Comparison Of NeuroNaute Smart System to a Standard EleCTroencephalogram System in Hospital (CONNECT)
Primary Purpose
Epilepsy
Status
Withdrawn
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
GOLDSTANDARD
NEURONAUTE
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Epilepsy focused on measuring Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, EEG
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients, with a regular appointment to perform an EEG recording: (i) suspected of epileptic disorders or (ii) epilepsy already diagnosed.
- Age (> 18 years),
- Affiliated to the social security
- Informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria:
- No informed consent
- Age (< 18 years)
- No affiliation to the social security
- Unsuitable anthropometric parameters
- Pregnant women
- Recent brain surgery
- Wound or scores on the body and the scalp
- Ongoing participation in another clinical trial
- Allergy to any component from MD including : Silver, polyamide, silicone
- Sensory disorders making the patient insensitive to pain on the skin
- Behavioral disorders making the patient excessively agitated or aggressive;
- Motor or mental disorders preventing the patient from expressing his or her pain;
- Cardiorespiratory disorders likely to be aggravated by slight compression of the chest;
- The susceptibility to tension headaches (the compression exerted by the bonnet may in certain cases trigger a headache)
Sites / Locations
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Experimental
Arm Label
GOLD STANDARD
NEURONAUTE
Arm Description
RECORDING WITH EEG GOLD STANDARD
RECORDING WITH THE NEURONAUTE
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Reproducibility of electroencephalographic signals interpretation recorded by the Neuronaute compared to the gold standard.
The main evaluation criteria is the reproducibility based on the interpretation of electroencephalographic signals recorded by the Neuronaute compared to the gold standard. The system will be considered effective if there are no significant differences in the physiological parameters recorded by the two systems.
A clinical expert will interpret the EEG(electroencephalography) signals and fill the EEG evaluation sheet. It includes items such as signals quality and presence of abnormal events
Secondary Outcome Measures
The Neuronaute will be considered effective if it detects inter-critical epileptic abnormalities in at least one patient.
A section of the evaluation sheet is designed for the secondary objectives.
The Neuronaute will be considered efficient if the installation time is at least as fast as the installation of the gold standard. The time will be measured from the beginning of the patient's preparation until the beginning of the recording.
The time needed to set up the clinical device and the device under test will be noted in the Case Report Form.
The quality of the Neuronaute's ECG signal will be compared with the gold standard using an evaluation grid.
An evaluation grid led to compare the quality of th Neuronaute's ECG signal and Gold Standard' signal
Full Information
NCT ID
NCT03379272
First Posted
December 7, 2016
Last Updated
November 5, 2021
Sponsor
BioSerenity
Collaborators
Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03379272
Brief Title
Comparison Of NeuroNaute Smart System to a Standard EleCTroencephalogram System in Hospital
Acronym
CONNECT
Official Title
CONNECT: Comparison Of NeuroNaute Smart System to a Standard EleCTroencephalogram System in Hospital
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
December 2020
Overall Recruitment Status
Withdrawn
Why Stopped
Device evolves.
Study Start Date
December 20, 2020 (Anticipated)
Primary Completion Date
December 20, 2020 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
December 20, 2020 (Anticipated)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
BioSerenity
Collaborators
Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
The proposed study is designed to evaluate the performance of the Neuronaute in comparison with the gold standard EEG in patients with a regular appointment at the hospital. The design of this study is guided by two overriding factors : (i) epileptics disorders suspected or either (ii) epileptics already diagnosed.
Volunteers will be asked to participate to this study. This study will enroll 35 outpatient subjects aged 18 to 85. Informed consent will be obtained from the patients, and assent from the subjects, prior to any form of assessment or intervention as part of the study.
Patients will be submitted to the studied device record Neuronaute following by the gold standard EEG.
A grid with all EEG activity recorded during the trial will be provided for evaluation after completion of the trial.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Epilepsy
Keywords
Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, EEG
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Single Group Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Non-Randomized
Enrollment
0 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
GOLD STANDARD
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
RECORDING WITH EEG GOLD STANDARD
Arm Title
NEURONAUTE
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
RECORDING WITH THE NEURONAUTE
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
GOLDSTANDARD
Intervention Description
RECORDING WITH EEG GOLDSTANDARD
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
NEURONAUTE
Intervention Description
RECORDING WITH NEURONAUTE
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Reproducibility of electroencephalographic signals interpretation recorded by the Neuronaute compared to the gold standard.
Description
The main evaluation criteria is the reproducibility based on the interpretation of electroencephalographic signals recorded by the Neuronaute compared to the gold standard. The system will be considered effective if there are no significant differences in the physiological parameters recorded by the two systems.
A clinical expert will interpret the EEG(electroencephalography) signals and fill the EEG evaluation sheet. It includes items such as signals quality and presence of abnormal events
Time Frame
1 year
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
The Neuronaute will be considered effective if it detects inter-critical epileptic abnormalities in at least one patient.
Description
A section of the evaluation sheet is designed for the secondary objectives.
Time Frame
1 year
Title
The Neuronaute will be considered efficient if the installation time is at least as fast as the installation of the gold standard. The time will be measured from the beginning of the patient's preparation until the beginning of the recording.
Description
The time needed to set up the clinical device and the device under test will be noted in the Case Report Form.
Time Frame
2 hours
Title
The quality of the Neuronaute's ECG signal will be compared with the gold standard using an evaluation grid.
Description
An evaluation grid led to compare the quality of th Neuronaute's ECG signal and Gold Standard' signal
Time Frame
1 year
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
85 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Patients, with a regular appointment to perform an EEG recording: (i) suspected of epileptic disorders or (ii) epilepsy already diagnosed.
Age (> 18 years),
Affiliated to the social security
Informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria:
No informed consent
Age (< 18 years)
No affiliation to the social security
Unsuitable anthropometric parameters
Pregnant women
Recent brain surgery
Wound or scores on the body and the scalp
Ongoing participation in another clinical trial
Allergy to any component from MD including : Silver, polyamide, silicone
Sensory disorders making the patient insensitive to pain on the skin
Behavioral disorders making the patient excessively agitated or aggressive;
Motor or mental disorders preventing the patient from expressing his or her pain;
Cardiorespiratory disorders likely to be aggravated by slight compression of the chest;
The susceptibility to tension headaches (the compression exerted by the bonnet may in certain cases trigger a headache)
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
No
Learn more about this trial
Comparison Of NeuroNaute Smart System to a Standard EleCTroencephalogram System in Hospital
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs