStruct":145,"leadSponsor":146,"locationsCount":42},"100642491","single-infrapubic-versus-bilateral-subinguinal-microsurgical-varicocelectomy-100642491","NCT07650955","Single Infrapubic Versus Bilateral Subinguinal Microsurgical Varicocelectomy","Single Infrapubic Versus Bilateral Subinguinal Approaches for Bilateral Microsurgical Varicocelectomy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patients aged 18 to 45 years.\n* Clinically palpable bilateral varicocele, grade II or grade III.\n* Diagnosis confirmed by color Doppler ultrasound.\n* Infertility for at least 12 months and\u002For abnormal semen analysis.\n* Female partner evaluation performed or planned to exclude major uncorrected female-factor infertility.\n* Patient fit for surgery and anesthesia.\n* Written informed consent provided by the participant.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Subclinical varicocele detected only by Doppler ultrasound.\n* Unilateral varicocele.\n* Recurrent varicocele after previous surgery, embolization, or sclerotherapy.\n* Previous inguinal, scrotal, pelvic, or penile surgery likely to distort surgical anatomy.\n* Associated inguinal hernia, hydrocele, spermatocele, epididymal cyst, or other scrotal condition requiring simultaneous surgery.\n* Azoospermia, especially suspected non-obstructive azoospermia.\n* Active urinary tract or genital infection.\n* Coagulopathy or anticoagulant therapy that cannot be safely interrupted.\n* Severe obesity, defined as body mass index greater than 40 kg\u002Fm², or any anatomical condition preventing safe exposure by either surgical approach.\n* Refusal to participate or inability to complete follow-up.","45 Years",{"count":132,"type":23},40,[26],"Bilateral varicocele is commonly treated by microsurgical varicocelectomy. The conventional bilateral subinguinal approach usually requires two separate skin incisions, one on each side. A single midline infrapubic approach may allow bilateral microsurgical repair through one incision and may reduce access-related morbidity.\n\nThis prospective randomized controlled trial will compare single infrapubic microsurgical bilateral varicocelectomy with conventional bilateral subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy in adult men with clinically palpable bilateral varicocele. The study will evaluate postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, time to return to normal daily activity, operative time, scar satisfaction, wound complications, recurrence, and other safety outcomes during follow-up.",[136,137],"Bilateral Varicocele","Male Infertility",[139,140,141],"Microsurgical varicocelectomy","Single infrapubic approach","Bilateral varicocele","2026-06-11",{"date":86,"type":34},{"date":88,"type":34},{"date":63,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":148,"slug":149,"hasResults":12,"nctId":150,"briefTitle":151,"officialTitle":152,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":153,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":101,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":154,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":156,"briefSummary":157,"conditions":158,"keywords":159,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":142,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":162,"startDateStruct":163,"completionDateStruct":164,"leadSponsor":166,"locationsCount":42},"100642454","phase-4-tamsulosin-dose-escalation-or-silodosin-switch-before-trial-without-catheter-in-bph-related-acute-urinary-retention-100642454","NCT07650968","Tamsulosin Dose Escalation or Silodosin Switch Before Trial Without Catheter in BPH-Related Acute Urinary Retention","Tamsulosin 0.4 mg Continuation Versus Dose Escalation to 0.8 mg Versus Switch to Silodosin 8 mg for Trial Without Catheter After Acute Urinary Retention Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patients aged 50 years or older.\n* Acute urinary retention requiring urethral catheterization.\n* Presumed acute urinary retention secondary to benign prostatic enlargement or benign prostatic obstruction.\n* Already receiving tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily for at least 4 weeks before the acute urinary retention episode.\n* Successful urethral catheterization at presentation.\n* Initial catheterized urine volume ≤1000 mL, with a clinical presentation consistent with painful acute urinary retention.\n* Prostate enlargement on ultrasound or clinical assessment consistent with benign prostatic hyperplasia or benign prostatic obstruction.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known or suspected prostate cancer.\n* Previous prostate surgery.\n* Previous urethral stricture disease or urethral surgery.\n* Neurogenic bladder or known neurological disease affecting voiding.\n* Chronic urinary retention rather than acute painful retention.\n* Acute urinary retention due to non-BPH causes, including clot retention, bladder stone obstruction, acute prostatitis, urethral trauma, or drug-induced retention.\n* Severe urinary tract infection, sepsis, or fever at presentation.\n* Gross hematuria requiring irrigation.\n* Failed urethral catheterization or need for suprapubic catheterization.\n* Current use of silodosin, alfuzosin, doxazosin, terazosin, tadalafil, anticholinergics, beta-3 agonists, or other drugs that may significantly affect voiding.\n* Severe renal impairment requiring urgent intervention.\n* Symptomatic postural hypotension or recurrent syncope.\n* Known hypersensitivity to silodosin.\n* Severe hepatic impairment.\n* Inability to comply with follow-up.",{"count":155,"type":23},378,[105],"This randomized controlled trial will compare three medication strategies before trial without catheter in men with acute urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia who were already taking tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily before the retention episode. After urethral catheterization, eligible participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups for 7 days: continuation of tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily, escalation to tamsulosin 0.8 mg once daily, or switching to silodosin 8 mg once daily. The urethral catheter will be removed on Day 7, and the ability to void successfully without re-catheterization will be assessed. Follow-up will continue to Day 30, with additional recording of catheter-free status, recurrent urinary retention, urinary flow, post-void residual urine, symptom scores, adverse drug events, catheter-related complications, and the need for later benign prostatic hyperplasia-related surgery.",[108,109],[112,114,160,161],"Silodosin","Catheter-free status",{"date":86,"type":34},{"date":88,"type":34},{"date":165,"type":23},"2027-06",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":168,"slug":169,"hasResults":12,"nctId":170,"briefTitle":171,"officialTitle":172,"acronym":173,"eligibilityCriteria":174,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":101,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":175,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":177,"briefSummary":178,"conditions":179,"keywords":182,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":186,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":187,"startDateStruct":188,"completionDateStruct":189,"leadSponsor":190,"locationsCount":42},"100642693","water-vapor-thermal-therapy-versus-ejaculation-sparing-bipolar-transurethral-enucleation-for-benign-prostatic-hyperplasia-100642693","NCT07648888","Water Vapor Thermal Therapy Versus Ejaculation-Sparing Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia","Water Vapor Thermal Therapy Versus Ejaculation-Sparing Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Prospective Comparative Study","REZ-ESBTUEP","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patients aged 50 years or older.\n* Symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms.\n* International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) 13 or higher.\n* Prostate volume 30 to 80 mL measured by transrectal ultrasound.\n* Maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) 15 mL\u002Fs or less with voided volume 150 mL or more.