[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"leadSponsorName\":\"Suzhou Hengruihongyuan Medical Technology Co. LTD\",\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:":88},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,3,0,[8,41,65],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":18,"enrollmentInfo":19,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":23,"briefSummary":25,"conditions":26,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":28,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":29,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":30,"startDateStruct":33,"completionDateStruct":35,"leadSponsor":37,"locationsCount":40},"100635614","suture-mediated-closure-system-following-percutaneous-common-femoral-vein-procedures-100635614",false,"NCT07554976","Suture-Mediated Closure System Following Percutaneous Common Femoral Vein Procedures","Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Suture-Mediated Closure System Following Percutaneous Common Femoral Vein Procedures","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Aged 18 to 80 years\n2. Patients eligible for interventional catheter-based examination or treatment via common femoral artery puncture using sheaths sized 5F to 21F\n3. Signed by the patient personally or by their legal representative on the Informed Consent Form\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Known pregnancy or lactation period;\n2. Diameter of the common femoral artery on the puncture side \\\u003C 5 mm;\n3. Concurrent participation in another clinical research study;\n4. Known allergy to any device component, and\u002For contraindications to contrast agents or anticoagulants;\n5. Vascular injury at the access site;\n6. Infection of the inguinal puncture site;\n7. Morbid obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg\u002Fm²);\n8. Lower extremity vascular ultrasound for assessment of common femoral artery stenosis ≥50%;\n9. Presence of femoral artery aneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, or pseudoaneurysm in the common femoral artery;\n10. Previous use of clip-based vascular closure devices at the ipsilateral arterial access site;\n11. Hematoma at the ipsilateral arterial access site;\n12. Other conditions deemed unsuitable for participation in this clinical trial by the investigator.","ALL","18 Years","80 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},136,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[24],"NA","The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the suture-mediated closure system produced by Suzhou Hengrui Hongyuan Medical Technology Co., Ltd. following Percutaneous Common Femoral Vein Procedures.",[27],"Percutaneous Intervention Via Common Femoral Vein","RECRUITING","2026-04-21",{"date":31,"type":32},"2026-04-28","ACTUAL",{"date":34,"type":32},"2025-11-05",{"date":36,"type":21},"2026-11-01",{"name":38,"class":39},"Suzhou Hengruihongyuan Medical Technology Co. LTD","INDUSTRY",1,{"id":42,"slug":43,"hasResults":11,"nctId":44,"briefTitle":45,"officialTitle":46,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":47,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":48,"maxAge":18,"enrollmentInfo":49,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":51,"briefSummary":52,"conditions":53,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":28,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":56,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":57,"startDateStruct":59,"completionDateStruct":61,"leadSponsor":63,"locationsCount":64},"100598203","clinical-study-of-the-pulsed-electric-field-ablation-system-in-chronic-obstructive-pulmonary-disease-100598203","NCT07068438","Clinical Study of the Pulsed Electric Field Ablation System in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","A Clinical Evaluation of the Pulsed Electric Field Ablation System for the Treatment of the Symptoms of Chronic Bronchitis in Adult Patients With COPD","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Subject's age is ≥35 years and ≤80 years.\n2. Patient has chronic bronchitis, defined as productive cough for three months in each of two successive years, whereas other causes of productive cough have been ruled out.\n3. Patient has a CAT score ≥ 10.\n4. Patient has an SGRQ score ≥ 25.\n5. Patient's responses to the first two questions of the CAT instrument sum to ≥ 7 points or the sum is 6 points and the patient's total CAT score is \\> 20 points.\n6. Patient has FEV1\u002FFVC \\\u003C 0.70.\n7. Patient has a pre-procedure post-bronchodilator FEV1 percent predicted of ≥ 30%.\n8. Patient is receiving guideline directed pharmacotherapy which includes one or more long acting bronchodilator (LAMA, LABA) with or without an inhaled corticosteroid for at least 8 weeks prior to randomization, unless the patient has attempted such therapy within the past 1 year without significant clinical response or had an adverse reaction.\n9. In the opinion of the Primary investigator, patient is able to undergo 2 bronchoscopies under general anesthesia and is able to adhere to the study follow-up schedule.\n10. Informed consent signed by the patient or legal representative.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient has known unresolved lower respiratory tract infection (e.g., pneumonia, mycobacterium avium-intracellulare infection (MAI), fungus, tuberculosis).\n2. Patient has a steroid-dependent condition requiring \\>10 mg of oral corticosteroid per day.\n3. Patient has any implantable electronic device (e.g., pacemaker, cardioverter defibrillator) that cannot be turned off during the procedure.\n4. Patient has a history of ventricular tachy-arrhythmia or clinically significant atrial tachyarrhythmia within the past two years, or sinus bradycardia with a heart rate of under than 45 beats per minute, unless the arrhythmia has been treated and\u002For patient is in regular rhythm during the screening phase.\n5. Subject has lung cancer.\n6. Patient has a pulmonary nodule or cavity that in the judgement of the Primary investigator may require intervention during the course of the study.\n7. Patient had prior lung surgery, such as lung transplant, LVRS, lobectomy, lung implant\u002Fprosthesis, metal airway stent, valves, coils or bullectomy.\n8. Patient has emphysema of greater than or equal to 50% as quantified on baseline HRCT scan as determined by the CT Core Lab.\n9. Patient has asthma based on Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) criteria.\n10. Patient has clinically significant bronchiectasis influencing the patient's clinical symptoms of cough and phlegm.\n11. Patient has actively smoked (including tobacco, marijuana, e-cigarettes, vaping, etc.) within the last 2 months.\n12. Patient is unable to walk over 225 meters in 6 minutes.\n13. Patient has a serious medical condition that, in the Primary investigator's opinion, could compromise patient safety or confound the interpretation of the patient's response to therapy (e.g., congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, or myocardial infarction in the past year, renal failure, liver disease, cerebrovascular accident within the past 6 months, uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c \\>8%), uncontrolled hypertension (diastolic BP \\>100mmHg) or autoimmune disease requiring treatment with immunosuppressant medications or a disease requiring chemotherapy).\n14. Patient has uncontrolled GERD.\n15. Patient has known severe pulmonary hypertension (pulmonary artery SP ≥ 50 mmHg).\n16. Patient has a known sensitivity to medication required to perform bronchoscopy (i.e., lidocaine, atropine, benzodiazepines).\n17. Patient is pregnant, nursing, or planning to get pregnant during study duration.\n18. Patient is currently participating in another clinical study involving an investigational product.\n19. Patient is receiving anticoagulation for a cardiovascular indication and, in the Primary investigator's opinion, unable to suspend anticoagulant medications (i.e., aspirin, clopidogrel, warfarin) during bronchoscopy in accordance.\n20. Patient has known airway colonization with drug-resistant bacteria such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Burkholderia cepacia complex, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Mycobacterium abscessus, Trichoderma, or other significant fungi.","35 Years",{"count":50,"type":21},210,[24],"This is a prospective, randomized, parallel group, sham-controlled, multicenter clinical trial. The objective is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of pulsed electric field ablation system manufactured by Suzhou Hengruihongyuan Medical Technology Co., Ltd. for the treatment of the symptoms of chronic bronchitis in adult COPD patients with moderate to severe chronic bronchitis. A total of 210 patients will be randomized into the experimental group and the sham group (2:1).",[54,55],"Chronic Bronchitis","COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease)","2025-08-25",{"date":58,"type":32},"2025-09-02",{"date":60,"type":21},"2025-09-01",{"date":62,"type":21},"2027-02-01",{"name":38,"class":39},13,{"id":66,"slug":67,"hasResults":11,"nctId":68,"briefTitle":69,"officialTitle":70,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":71,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":72,"enrollmentInfo":73,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":75,"briefSummary":76,"conditions":77,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":28,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":56,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":80,"startDateStruct":82,"completionDateStruct":84,"leadSponsor":86,"locationsCount":87},"100597063","interventional-left-ventricular-assist-system-for-pci-in-chip-patients-100597063","NCT07053618","Interventional Left Ventricular Assist System for PCI in CHIP Patients","Interventional Left Ventricular Assist System for PCI in CHIP Patients: a Prospective, Multicenter, Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1\\. Aged 18-90 2. The investigator assesses that the subject requires coronary revascularization, but CABG (Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting) is considered high-risk or the subject refuses CABG. The investigator believes the subject may benefit from PCI (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention).\n\n3\\. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%. 4. Coronary angiography (CAG) or coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) shows any of the following conditions:\n\n1. Unprotected left main (LM) coronary artery disease (coronary stenosis ≥ 50%).\n2. A last remaining patent coronary artery (the anterior descending artery (LAD) and\u002For its branches, the circumflex artery (LCX) and\u002For its branches, and the right coronary artery (RCA) and\u002For its branches).\n3. Saphenous vein graft (SVG) vascular lesions.\n4. Severely calcification, tortuosity.\n5. Multivessel disease (two or more) combined with chronic total occlusion (CTO).\n6. Three-vessel disease. Three-vessel disease is defined as significant stenosis (≥ 70%) in at least one segment of all three major epicardial coronary artery territories: the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and\u002For its branches, the left circumflex artery (LCX) and\u002For its branches, and the right coronary artery (RCA) and\u002For its branches. In a left-dominant coronary system, lesions in the proximal segments of the LAD and LCX are also considered three-vessel disease.\n\n5\\. Patients who are able to give informed consent and complete the follow-up.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Cardiogenic shock (CS) within 7 days (Cardiogenic shock: Sustained SBP \\\u003C90 mmHg for ≥30 min or requiring supportive measures to maintain SBP \\>90 mmHg and end-organ hypoperfusion (urine output \\\u003C30 ml\u002Fh or cool extremities).\n2. STEMI or CK-MB did not return to the normal range within 24 hours.\n3. Cardiac arrest with cardiopulmonary resuscitation within 24 hours.\n4. Left ventricular mural thrombus.\n5. After aortic valve replacement surgery (mechanical, bioprosthetic).\n6. Having used or using ECMO or pVAD (percutaneous ventricular assist device) within 7 days.\n7. Moderate to severe aortic stenosis, moderate to severe aortic valve insufficiency.\n8. Atrial septal or ventricular septal defects (including post-infarction VSD), or post-myocardial infarction Free-Wall Rupture, or papillary muscle rupture.\n9. Severe right heart failure or severe tricuspid valve insufficiency.\n10. Disease or abnormality of the aorta that interferes with the procedure, including Marfan syndrome, coarctation of aortic, aortic aneurysm, severe tortuosity or calcification of the aorta.\n11. Severe peripheral arterial stenosis or occlusive lesions.\n12. Uncorrectable moderate or severe anemia prior to the procedure (hemoglobin \\\u003C90 g\u002FL). Abnormal coagulation function (routine blood test indicates platelet count less than 75×109\u002FL, INR ≥2.0, or fibrinogen ≤1.5 g\u002FL).\n13. Known contraindications to heparin, contrast agents, or study-required medications (e.g., aspirin, clopidogrel); history of Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.\n14. Active hemorrhage within 1 month.\n15. History of stroke or TIA or permanent neurologic deficits within one month prior to the procedure.\n16. Renal dysfunction: subject on dialysis or serum creatinine ≥4 mg\u002FdL (353.6 µmol\u002FL) within 7 days.\n17. Liver dysfunction: liver AST, ALT and bilirubin \\>3 times the upper limit of normal within 7 days.\n18. Presence or suspected presence of infective endocarditis or systemic infection.\n19. Women who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or planning pregnancy during the trial.\n20. Participation in another drug or medical device clinical trial.\n21. Other conditions deemed by the investigator as unsuitable for participation in this trial.\n\n    \\-","90 Years",{"count":74,"type":21},286,[24],"Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is a life-sustaining therapy first introduced in the 1950s. After six decades of development, it now serves as a critical bridge therapy for patients with acute cardiac events and end-stage heart failure. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS), a key MCS modality, has advanced rapidly in recent years.\n\nIn China, pMCS adoption has accelerated significantly, evidenced by year-over-year growth in both specialized centers and clinical cases, alongside continuous technological refinement.\n\nCommon pMCS devices include: Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP), Axial flow pump systems (e.g., Impella®), Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO). However, no randomized study has compared Impella with VA-ECMO in CHIP patients.\n\nThe aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of interventional left ventricular assist system (VADLINK) compared to the VA-ECMO in providing circulatory support for complicated and high-risk patient with indications for PCI.",[78,79],"High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (High-risk PCI)","Left Ventricular Assist Devices",{"date":81,"type":32},"2025-08-26",{"date":83,"type":32},"2025-08-06",{"date":85,"type":21},"2027-08-01",{"name":38,"class":39},15,""]