Changeflow GovPing Healthcare & Life Sciences Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Needle Tenotomy ...
Routine Notice Added Final

Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Needle Tenotomy vs Percutaneous Ultrasonic Needle Tenotomy for Gluteal Tendinosis

Favicon for changeflow.com ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Detected
Email

Summary

NIH ClinicalTrials.gov registered a new clinical study (NCT07540806) comparing two tenotomy techniques for gluteal tendinosis: standard percutaneous needle tenotomy (PNT) versus percutaneous ultrasonic tenotomy (PUT) using the Tenex device. The study's primary endpoints are pain improvement and functional outcomes. This is an informational database entry; no regulatory obligations or compliance requirements are created.

Published by NIH on changeflow.com . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

What changed

NIH ClinicalTrials.gov registered a new clinical study (NCT07540806) comparing standard percutaneous needle tenotomy (PNT) against percutaneous ultrasonic tenotomy (PUT) for treating gluteal tendinosis. The study aims to measure pain improvement and functional outcomes between the two interventions. This is a database registration entry only; it does not create regulatory obligations, impose compliance requirements, or change existing policy. Compliance readers may note the study's intervention details (Tenex device) for awareness if their institutions are involved in similar procedural research.

Archived snapshot

Apr 21, 2026

GovPing 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.

← ClinicalTrials.gov Studies

Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Needle Tenotomy (PNT) vs Percutaneous Ultrasonic Needle Tenotomy (PUT) for Gluteal Tendinosis

N/A NCT07540806 Kind: NA Apr 20, 2026

Abstract

The goal of this study is to determine if a newer tenotomy technique utilizing an ultrasound needle is more effective than the traditional tenotomy technique utilizing a simple hypodermic needle for gluteal tendinosis. The main questions it aims to answer are:

  1. Is pain from the gluteal tendinosis improved with either technique, and, if so, is there a difference in the improvement between techniques?
  2. Is there an improvement in function for gluteal tendinosis, and, if so, is there a difference between techniques?

Conditions: Tendinopathy, Tendinosis, Gluteal Tendinitis

Interventions: Percutaneous needle tenotomy (PNT), Percutaneous ultrasonic tenotomy (PUT, Tenex Device)

View original document →

Get daily alerts for ClinicalTrials.gov Studies

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from NIH.

What's AI-generated?

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.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
NIH
Instrument
Notice
Branch
Executive
Legal weight
Non-binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor

Who this affects

Applies to
Healthcare providers Clinical investigators
Industry sector
6211 Healthcare Providers
Activity scope
Clinical trial registration Medical research
Geographic scope
United States US

Taxonomy

Primary area
Healthcare
Operational domain
Clinical Operations
Topics
Medical Devices

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when ClinicalTrials.gov Studies publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!