\n* Post-void residual urine volume 250 mL or less.\n* Failed, intolerant, or unwilling to continue medical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia.\n* Sexually active within the previous 3 months.\n* Preserved antegrade ejaculation at baseline.\n* Patient wishes to preserve ejaculation.\n* Ability to complete the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5), and Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF).\n* Written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Suspected or confirmed prostate cancer.\n* Abnormal prostate-specific antigen or digital rectal examination suspicious for malignancy unless prostate cancer has been excluded according to standard clinical practice.\n* Previous prostate surgery.\n* Previous urethral surgery likely to affect instrumentation or study outcomes.\n* Urethral stricture disease.\n* Neurogenic bladder dysfunction.\n* Active urinary tract infection until adequately treated.\n* Bladder stones requiring concomitant surgery.\n* Prostate volume less than 30 mL or more than 80 mL.\n* Baseline anejaculation or severe ejaculatory dysfunction.\n* No sexual activity during the previous 3 months.\n* Chronic indwelling urethral or suprapubic catheter.\n* Recurrent urinary retention or suspected detrusor underactivity requiring urodynamic clarification.\n* Post-void residual urine volume more than 250 mL.\n* Uncontrolled coagulopathy.\n* Anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy that cannot be safely managed perioperatively.\n* Unfitness for anesthesia or intervention.\n* Inability or unwillingness to comply with follow-up.",{"count":176,"type":23},120,[26],"This prospective comparative study will evaluate Water Vapor Thermal Therapy (WVTT\u002FRezum) versus Ejaculation-Sparing Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate (ES-B-TUEP) in sexually active men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia.\n\nEligible patients will have moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms, preserved antegrade ejaculation at baseline, and will be candidates for procedural treatment after failure, intolerance, or unwillingness to continue medical therapy. This is not a randomized study. Treatment selection will be based on shared decision-making between the patient and the treating surgeon after standardized counseling about both procedures.\n\nThe study will compare ejaculatory function, urinary symptom improvement, urinary flow, post-void residual urine, erectile function, perioperative outcomes, complications, catheterization duration, hospital stay, medication restart, and retreatment or reintervention during follow-up. The primary outcome will be the change in the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction Short Form Function domain score from baseline to 12 months.",[109,180,181],"Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms","Ejaculatory Dysfunction",[183,184,185],"Water Vapor Thermal Therapy","Ejaculation-Sparing","MSHQ-EjD-SF","2026-06-10",{"date":84,"type":34},{"date":88,"type":34},{"date":121,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":192,"slug":193,"hasResults":12,"nctId":194,"briefTitle":195,"officialTitle":196,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":197,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":101,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":198,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":199,"briefSummary":200,"conditions":201,"keywords":202,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":186,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":206,"startDateStruct":207,"completionDateStruct":208,"leadSponsor":209,"locationsCount":42},"100641924","water-vapor-thermal-therapy-versus-ejaculation-preserving-holep-for-benign-prostatic-hyperplasia-100641924","NCT07648875","Water Vapor Thermal Therapy Versus Ejaculation-Preserving HoLEP for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia","Water Vapor Thermal Therapy Versus Ejaculation-Preserving Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Prospective Comparative Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patients aged 50 years or older.\n* Symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms.\n* International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) of 13 or higher.\n* Prostate volume 30 to 80 mL measured by transrectal ultrasound.\n* Maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) of 15 mL\u002Fs or less with voided volume of at least 150 mL.\n* Post-void residual urine volume of 250 mL or less.\n* Failure, intolerance, or unwillingness to continue medical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia.\n* Sexually active within the previous 3 months.\n* Preserved antegrade ejaculation at baseline.\n* Patient wishes to preserve ejaculation.\n* Ability to complete the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5), and Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF).\n* Written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Suspected or confirmed prostate cancer.\n* Abnormal prostate-specific antigen or digital rectal examination suspicious for malignancy unless prostate cancer has been excluded according to standard clinical practice.\n* Previous prostate surgery.\n* Previous urethral surgery likely to affect instrumentation or study outcomes.\n* Urethral stricture disease.\n* Neurogenic bladder dysfunction.\n* Active urinary tract infection until adequately treated.\n* Bladder stones requiring concomitant surgery.\n* Prostate volume less than 30 mL or more than 80 mL.\n* Baseline anejaculation or severe ejaculatory dysfunction.\n* No sexual activity during the previous 3 months.\n* Chronic indwelling urethral or suprapubic catheter.\n* Suspected detrusor underactivity requiring urodynamic clarification.\n* Post-void residual urine volume more than 250 mL.\n* Uncontrolled coagulopathy.\n* Anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy that cannot be safely managed perioperatively.\n* Unfitness for anesthesia or intervention.\n* Inability or unwillingness to comply with follow-up.",{"count":176,"type":23},[26],"This prospective comparative study will evaluate Water Vapor Thermal Therapy (Rezum) versus ejaculation-preserving Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (EP-HoLEP) in sexually active men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate volume 30-80 mL.\n\nEligible patients will not be randomized. The treatment option will be selected through shared decision-making between the patient and treating physician after standardized counseling about the expected benefits, risks, recovery, catheter duration, urinary outcomes, durability, and potential effects on ejaculation and sexual function.\n\nThe main objective is to compare the change in ejaculatory function from baseline to 12 months using the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) Function domain. Secondary outcomes will include urinary symptom improvement, quality of life, maximum urinary flow rate, post-void residual urine volume, erectile function, antegrade ejaculation preservation, catheterization duration, hospital stay, complications, restart of benign prostatic hyperplasia medication, and retreatment or reintervention within 12 months.",[109,180],[183,203,204,205],"Rezum","Ejaculation-Preserving HoLEP","Male Sexual Health Questionnaire",{"date":84,"type":34},{"date":88,"type":34},{"date":121,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":211,"slug":212,"hasResults":12,"nctId":213,"briefTitle":214,"officialTitle":215,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":216,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":217,"maxAge":218,"enrollmentInfo":219,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":221,"briefSummary":222,"conditions":223,"keywords":225,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":186,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":228,"startDateStruct":229,"completionDateStruct":230,"leadSponsor":232,"locationsCount":42},"100642391","phase-4-l-citrulline-and-tadalafil-for-mild-to-moderate-erectile-dysfunction-100642391","NCT07642505","L-Citrulline and Tadalafil for Mild to Moderate Erectile Dysfunction","L-Citrulline Versus Tadalafil Versus Combination Therapy in Mild to Moderate Erectile Dysfunction: A Prospective Randomized Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patients aged 30 to 70 years.\n* Erectile dysfunction for at least 3 months.\n* Mild to moderate erectile dysfunction, defined by International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function domain score from 11 to 25.\n* Stable sexual relationship during the study period.\n* Willingness to attempt sexual activity during the study period.\n* Ability to complete study questionnaires and attend follow-up visits.\n* Written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Severe erectile dysfunction, defined by International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function domain score of 10 or less.\n* Current nitrate or nicorandil use.\n* Contraindication or hypersensitivity to tadalafil or L-citrulline.\n* Unstable cardiovascular disease, unstable angina, recent myocardial infarction or stroke, uncontrolled hypertension, or high-risk arrhythmia.\n* Severe hepatic impairment.\n* Severe renal impairment.\n* Untreated hypogonadism requiring hormonal treatment.\n* Hyperprolactinemia or uncontrolled endocrine disorder.\n* Major neurogenic erectile dysfunction, spinal cord injury, or previous radical pelvic surgery causing severe erectile dysfunction.\n* Significant Peyronie's disease preventing intercourse.\n* Active major psychiatric illness impairing reliable assessment.\n* Use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, intracavernosal injection therapy, vacuum device therapy, testosterone therapy, L-arginine, L-citrulline, or erectile dysfunction nutraceuticals during the washout period before randomization.\n* Participation in another clinical trial during the previous 3 months.","30 Years","70 Years",{"count":220,"type":23},133,[105],"Erectile dysfunction is a common male sexual health problem that may affect quality of life and sexual relationships. Tadalafil 5 mg once daily is an established oral treatment for erectile dysfunction. L-citrulline is an oral nitric oxide pathway supplement that may improve erectile function by increasing L-arginine availability.\n\nThis randomized trial will compare three oral treatment regimens in men with mild to moderate erectile dysfunction: L-citrulline 1500 mg\u002Fday, tadalafil 5 mg\u002Fday, and the combination of L-citrulline 1500 mg\u002Fday plus tadalafil 5 mg\u002Fday. Participants will receive treatment for 12 weeks and will be followed at baseline, week 4, week 8, and week 12.\n\nThe primary outcome will be the change in the International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function domain score from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include changes in IIEF-5\u002FSHIM score, Erection Hardness Score, SEP diary outcomes, treatment adherence, adverse events, and treatment discontinuation.",[224],"Erectile Dysfunction",[226,115,227],"L-citrulline","International Index of Erectile Function",{"date":116,"type":34},{"date":88,"type":34},{"date":231,"type":23},"2026-12",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":234,"slug":235,"hasResults":12,"nctId":236,"briefTitle":237,"officialTitle":238,"acronym":239,"eligibilityCriteria":240,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":241,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":242,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":243,"briefSummary":244,"conditions":245,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":247,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":248,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":249,"startDateStruct":250,"completionDateStruct":252,"leadSponsor":254,"locationsCount":42},"100642342","frequency-rhythmic-electrical-modulated-stimulation-effect-in-peripheral-neuropathy-patients-severity-of-cases-and-qol-100642342","NCT07645482","Frequency Rhythmic Electrical Modulated Stimulation Effect in Peripheral Neuropathy Patients Severity of Cases and Qol.","Effects Of Frequency Rhythmic Electrical Modulated Stimulation (FREMS) On Blood Perfusion, Neuropathy Severity And Quality Of Life In Diabetic Patients With Peripheral Neuropathy And Lower Limb Ischemia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","FREMS","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients diagnosed with DM\n* patients age group above 40 years old.\n* patient diagnosed with peripheral neuropathy with symptoms lasts more than 3 months.\n* patients lower limb ischemia in duplex affected APSV.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients with implant peacemakers, defibrillator, or neurostimulator.\n* pregnancy.\n* any severe disease prevent compliance to study procedures.\n* patients with disabilities prevent their commitment to sessions.","40 Years",{"count":132,"type":23},[26],"It's estimated that 50% of diabetic patients will have peripheral neuropathy as a complication within 3 years of the diabetes incidence \\[14\\], the goal of the study is to investigate this problem through the following objectives:\n\n1. To measure the effect of using FREMS therapy in diabetic neuropathy in interventional group on the blood perfusion, neuropathy severity and quality of life after 10 sessions compared to baseline.\n2. To measure the effect of using standard of care in diabetic neuropathy in control group on the blood perfusion, neuropathy severity and quality of life after 10 sessions compared to baseline.\n3. To compare the results between both interventional and control group.",[246],"Peripheral Neuropathy With Type 2 Diabetes","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-06-09",{"date":116,"type":34},{"date":251,"type":23},"2026-07",{"date":253,"type":23},"2026-08",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":256,"slug":257,"hasResults":12,"nctId":258,"briefTitle":259,"officialTitle":260,"acronym":239,"eligibilityCriteria":261,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":241,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":262,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":264,"briefSummary":265,"conditions":266,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":247,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":248,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":268,"startDateStruct":269,"completionDateStruct":270,"leadSponsor":272,"locationsCount":42},"100643461","frequency-rhythmic-electrical-modulated-stimulation-therapy-in-chronic-ulcers-100643461","NCT07645495","Frequency Rhythmic Electrical Modulated Stimulation Therapy in Chronic Ulcers.","Chronic Ulcer Healing With Frequency Rhythmic Electrical Modulated Stimulation (FREMS)Therapy and Phenytoin Application in Diabetic Patients.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* chronic ulcers more than 3 months.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* incapable of being in the clinic of diabetic ulcer during treatment period 3 days\u002F week for 3 months.\n* severe ischemia that is indicated for a surgery.\n* infection or osteomyelitis.",{"count":263,"type":23},26,[26],"The goal of the study is to\n\n1. To measure wound size of chronic ulcers after using FREMS therapy and phenytoin application in the interventional group monthly till the end of the third month compared to baseline.\n2. To measure wound size of chronic ulcers after using standard of care in control group monthly till the end of the third month compared to baseline.