Cesarean Scar Healing Randomized Trial Compares Two Ointments
Summary
This registry entry documents a randomized controlled trial (NCT07547462) comparing hydrophilic methacrylate gel versus beta-sitosterol ointment for early cesarean section scar healing. Adult women who underwent cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to receive either hydrophilic methacrylate gel (n=58) or beta-sitosterol ointment (n=59), with scar outcomes assessed by trained nurses blinded to treatment allocation at two time points approximately 12 days apart. The primary outcome is scar redness measured by the Vancouver Scar Scale, with secondary outcomes including pigmentation, pliability, scar height, pain, itching, satisfaction, and treatment recommendation.
“Adult women who underwent cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to receive either hydrophilic methacrylate gel (n=58) or beta-sitosterol ointment (n=59).”
About this source
ClinicalTrials.gov is the NIH-run registry of every clinical trial conducted in the United States, plus most international trials sponsored by US-based companies or institutions. By federal law, sponsors must register Phase 2 through Phase 4 studies before enrolling patients and post results within a year of completion. This feed tracks every new trial registration and study update, around 700 a month: drug interventions, device studies, behavioral protocols, observational research. Watch this if you scout drug candidates moving into mid or late-stage development, monitor competitor pipelines, or follow rare disease research where new trials signal patient hope. GovPing parses sponsor, phase, intervention, and target indication on each entry.
What changed
This ClinicalTrials.gov registry entry describes an randomized controlled trial comparing two topical agents for early cesarean section scar healing. Hydrophilic methacrylate gel (n=58) is compared against beta-sitosterol ointment (n=59), with blinded nurse assessment of the primary outcome (Vancouver Scar Scale redness) at two visits approximately 12 days apart. Secondary endpoints include pigmentation, pliability, scar height, pain, itching, satisfaction, and treatment recommendation. This entry documents the trial design and registration status; it does not report efficacy results.
Affected parties include clinical investigators conducting wound-healing and obstetrics research, and manufacturers of topical wound-care or scar-treatment products who may wish to monitor comparative effectiveness data. Sponsors considering similar scar-treatment development programs should note the trial design and outcome measures as a benchmark for future study design.
Archived snapshot
Apr 23, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
Optimizing Early Cesarean Scar Healing
N/A NCT07547462 Kind: NA Apr 23, 2026
Abstract
This randomized controlled trial compares hydrophilic methacrylate gel versus beta-sitosterol ointment for early cesarean section scar healing. Adult women who underwent cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to receive either hydrophilic methacrylate gel (n=58) or beta-sitosterol ointment (n=59). Scar outcomes were assessed by trained nurses blinded to treatment allocation and by patients at two time points approximately 12 days apart. The primary outcome was scar redness measured by the Vancouver Scar Scale. Secondary outcomes included pigmentation, pliability, scar height, and patient-reported measures including pain, itching, satisfaction, and treatment recommendation.
Conditions: Cesarean Section Scar, Wound Healing
Interventions: Beta-Sitosterol Ointment, Hydrophilic Methacrylate Gel
Related changes
Get daily alerts for ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Source
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from NIH.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when ClinicalTrials.gov Studies publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.