linjc16/ctgov huggingface dataset:
McGrath Mac VideoLaryngoscope vs the Macintosh Laryngoscope

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Videolaryngoscopes become widely used. The aim of this study is to compare McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope to conventional MacIntosh laryngoscope in patients without known risk of difficult of mask ventilation and of tracheal intubation.

Official Title
-----------------
Randomised Controlled Trial of Intubation With the McGrath Mac VideoLaryngoscope vs the Macintosh Laryngoscope

Conditions
-----------------
Tracheal Intubation

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: Macintosh laryngoscope
* Device: McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: patient scheduled for a general anesthesia with orotracheal intubation Exclusion Criteria: predictable risk of difficult mask ventilation or of difficult tracheal intubation necessity of a rapid sequence induction contra-indication to sufentanil, to propofol, or to atracurium ENT, thoracic surgery, or intracranial surgery

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 80 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Single


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: Macintosh laryngoscope<br>Tracheal intubation will be performed using a Macintosh laryngoscope | Device: Macintosh laryngoscope<br> <br> |
| Experimental: McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope<br>Tracheal intubation will be performed using a McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope | Device: McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope<br> <br> |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Ease of tracheal intubation | Ease of intubation is measured using the Intubation Difficulty Scale (Adnet et al. Anesthesiology 1997;87(6):1290-1297) | 1 hour | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Time to obtain the first capnogram (sec) |  | one hour | 
| Score of Cormak and Lehane modified by Yentis |  | one hour | 
| POGO (percentage of glottic opening) score |  | one hour | 
| Rate of use of alternative techniques for intubation |  | one hour | 
| Rate of esophageal intubation |  | one hour | 
| Incidence of arterial oxygen desaturation (SpO2 <92%) |  | one hour | 
| Rate of failure of tracheal intubation |  | one hour | 
| Rate of hemodynamic abnormality |  | one hour | 
| Postoperative throat pain |  | one day | 
| Postoperative hoarseness |  | one day | 
| Questionnaire of Salditt-Isabel |  | one hour |
Segment Transport Versus Acute Shortening In The Treatment of Tibial Pseudarthroses With Bone Loss

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
In this study the investigators are presenting the advantages as well as the disadvantages of ACUTE SHORTENING AND RELENGTHENINIG VS SEGMENT TRANSPORT methods.

Conditions
-----------------
TIBIA PSEUDOARTHROSES

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: ASR METHOD


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria:TIBIA PSEUDOARTHROSES - Exclusion Criteria:BONE LOSS GREATER THAN 10 CM -

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 13 Years
Maximum Age: 50 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Non-Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Single


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| No Intervention: COMPLICATION<br> | Other: ASR METHOD<br> <br> |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| TREATMENT PERIOD AND COMPLICATION RATE |  |  |
Chronic Ankle Instability and Proprioception

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of this investigation is to determine the effects of chronic ankle instability on cervical spine and knee proprioception as measured using joint position sense to investigate whether correlation can be drawn between the two.

Official Title
-----------------
Effects of Ankle Instability on Cervical Proprioception

Conditions
-----------------
Chronic Ankle Sprains

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: History of ankle instability Ages 20-65 yoa Exclusion Criteria: - Recent surgery, have any unstable or fused joints of the cervical spine. Medications, prescription or herbal muscle stimulants, relaxants. Any previ

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 20 Years
Maximum Age: 65 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------
What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| joint repositioning error |  | 1 week | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
sprain proprioception
Rare Iron Overloads Except C282Y Homozygosity : Description and Characterization.

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Chronic iron overload is responsible for morbidity and mortality. There are many genetic and acquired causes. One of them is an hepcidin deficiency. Hepcidin is the regulating hormone for iron. The study explores this specific cause, and aim to characterize this iron overload in term of clinical, biological, genetic and functional specificities.

Detailed Description
-----------------
One of chronic iron overload profiles is a deficit in hepcidin. Hepcidin is the regulating hormone for iron. This specific profile is characterized by an elevated serum iron, an elevated transferrin saturation, and parenchymal damages of iron overload. This disease is not connected with known mutations of iron metabolism genes. The main objective of this study is the clinical, biological, genetic and functional characterization of rare iron overload phenotypes associated with hepcidin deficiency except C282Y homozygosity.

Official Title
-----------------
Clinical, Biological, Genetic and Functional Characterization of Rare Iron Overload Phenotypes Associated With Hepcidin Deficiency Except C282Y Homozygosity.

Conditions
-----------------
Rare Iron Overloads Except C282Y Homozygosity

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion criteria: Biological profile suggesting hepcidin deficiency: high serum iron (> 25μmol / l) checked at least 2 times. increased transferrin saturation coefficient (> 50 %) checked at least 2 times, and calculated from transferrinemia. Proved hepatic iron overload: using a dosage of iron hepatic concentration either on hepatic biopsy, or by MRI according to the method of iron overload quantification. A threshold of 100 µmol / g is set. Patient's written consent for examination and collection of genetic data to set the diagnosis. Non inclusion criteria: HFE hemochromatosis: C282Y/C282Y homozygosity Treatment by iterative phlebotomies (more than 2 phlebotomies) Hematological diseases with dyserythropoiesis and/or repeated transfusions Low haptoglobin level, suggesting chronic hemolysis or myelodysplasia Long-term iron oral and/or parenteral supplementation
Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| iron overloads except C282Y homozygosity<br>Patients with an iron overloads except C282Y homozygosity | |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
hepcidin, Rare iron overload
Comparing Cardiac Output Measurements Using a Wearable, Wireless, Non-invasive PPG-Based Device to a Swan Ganz Catheter

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Invasive pulmonary capillary wedge pressure measurements using a Swan-Ganz catheter (SGC) is considered the gold standard for cardiac output (CO) monitoring. In this prospective study, we will compare CO measurements between a PPG-based wearable monitor and a SGC in ambulatory CHF patients.

Official Title
-----------------
Comparing Cardiac Output Measurements Using a Wearable, Wireless, Non-invasive PPG-Based Device to a Swan Ganz Catheter During Ambulatory Assessment of CHF Patients

Conditions
-----------------
Cardiac Output, Low, Cardiac Output, High, Congestive Heart Failure

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: non-invasive monitoring


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with CHF Exclusion Criteria: Pregnant women Pediatric patients Inability to sign an informed consent form

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 120 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Device: non-invasive monitoring|non-invasive measurements of cardiac output|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Comparison of cardiac output obtained by a non-unvasive device to the invasive method | In each participant, a Swan-Ganz catheter will be inserted as part of their routine assessment, and cardiac output measurements will be compared with a non-invasive wearable and wireless PPG-based device. | 2-4 hours per patient | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Non-Invasive Monitoring, Cardiac Output
Oral and Systemic aMMP-8 in Periodontal Disease

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Periodontal disease is an inflammatory process that can result in tooth loss and also is considered a modifying factor for systemic health. Matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-8 is the major collagenase of periodontal tissue breakdown. The aim of the present study is to analyze active (aMMP-8) levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF), saliva and serum in the context of new criteria of gingivitis and stage 3 grade C periodontitis.

Official Title
-----------------
Local And Systemic Levels of aMMP-8 in Gingivitis and Stage 3 Periodontitis

Conditions
-----------------
Periodontal Diseases, Periodontal Inflammation

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: Biochemical analysis


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: systemically healthy and non-smoker individuals aged 25 to 50 years having ≥20 teeth present (except third molars) individuals with periodontally healthy, gingivitis and stage 3 periodontitis diagnoses Exclusion Criteria: having any systemic disease smoking pregnancy or lactation using antibiotic or any anti-inflammatory drug or any periodontal treatment within the past 6 months.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 25 Years
Maximum Age: 50 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Healthy (n=23)<br> | Other: Biochemical analysis<br>* aMMP-8 is measured by immunofluorometric assay (IFMA).<br>|
| Gingivitis (n=20)<br> | Other: Biochemical analysis<br>* aMMP-8 is measured by immunofluorometric assay (IFMA).<br>|
| Periodontitis (n=40)<br> | Other: Biochemical analysis<br>* aMMP-8 is measured by immunofluorometric assay (IFMA).<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Oral (GCF and saliva) and serum levels of aMMP-8 in periodontitis and gingivitis | aMMP-8 levels | through study completion, an average of 4 months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
periodontitis, gingivitis, matrix metalloproteinases
A Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of FK506E (MR4) in Patients Undergoing Primary Liver Transplantation.

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
To evaluate and to compare efficacy and safety of a dual regimen with oral modified release tacrolimus FK506E (MR4) / steroids versus a dual regimen with oral tacrolimus FK506 / steroids in patients undergoing primary liver transplantation. It shall be demonstrated that FK506E (MR4) is non-inferior to FK506 with regards to the primary endpoint.

Detailed Description
-----------------
A multicentre, 1:1 randomised, double blind, double dummy, two arm parallel group phase III study comparing a dual modified release FK506E (MR4) / steroid regimen with a standard tacrolimus FK506 / steroid regimen.