\n3. To compare the results of the 2 groups and determine the significance of the treatment.",[267],"Chronic Ulcers",{"date":116,"type":34},{"date":251,"type":23},{"date":271,"type":23},"2026-09",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":274,"slug":275,"hasResults":12,"nctId":276,"briefTitle":277,"officialTitle":277,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":278,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":279,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":281,"briefSummary":282,"conditions":283,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":247,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":285,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":286,"startDateStruct":287,"completionDateStruct":289,"leadSponsor":291,"locationsCount":4},"100643528","phase-4-evaluation-of-the-clinical-impact-of-adjunctive-l-carnitine-therapy-in-critically-ill-hepatic-patients-admitted-to-intensive-care-unit-100643528","NCT07642076","Evaluation of the Clinical Impact of Adjunctive L-carnitine Therapy in Critically Ill Hepatic Patients Admitted to Intensive Care Unit","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age more than 18 years old\n* male or female with confirmed liver disease admitted to intensive care unit, including:\n* Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF)\n* Hepatic encephalopathy\n* spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP)\n* variceal bleeding\n* fulminant hepatitis\n* Hepatorenal syndrome\n* Ascites\n* Etc\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age of less than 18 years old\n* Pregnancy or Lactation\n* patients have seizure\n* patient on warfarin",{"count":280,"type":23},58,[105],"This study aims to evaluate the possible efficacy of l-carnitine in critically ill hepatic patients admitted to intensive care unit.",[284],"Hepatic","2026-06-07",{"date":142,"type":34},{"date":288,"type":23},"2026-06",{"date":290,"type":23},"2027-03",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":293,"slug":294,"hasResults":12,"nctId":295,"briefTitle":296,"officialTitle":297,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":298,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":299,"maxAge":300,"enrollmentInfo":301,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":302,"briefSummary":303,"conditions":304,"keywords":306,"overallStatus":247,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":310,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":311,"startDateStruct":312,"completionDateStruct":313,"leadSponsor":315,"locationsCount":4},"100643550","mat-pilates-exercises-on-balance-in-adolescents-with-scoliosis-100643550","NCT07638826","Mat-Pilates Exercises on Balance in Adolescents With Scoliosis","Efficacy of Mat-Pilates Exercises on Balance and Functional Capacity in Adolescents With Scoliosis. A Randomized Controlled Trial.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adolescents ages will be ranged from 12 to 15 years old.\n* Cobb's angles ranging from 10° to 25°.\n* Functional Hearing and vision.\n* Independent standing and walking.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Either spine, upper, or lower limbs fractures.\n* Leg length discrepancy or foot deformities.\n* Rheumatic and congenital heart disease.\n* History of previous surgical operation.","12 Years","15 Years",{"count":132,"type":23},[26],"The aim of this study is to examine the effects of mat-Pilates exercises on balance and functional capacity in adolescents with scoliosis.",[305],"Adolescents With Scoliosis",[307,308,309],"Pilates Exercises","Biodex","Adolescent Scoliosis","2026-06-05",{"date":186,"type":34},{"date":84,"type":23},{"date":314,"type":23},"2026-09-15",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":317,"slug":318,"hasResults":12,"nctId":319,"briefTitle":320,"officialTitle":321,"acronym":322,"eligibilityCriteria":323,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":324,"minAge":325,"maxAge":241,"enrollmentInfo":326,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":328,"briefSummary":330,"conditions":331,"keywords":333,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":335,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":336,"startDateStruct":337,"completionDateStruct":339,"leadSponsor":340,"locationsCount":42},"100640120","phase-3-efficacy-of-alpha-lipoic-acid-combined-with-myo-inositol-in-non-diabetic-pcos-patients-100640120","NCT07630779","Efficacy of Alpha Lipoic Acid Combined With Myo-Inositol in Non-Diabetic PCOS Patients","A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating the Efficacy of Alpha Lipoic Acid Combined With Myo-Inositol With or Without Metformin in Non-Diabetic Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome","ALA-MYO-PCOS","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Women aged 21 to 40 years\n* Diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) according to Rotterdam criteria\n* Not currently pregnant or lactating\n* No hormonal therapy within the last 3 months\n* Willing and able to provide informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* \\- History of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or thyroid disorders\n* History of cardiovascular, renal, or hepatic disease\n* Use of hormonal contraceptives or insulin sensitizers within the last 3 months\n* Known hypersensitivity or allergy to study medications (myo-inositol, alpha-lipoic acid, or metformin)\n* Non-Egyptian ethnicity","FEMALE","21 Years",{"count":327,"type":23},180,[329],"PHASE3","This study evaluates the efficacy of alpha-lipoic acid combined with myo-inositol, with or without metformin, in improving menstrual regularity and ovulation in non-diabetic women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). The study also assesses metabolic, hormonal, and clinical outcomes.",[332],"Poly Cystic Ovary Syndrome",[334],"PCOS Myo-Inositol Alpha Lipoic Acid Metformin Insulin Resistance Ovulation","2026-06-02",{"date":310,"type":34},{"date":338,"type":34},"2026-03-10",{"date":231,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":342,"slug":343,"hasResults":12,"nctId":344,"briefTitle":345,"officialTitle":345,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":346,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":130,"maxAge":347,"enrollmentInfo":348,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":350,"briefSummary":351,"conditions":352,"keywords":354,"overallStatus":247,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":335,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":356,"startDateStruct":358,"completionDateStruct":359,"leadSponsor":361,"locationsCount":42},"100608689","functional-inspiratory-versus-expiratory-muscle-electrical-stimulation-on-weaning-outcomes-in-mechanically-ventilated-patients-100608689","NCT07204821","Functional Inspiratory Versus Expiratory Muscle Electrical Stimulation on Weaning Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Patients","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* All mechanically ventilated patients will be:\n* Their ages range from 45 to 65 years.\n* Their BMI is from 25-29.9kg\u002Fm2.\n* Mechanically ventilated for at least 24 hours.\n* They all have hypoxemic respiratory failure\n* Glasgow coma score (GCS) ranged from 6 to 12.\n* Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score: -2 to +2\n* Patients and their relatives had written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Hemodynamically unstable patients.\n* Patients with rib fractures.\n* Patients with implanted pacemaker.\n* Obese (BMI greater than 30 kgm2).\n* Tachycardia.\n* Uncontrolled hypertension.\n* History of neuromuscular disease at admission.\n* Spinal injuries.\n* Inability to trigger mechanical ventilation\n* Pregnancy\n* An anticipated stay on the ventilator \\\u003C72 h at the time of study\n* Patients who cannot attach electrodes due to local skin damage or infection\n* Patients with Severe intestinal gas accumulation, structural abnormalities, and other reasons that prevent ultrasound detection of diaphragm movement.\n* Congenital myopathies or neuropathies, and contraindications for expiratory muscle FES (cardiac pacemaker, refractory epilepsy, recent (\\\u003C 4 weeks) abdominal surgery).\n* Patients with unrelieved pneumothorax and restricted diaphragm movement disorders.\n* Chest or diaphragm malformation","65 Years",{"count":349,"type":23},48,[26],"The Goal of This Clinical Trail is\n\n* To find out the difference in the effect of inspiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation and expiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation on weaning outcomes mechanically ventilated patients.\n* To investigate the effect of inspiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation and expiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation on Laboratory investigation (Arterial Blood Gases).\n* To investigate the effect of inspiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation and expiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation on Sonar parameters (Diaphragmatic excursion, Diaphragmatic muscle fractional thickness in the end of inspiration and the end of expiration and abdominal muscles wall thickness). To evaluate the effect of inspiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation and expiratory muscle functional electrical stimulation on (ICU length of stay and Spontaneous Breathing Trail (SBT)).",[353],"Icu",[355],"Functional Inspiratory Muscle Electrical Stimulation, Functional Expiratory Muscle Electrical Stimulation, Weaning Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.",{"date":357,"type":34},"2026-06-03",{"date":84,"type":23},{"date":360,"type":23},"2026-09-01",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":363,"slug":364,"hasResults":12,"nctId":365,"briefTitle":366,"officialTitle":367,"acronym":368,"eligibilityCriteria":369,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":100,"minAge":101,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":370,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":372,"briefSummary":373,"conditions":374,"keywords":375,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":36,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":380,"startDateStruct":381,"completionDateStruct":383,"leadSponsor":384,"locationsCount":42},"100640142","ejaculation-preserving-versus-standard-bipolar-tuep-for-bph-100640142","NCT07629479","Ejaculation-Preserving Versus Standard Bipolar TUEP for BPH","Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate With Preservation of Ejaculation in Patients With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial","EP-BTUEP","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction after failed medical treatment for at least 3 months.\n* Sexually active patients with a continuous relationship with the same partner.\n* International Prostate Symptom Score of 8 or greater.\n* Transrectal ultrasound-estimated prostate size between 40 and 100 cc.\n* Eligible for bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate.\n* Ability to complete the required sexual and urinary function questionnaires.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Preoperative sexual dysfunction.\n* Preoperative ejaculatory dysfunction.\n* Diagnosis or suspicion of prostate cancer.\n* Neurological disorders affecting lower urinary tract or sexual function.\n* Detrusor hypocontractility.\n* Catheter-dependent patients.\n* Patients with bladder stones.\n* Inability or refusal to provide informed consent.",{"count":371,"type":23},60,[26],"This prospective randomized controlled trial will compare ejaculation-preserving bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate with standard bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate in sexually active men with benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms after failed medical treatment. Participants will be randomly assigned to either ejaculation-preserving B-TUEP or standard B-TUEP. The study will evaluate preservation of ejaculatory function, erectile function, urinary symptom improvement, uroflowmetry outcomes, post-void residual urine, perioperative complications, and need for retreatment during follow-up.",[109,180,110],[376,377,378,379],"Bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate","B-TUEP","Ejaculation preservation","International Prostate Symptom Score",{"date":310,"type":34},{"date":382,"type":34},"2025-09-08",{"date":271,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":386,"slug":387,"hasResults":12,"nctId":388,"briefTitle":389,"officialTitle":390,"acronym":391,"eligibilityCriteria":392,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":393,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":395,"briefSummary":396,"conditions":397,"keywords":401,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":406,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":407,"startDateStruct":409,"completionDateStruct":411,"leadSponsor":412,"locationsCount":413},"100638175","comfij-versus-conventional-double-j-stent-for-ureteral-stent-symptoms-100638175","NCT07627828","ComfiJ Versus Conventional Double-J Stent for Ureteral Stent Symptoms","Evaluation of Stent-Related Symptoms After ComfiJ Ureteric Stent Versus Conventional Double-J Ureteric Stent: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial","COMFIJ-DJS","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 18 to 80 years.\n* Adult patients undergoing unilateral ureteroscopy or retrograde intrarenal surgery for ureteric or renal stones.\n* Intraoperative confirmation that short-term postoperative ureteric stenting for approximately 2 weeks is clinically indicated.\n* Indications for postoperative stenting may include ureteric edema, minor ureteric mucosal trauma, need for ureteric dilatation, ureteral access sheath use with expected postoperative edema, impacted stone, residual dust or fragments requiring temporary drainage, or prolonged procedure.\n* Ability to understand and complete the Arabic Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Cases in which no postoperative ureteric stent is clinically indicated.\n* Cases requiring prolonged urinary drainage or major reconstructive decision-making.\n* Bilateral ureteroscopy or retrograde intrarenal surgery.\n* Solitary kidney.\n* Major ureteric injury or ureteric perforation.\n* Preoperative febrile urinary tract infection or sepsis.\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding.\n* Neurogenic bladder.\n* Overactive bladder syndrome.\n* Major neurological disease or psychiatric disease affecting symptom reporting.\n* History of major bladder, prostate, or pelvic surgery likely to confound stent-related symptoms.\n* Concomitant use of alpha-blockers, anticholinergics, chronic analgesics, or other medications likely to alter symptom evaluation.\n* Other acute medical conditions that might influence the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire pain score, including acute pancreatitis, acute gastroenteritis, or musculoskeletal disorders.\n* Known allergy to any study-related medication or device material.\n* Inability to comply with the follow-up schedule.",{"count":394,"type":23},150,[26],"This prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial will compare stent-related symptoms after placement of a ComfiJ ureteral stent versus a conventional double-J ureteral stent in adult patients undergoing unilateral ureteroscopy or retrograde intrarenal surgery for urinary stones when short-term postoperative ureteral stenting is clinically indicated. Eligible patients will be randomized intraoperatively after the operating surgeon confirms the need for postoperative stenting. The primary outcome will be the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire urinary symptoms domain score on postoperative day 14 before planned stent removal.",[398,399,400],"Ureteral Stent-Related Symptoms","Ureteral Calculi","Urolithiasis",[402,403,404,405],"ComfiJ ureteral stent","Conventional double-J ureteral stent","Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire","Ureteroscopy","2026-05-30",{"date":408,"type":34},"2026-06-04",{"date":410,"type":34},"2026-05-02",{"date":63,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},3,{"id":415,"slug":416,"hasResults":12,"nctId":417,"briefTitle":418,"officialTitle":419,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":420,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":421,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":423,"briefSummary":424,"conditions":425,"keywords":430,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":406,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":434,"startDateStruct":435,"completionDateStruct":437,"leadSponsor":439,"locationsCount":413},"100640169","initial-drainage-method-and-flexible-ureteroscopy-outcomes-in-calculous-anuria-100640169","NCT07627880","Initial Drainage Method and Flexible Ureteroscopy Outcomes in Calculous Anuria","Impact of Initial Drainage Method on Flexible Ureteroscopy Outcomes in Patients Presenting With Calculous Anuria: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 18 years or older.