Official Title
-----------------
A Multicentre, Randomised, Double Blind, Two Arm Parallel Group Study to Evaluate and Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Modified Release Tacrolimus FK506E (MR4) Versus Tacrolimus FK506 in Combination With Steroids in Patients Undergoing Primary Liver Transplantation

Conditions
-----------------
Liver Transplantation

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: tacrolimus


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients receiving a primary, split liver or a whole liver graft from a cadaveric donor with compatible ABO blood type. Exclusion Criteria: Patients receiving a multi-organ transplant or having previously received an organ transplant (including liver re-transplantation). Patients with severe diarrhoea, vomiting, active peptic ulcer or gastrointestinal disorder that may affect the absorption of tacrolimus. Patients with serum creatinine > 200 µmol/l..

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Prevention
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Quadruple


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: 1<br> | Drug: tacrolimus<br>* immunosuppression<br>* Other names: FK506E, MR4;|
| Experimental: 2<br> | Drug: tacrolimus<br>* immunosuppression<br>* Other names: FK506E, MR4;|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Incidence of and time to biopsy-proven acute rejections |  | 12 months | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Incidence of acute rejections |  | 12 months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Tacrolimus, Liver transplantation
Bi-Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure (BIFF-Study)

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is used to treat dilated heart failure with discoordinate contraction. Dyssynchrony typically stems from electrical delay leading to mechanical delay between the septal and lateral walls. Right ventricular apical pacing might be associated with long-term adverse effects on left ventricular function, and alternative pacing sites such as high septal or RVOT has been suggested. Previous studies have however been conflicting. The aim of this study is to determine if bi-ventricular pacing from RVOT + LV is better than RVapex+LV. To avoid influence from possible atrial delay only patients with chronic atrial fibrillation are included. All patients will receive a bi-ventricular pacemaker with 3 leads placed in RVapex, RVOT and via coronary sinus to pace the left ventricle. After a run in period (to determine if AV-junction ablation is necessary) the patients are randomised to one of the following pacing configurations: RVOT+LV or RVapex+LV with cross-over after 3 month.

Official Title
-----------------
Study on the Efficacy of bi-Ventricular Pacing of Patients With Severe Heart Failure and Chronic Atrial Fibrillation

Conditions
-----------------
Heart Failure

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: InSync III


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Heart failure NYHA III-IV LVEF<35% QRS duration>150 ms Chronic atrial fibrillation. Exclusion Criteria: Heart failure not related to systolic function Unstable angina pectoris, AMI, PCI or CABG within 2 month Inclusion in other studies

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 80 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment
Masking: Triple


Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Device: InSync III|Bi-ventricular pacing from leads in LV+RVA or LV+RVOT|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| quality of life |  |  | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NYHA class |  |  | 
| 6-MWT |  |  | 
| bi-cycle test |  |  | 
| pro-BNP |  |  | 
| echocardiographic measures |  |  | 
| apnea-hypopnea index |  |  | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Heart failure, Dyssynchrony, Cardiac resynchronization therapy, Atrial fibrillation, RVOT, RVapex
Sexual Dysfunction and Dental Care

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Evaluation of sexual functioning of patients at the Sexual Medical Center, at Sheba Medical Center in Israel. Sexual functioning shall be compared with their dental behavior. Hypothesis: a positive association will be found.

Detailed Description
-----------------
Patients, male and female, age over 18, who apply to the Sexual Medical Center, at Sheba Medical Center will fill a battery of questionnaires regarding their sexual function and dental treatment.

Official Title
-----------------
Association Between Sexual Dysfunction in Adults and Behavioral Dysfunctions in Achieving Proper Dental Care

Conditions
-----------------
Dyspareunia, Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder, Erectile Dysfunction, Vaginismus

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Men and women, over 18 years old, who come for sexual therapy/ counseling to the Sexual Medical Center, in Sheba Medical Center, Israel Partners or spouses of the above. Exclusion Criteria: Patients who are already in the middle of treatment.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 88 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------
What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
male, sexual dysfunction, female, dental care, need of control
Efficacy and Safety Study of Udenafil to Treat Erectile Dysfunction

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Study Design : multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel group, fixed dose design Phase : Phase III

Official Title
-----------------
Phase 3 Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Once-a-day Dosing of Udenafil in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction

Conditions
-----------------
Erectile Dysfunction

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: DA-8159 (Udenafil)
* Drug: Placebo


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Male patients aged 20 years or more diagnosed with ED Exclusion Criteria: Had uncontrolled blood pressure Had hepatic or renal dysfunction Was currently under anticancer chemotherapy Had a treatments for ED using other PDE-5 inhibitors

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 20 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
Male

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: DA-8159 dose 1<br>Udenafil | Drug: DA-8159 (Udenafil)<br> <br> |
| Experimental: DA-8159 dose 2<br>Udenafil | Drug: DA-8159 (Udenafil)<br> <br> |
| Placebo Comparator: Placebo<br> | Drug: Placebo<br> <br> |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| IIEF EF domain score |  | 24 weeks | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| IIEF, IPSS |  | 24 weeks |