\n* Calculous anuria secondary to a single upper ureteral stone.\n* Solitary functioning kidney, whether anatomical or functional.\n* Single upper ureteral stone confirmed by non-contrast computed tomography.\n* Stone size from 6 mm to 20 mm in maximum diameter.\n* Patient considered suitable for either initial JJ ureteral stent drainage or percutaneous nephrostomy drainage.\n* Candidate for definitive treatment by flexible ureteroscopy\u002Fretrograde intrarenal surgery.\n* Documented renal functional improvement and clinical stabilization before definitive RIRS.\n* Negative or appropriately treated urine culture before definitive RIRS.\n* Ability and willingness to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Multiple stones or bilateral stones not fitting the solitary-kidney study design.\n* Renal pelvic, distal ureteral, or multiple ipsilateral stones.\n* Stone burden greater than 20 mm.\n* Septic shock, hemodynamic instability, or need for emergency dialysis at presentation.\n* Pyonephrosis requiring a non-randomized drainage decision.\n* Anatomical abnormalities affecting endoscopic access, such as horseshoe kidney, pelvic kidney, ureterocele, or ureteral stricture.\n* Previous ipsilateral ureteral reconstructive surgery.\n* Uncorrected coagulopathy.\n* Pregnancy.\n* Genitourinary malignancy.\n* Inability to complete follow-up.",{"count":422,"type":23},90,[26],"Calculous anuria caused by obstructing upper ureteral stones in a solitary functioning kidney is a urological emergency requiring urgent decompression. Both retrograde JJ ureteral stenting and percutaneous nephrostomy are commonly used emergency drainage methods. However, limited evidence is available regarding whether the initial drainage method affects subsequent definitive flexible ureteroscopy\u002Fretrograde intrarenal surgery outcomes.\n\nThis multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial will compare emergency JJ ureteral stent drainage versus percutaneous nephrostomy drainage in adult patients presenting with calculous anuria due to a single upper ureteral stone in a solitary functioning kidney. After renal functional improvement, clinical stabilization, and appropriate urine culture management, all participants will undergo standardized definitive flexible ureteroscopy\u002Fretrograde intrarenal surgery. The study will assess renal functional recovery, first-session surgical success, stone-free rate, operative parameters, complications, and microbiological outcomes.",[426,427,428,429],"Calculous Anuria","Upper Ureteral Stone","Obstructive Uropathy","Acute Kidney Injury",[431,432,433],"Percutaneous nephrostomy","Double-J ureteral stent","Retrograde intrarenal surgery",{"date":408,"type":34},{"date":436,"type":34},"2026-05-06",{"date":438,"type":23},"2027-04",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":441,"slug":442,"hasResults":12,"nctId":443,"briefTitle":444,"officialTitle":445,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":446,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":447,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":449,"briefSummary":451,"conditions":452,"keywords":454,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":460,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":461,"startDateStruct":462,"completionDateStruct":464,"leadSponsor":465,"locationsCount":42},"100639013","phase-2-intravesical-aminophylline-for-urgent-ureteral-stenting-in-acute-calculous-anuria-100639013","NCT07617948","Intravesical Aminophylline for Urgent Ureteral Stenting in Acute Calculous Anuria","Intravesical Aminophylline-Assisted Urgent Retrograde Ureteral Stenting for Acute Calculous Anuria: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients aged 18 years or older.\n2. Diagnosis of acute calculous anuria due to ureteral stone obstruction in a solitary functioning kidney.\n3. Obstruction confirmed by pelvi-abdominal ultrasound and computed tomography of the urinary tract.\n4. Clinical and laboratory evidence of acute renal impairment, including oliguria or anuria and serum creatinine \\>2 mg\u002FdL.\n5. Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Known hypersensitivity to aminophylline, theophylline, or other methylxanthines.\n2. Evidence of active urinary tract infection or urosepsis.\n3. Previous history of ureteral stricture or major urinary tract reconstructive surgery.\n4. Hemodynamic instability requiring immediate life-saving measures before urological intervention.\n5. Pregnancy.",{"count":448,"type":23},72,[450],"PHASE2","Acute calculous anuria is a urological emergency caused by ureteral stone obstruction in a solitary functioning kidney or bilateral ureteral obstruction. Urgent decompression of the upper urinary tract is required to restore urine drainage and prevent further renal impairment.\n\nThis prospective randomized double-blind controlled trial will evaluate whether intravesical aminophylline can facilitate urgent retrograde ureteral stenting in adult patients with acute calculous anuria due to ureteral stones. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either intravesical aminophylline diluted in normal saline or placebo saline before attempted retrograde Double-J ureteral stent placement.\n\nThe primary outcome is technical success, defined as successful placement of a Double-J ureteral stent across the obstructing stone without the need for percutaneous nephrostomy. Secondary outcomes include stenting time, intraoperative complications, renal function recovery, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, and the need for alternative drainage.",[453,399,428,429],"Acute Calculous Anuria",[455,456,457,458,459],"Intravesical aminophylline","Retrograde ureteral stenting","Acute calculous anuria","Emergency urinary drainage","Double-J stent","2026-05-29",{"date":335,"type":34},{"date":463,"type":34},"2026-04-08",{"date":438,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":467,"slug":468,"hasResults":12,"nctId":469,"briefTitle":470,"officialTitle":471,"acronym":472,"eligibilityCriteria":473,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":474,"enrollmentInfo":475,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":477,"briefSummary":478,"conditions":479,"keywords":480,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":460,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":484,"startDateStruct":485,"completionDateStruct":487,"leadSponsor":488,"locationsCount":42},"100637967","phase-2-melatonin-and-solifenacin-for-double-j-ureteral-stent-symptoms-100637967","NCT07617922","Melatonin and Solifenacin for Double-J Ureteral Stent Symptoms","Melatonin Versus Solifenacin Versus Their Combination for Improving Double-J Ureteral Stent-Related Symptoms and Quality of Life: A Prospective Randomized Study","MEL-SOL-STENT","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Age 18 to 60 years.\n2. Patients undergoing unilateral ureteroscopy or ureteroscopic lithotripsy with insertion of a unilateral Double-J ureteral stent.\n3. Ability to understand and complete the study questionnaires.\n4. Willingness to participate and provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Bilateral ureteral stents.\n2. Stents inserted for malignant ureteral obstruction or non-stone reconstructive indications.\n3. Known hypersensitivity or contraindication to solifenacin or melatonin.\n4. History of acute or chronic urinary retention, or evidence of clinically significant bladder outlet obstruction at baseline.\n5. History of narrow-angle glaucoma or other contraindications to antimuscarinic therapy, including gastric retention.\n6. Significant hepatic impairment.\n7. Severe renal impairment if judged clinically relevant to study medication safety.\n8. Pre-existing moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms unrelated to the stent.\n9. Recent use of antimuscarinics, alpha-blockers, or melatonin that may interfere with symptom assessment.\n10. Pregnancy or lactation.\n11. Inability to complete follow-up.","60 Years",{"count":476,"type":23},189,[450],"Double-J ureteral stents are commonly inserted after ureteroscopy, but they may cause bothersome urinary symptoms, pain, sleep disturbance, and reduced quality of life.\n\nThis prospective randomized assessor-blinded three-arm clinical trial will compare oral solifenacin, oral melatonin, and their combination for improving ureteral stent-related symptoms in adult patients after unilateral ureteroscopic lithotripsy with insertion of a unilateral Double-J ureteral stent.\n\nParticipants will be randomized to receive solifenacin 5 mg once daily, melatonin 3 mg once nightly, or combined solifenacin 5 mg once daily plus melatonin 3 mg once nightly for 14 days after surgery. The primary outcome is the total Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire score at postoperative Day 7. Secondary outcomes include total Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire score at Day 14, change in questionnaire score between Day 7 and Day 14, Insomnia Severity Index score, Visual Analogue Scale pain score, adverse events, treatment compliance, and rescue analgesic consumption.",[398,399,180],[432,481,404,482,483],"Ureteral stent symptoms","Solifenacin","Melatonin",{"date":335,"type":34},{"date":486,"type":34},"2026-05-07",{"date":63,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":490,"slug":491,"hasResults":12,"nctId":492,"briefTitle":493,"officialTitle":494,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":495,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":101,"enrollmentInfo":496,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":498,"briefSummary":499,"conditions":500,"keywords":502,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":460,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":506,"startDateStruct":507,"completionDateStruct":509,"leadSponsor":511,"locationsCount":42},"100616068","effect-of-prp-injection-on-voice-recovery-after-benign-vocal-fold-surgery-100616068","NCT07300800","Effect of PRP Injection on Voice Recovery After Benign Vocal Fold Surgery","Evaluating The Efficacy of Platelet Rich Plasma on Voice Outcomes Following Surgical Removal of Benign Vocal Fold Lesions","* Inclusion Criteria:\n\n  \\* Adults aged 18 to 50 years\n\n  \\* Diagnosis of a benign vocal fold lesion, including: Vocal fold polyps Vocal fold cysts Vocal fold nodules\n\n  \\* Failure to respond to conservative management, including one or more of the following: Voice rest, voice therapy\n* Exclusion Criteria:\n\n  * Age younger than 18 years or above 50\n  * Medically unfit for surgery",{"count":497,"type":23},64,[26],"The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections can improve voice outcomes after microlaryngosurgery in patients with benign vocal fold lesions. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\nDoes postoperative PRP injection improve vocal quality compared to conventional surgery alone?\n\nDoes PRP injection reduce vocal fatigue and improve patients' voice-related quality of life?\n\nResearchers will compare 32 patients receiving PRP injections after surgical removal of lesions (intraoperative injection) to 32 patients undergoing conventional surgery without PRP to see if PRP enhances recovery and voice function.\n\nParticipants will:\n\nUndergo microlaryngosurgery to remove benign vocal fold lesions.\n\nReceive a PRP injection to the operated vocal fold and standard postoperative care.\n\nOr Standard postoperative care only.\n\nComplete voice assessments before surgery and at 1 and 3 months after surgery, including:\n\nAuditory perceptual evaluation (GRBAS scale) Videostroboscopy Acoustic and aerodynamic voice analysis Vocal Fatigue Index (VFI)\n\nAll participants will provide written consent and undergo standard preoperative assessments including medical history, ENT examination, laboratory tests, ECG, and anesthesia evaluation.",[501],"Benign Vocal Fold Lesions",[503,504,505],"vocal fold polyp","vocal fold nodules","vocal fold cyst",{"date":36,"type":34},{"date":508,"type":34},"2025-03-04",{"date":510,"type":23},"2026-07-30",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":513,"slug":514,"hasResults":12,"nctId":515,"briefTitle":516,"officialTitle":517,"acronym":518,"eligibilityCriteria":519,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":520,"maxAge":521,"enrollmentInfo":522,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":523,"briefSummary":524,"conditions":525,"keywords":529,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":534,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":535,"startDateStruct":536,"completionDateStruct":538,"leadSponsor":540,"locationsCount":42},"100640160","vacuum-assisted-mini-percutaneous-versus-transurethral-cystolithotripsy-in-pediatric-bladder-stones-100640160","NCT07614880","Vacuum-Assisted Mini-Percutaneous Versus Transurethral Cystolithotripsy in Pediatric Bladder Stones","Vacuum-Assisted Mini-Percutaneous Cystolithotomy Versus Transurethral Cystolithotripsy in Pediatric Bladder Stones: A Prospective Randomized Study","VAMPCL-Ped","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Children aged 2 to 14 years.\n* Diagnosis of bladder stone or stones measuring 10-30 mm in maximum cumulative diameter, confirmed by ultrasound.\n* Normal upper urinary tract.\n* Fit for general anesthesia.\n* Written informed consent obtained from parents or legal guardians.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known urethral stricture or posterior urethral valves.\n* Active urinary tract infection at the time of surgery.\n* Coagulopathy or uncorrected bleeding disorder.\n* Previous open bladder surgery.\n* Any anatomical or clinical condition that, in the investigator's judgment, precludes safe endoscopic or percutaneous cystolithotripsy.","2 Years","14 Years",{"count":132,"type":23},[26],"This prospective randomized pilot study will compare vacuum-assisted mini-percutaneous cystolithotripsy with standard transurethral cystolithotripsy for the treatment of bladder stones in children. Forty children aged 2 to 14 years with bladder stone(s) measuring 10 -30 mm will be randomly assigned to one of two surgical approaches. The vacuum-assisted mini-percutaneous group will undergo suprapubic percutaneous access using a mini sheath with suction-assisted fragment evacuation, while the transurethral group will undergo standard transurethral cystolithotripsy. The primary outcome will be total operative time. Secondary outcomes will include stone-free rate ,lithotripsy time and fragment clearance time, urethral mucosal injury, postoperative hematuria, fever, urinary tract infection, sepsis, urinary retention, urinary leakage from the suprapubic tract, catheterization time, hospital stay, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, need for auxiliary procedures or conversion, and recurrence or urethral stricture-related symptoms during follow-up.",[526,527,528],"Pediatric Bladder Stones","Bladder Calculi","Pediatric Urolithiasis",[530,531,532,533],"Pediatric bladder stones","Mini-percutaneous cystolithotripsy","Vacuum-assisted cystolithotripsy","Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy","2026-05-28",{"date":36,"type":34},{"date":537,"type":34},"2026-03-04",{"date":539,"type":23},"2028-03",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":542,"slug":543,"hasResults":12,"nctId":544,"briefTitle":545,"officialTitle":546,"acronym":547,"eligibilityCriteria":548,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":4,"maxAge":50,"enrollmentInfo":549,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":551,"briefSummary":552,"conditions":553,"keywords":554,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":534,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":559,"startDateStruct":560,"completionDateStruct":561,"leadSponsor":562,"locationsCount":42},"100640178","dusting-vs-fragmentation-laser-cystolithotripsy-for-pediatric-bladder-stones-100640178","NCT07623980","Dusting vs Fragmentation Laser Cystolithotripsy for Pediatric Bladder Stones","Dusting Versus Fragmentation With Holmium:YAG Laser During Transurethral Cystolithotripsy in Pediatric Bladder Stones: A Prospective Randomized Trial","DUST-FRAG-PED","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Children aged less than 18 years.\n2. Radiologically confirmed single bladder stone less than 3 cm.\n3. Suitable for transurethral cystolithotripsy.\n4. Fit for general anesthesia.\n5. Written informed consent from parents or legal guardians.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Giant bladder stones more than 3 cm.\n2. Urethral pathology preventing safe transurethral access.\n3. Major lower urinary tract anomaly or neurogenic bladder.\n4. Active untreated urinary tract infection.\n5. Coagulation disorder or contraindication to endoscopic surgery.",{"count":550,"type":23},110,[26],"Bladder stones are a clinically relevant pediatric urological condition that may require endoscopic treatment. Transurethral Holmium:YAG laser cystolithotripsy is a minimally invasive option for selected children with bladder stones.\n\nThis prospective randomized trial will compare two Holmium:YAG laser strategies during transurethral cystolithotripsy in children with a single bladder stone less than 3 cm: dusting and fragmentation. Children will be randomized to undergo laser dusting or laser fragmentation during transurethral cystolithotripsy.\n\nThe primary outcome is total operative time. Secondary outcomes include laser time, need for active fragment extraction, endoscopic stone-free status at the end of the procedure, ultrasound-assessed stone-free status during follow-up, intraoperative complications, postoperative urinary symptoms, urinary tract infection, need for postoperative catheterization, and hospital stay.",[527,526,528],[81,555,556,557,558],"Dusting","Holmium:YAG laser","Fragmentation","Bladder stone surgery",{"date":357,"type":34},{"date":436,"type":34},{"date":63,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":564,"slug":565,"hasResults":12,"nctId":566,"briefTitle":567,"officialTitle":568,"acronym":569,"eligibilityCriteria":570,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":571,"maxAge":50,"enrollmentInfo":572,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":574,"phases":4,"briefSummary":575,"conditions":576,"keywords":579,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":534,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":585,"startDateStruct":586,"completionDateStruct":587,"leadSponsor":588,"locationsCount":42},"100637943","renal-swe-as-a-predictor-after-pediatric-pyeloplasty-for-upjo-100637943","NCT07624019","Renal SWE as a Predictor After Pediatric Pyeloplasty for UPJO","Renal Cortical Shear Wave Elastography as a Predictor of Functional Recovery After Open Pyeloplasty for Unilateral Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: A Prospective Cohort Study","UPJO-SWE","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Children aged 6 months to 18 years.\n* Diagnosis of unilateral primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction.\n* Planned for open dismembered pyeloplasty.\n* Availability of preoperative renal ultrasonography, renal cortical shear wave elastography, and diuretic renography.\n* Written informed consent obtained from parent or legal guardian.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Bilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction.\n* Secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction.\n* Previous ipsilateral upper urinary tract surgery.\n* Associated major urinary tract anomalies likely to independently affect renal function, including vesicoureteral reflux, megaureter, duplex system, posterior urethral valves, or ectopic kidney.\n* Active urinary tract infection at the time of assessment.\n* Known intrinsic renal parenchymal disease unrelated to obstruction.\n* Inability to obtain reliable shear wave elastography measurements.\n* Incomplete planned follow-up.","6 Months",{"count":573,"type":23},84,"OBSERVATIONAL","Ureteropelvic junction obstruction is an important cause of hydronephrosis and potentially reversible renal functional impairment in children. Although open pyeloplasty is an effective standard treatment, the degree of postoperative renal functional recovery varies between patients.\n\nThis prospective observational cohort study will evaluate whether renal cortical shear wave elastography can predict renal functional recovery after open pyeloplasty in children with unilateral primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Renal cortical shear wave elastography will be assessed before surgery and during follow-up, and the change in elastography values will be compared with renal isotope findings after surgery.\n\nThe primary objective is to evaluate the predictive value of the change in renal cortical shear wave elastography from baseline to 3 months after surgery for isotope-defined renal functional recovery at 6 months after open pyeloplasty.",[577,578],"Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction","Renal Functional Recovery",[580,581,582,583,584],"Pediatric UPJO","Open pyeloplasty","Shear wave elastography","Renal cortical stiffness","Ureteropelvic junction obstruction",{"date":357,"type":34},{"date":436,"type":34},{"date":63,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":590,"slug":591,"hasResults":12,"nctId":592,"briefTitle":593,"officialTitle":594,"acronym":595,"eligibilityCriteria":596,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":50,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":597,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":599,"briefSummary":600,"conditions":601,"keywords":605,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":534,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":608,"startDateStruct":609,"completionDateStruct":610,"leadSponsor":611,"locationsCount":413},"100640042","phase-2-tamsulosin-and-intraureteral-aminophylline-for-ureteral-access-during-rirs-100640042","NCT07623876","Tamsulosin and Intraureteral Aminophylline for Ureteral Access During RIRS","Comparative Efficacy of Tamsulosin, Intraureteral Aminophylline, and Their Combination in Facilitating Ureteral Access During Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.","TAM-AMIN-UAS","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 18 years or older.\n* Unilateral renal stone 2 cm or less in maximal diameter on preoperative imaging.\n* Scheduled for primary retrograde intrarenal surgery.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Prior ureteral stenting on the study side.\n* Bilateral same-session retrograde intrarenal surgery.\n* Concomitant ureteral stone requiring primary semirigid ureteroscopy as the main procedure.\n* Known ureteral stricture or prior ureteral reconstructive surgery on the study side.\n* Active urinary tract infection or untreated positive urine culture.\n* Pregnancy.\n* Known allergy or contraindication to tamsulosin or aminophylline.\n* Significant cardiac arrhythmia, uncontrolled ischemic heart disease, seizure disorder, or hyperthyroidism.\n* Severe hepatic impairment.\n* Inability to comply with the 7-day preoperative medication protocol.",{"count":598,"type":23},322,[450],"This multicenter randomized controlled trial will evaluate whether preoperative tamsulosin, intraureteral aminophylline, or their combination can improve ureteral access during primary retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones. Adult patients with unilateral renal stones measuring 2 cm or less and planned placement of a 10\u002F12 Fr ureteral access sheath will be randomly assigned to one of four groups in a 2x2 factorial design. Participants will receive either tamsulosin or placebo for 7 days before surgery and either intraureteral aminophylline or intraureteral placebo during the procedure. The main outcome will be successful first-attempt placement of the planned 10\u002F12 Fr ureteral access sheath after study solution instillation, without active ureteral dilatation, sheath downsizing, prestenting with deferred surgery, or abandonment of the procedure due to access failure.",[602,603,604],"Renal Stones","Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery","Ureteral Access Sheath Placement",[433,114,606,607],"Intraureteral aminophylline","ureteral access sheath",{"date":357,"type":34},{"date":436,"type":34},{"date":63,"type":23},{"name":40,"class":41},""]