|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Descriptive Information Fields | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Brief Title † | Copenhagen Arterial Revascularization Randomized Patency and Outcome Trial | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Official Title † | Arterial Revascularization for Coronary Bypass Surgery: A Randomized Trial Comparing the Outcome After Using LIMA + Vein Grafts Versus Total Arterial Revascularization With LIMA + RIMA + Radial Artery Grafts | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Brief Summary | There is a remarkable lack of randomized trials concerning the potential benefit of using arterial conduits for coronary bypass surgery. This is the purpose of the present trial. Exclusive use of arterial conduits might result in improved conduit viability, reduced risk of recurrent angina, myocardial infarction and other cardiac events, reduced need for antianginal medication, improved functional status and possibly improved long term survival. The patients will be followed for ten years after surgery. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Detailed Description | I: Background There is a remarkable lack of randomized studies concerning the potential benefit of using arterial grafts for coronary revascularization. Numerous observational reports consistently confirm, that the use of a LIMA-LAD grafts is not associated with increased peroperative mortality or morbidity and will result in an approximately 10% improved survival at 10 years postoperatively. The average patency for LIMA-LAD grafts is 80%-85% after 10 years. 50% of the vein grafts are occluded. LIMA-LAD grafting reduces the risk of of late myocardial infarction, other cardiac events and reoperation, however the effect on recurrent angina or need of antianginal medication is less certain. The question, whether bilateral IMA grafting has long term benefits compared to single IMA grafts is controversial. Numerous observational retrospective studies fail to demonstrate convincingly, that bilateral IMA grafting reduces long term mortality and improves the frequency of late cardiac events and recurrent angina, but these data are difficult to compare due to selection bias. It is not quite clear, if a minimal benefit represents a true difference in outcome, or if two different populations are compared. Whether an increased degree of arterial revascularization, including radial artery (RA) and IMA grafts, will result in an improved long term survival, reduced risk for recurrent angina, reinfarction, antianginal medication and improved quality of life, is unclear. A randomized trial has not yet been performed and current observational 5 year follow-up data are promising, but cannot document an anticipated benefit from a more stringent scientific point of view. II: Hypothesis Coronary bypass grafting with the use of LIMA + RIMA + RA (total arterial revascularization) vs. LIMA + saphenous vein grafts will result in equal peroperative mortality and morbidity rates and improve long term outcome in terms of improved patency rates, reduced risk of recurrent angina, infarction and other cardiac events, reduced need for antianginal medication, improved functional status and possibly improved long term survival. III: Aim of the study Prospective randomized trial comparing coronary bypass grafting with the use of LIMA + RIMA + RA vs. LIMA + saphenous vein grafts in patients with 2 or 3 vessel disease (more than 1 graft anticipated) with respect to:
IV: Design & methods
Sample size is calculated with respect to the primary endpoint graft patency at 1 and 5 years. A difference of 10-15% of patency in favour of the radial artery as bypass graft is regarded as clinically relevant. Observational data on radial artery patency indicate patency rates of 90-95% at 1 year and 85% at 5 years, while saphenous vein graft patency is 80-90% at 1 year and 60-70% at 5 years. To detect such a difference (15% improved patency for RA grafts, 85% vs 70%) with a 90% probability (type 2 error 0.10) and a significance level of 0.05, the sample size for each group would be n=150. A 15% difference in patency rates at 5 years is in our opinion an assumption that probably overestimates the vein graft patency, which means, that a sample size of 150 patients in each group should guarantee with a high probability a statistically significant outcome. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Study Phase | Phase III | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Study Type † | Interventional | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Study Design † | Treatment, Randomized, Single Blind (Outcomes Assessor), Active Control, Parallel Assignment, Safety/Efficacy Study | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary Outcome Measure † | Angiographic distal anastomotic patency rates [ Time Frame: 1, 5 and 10 years postoperatively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ] Cardiac event free survival [ Time Frame: 1, 5 and 10 years postoperatively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ] |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary Outcome Measure † | Peroperative mortality [ Time Frame: Until 3 months postoperatively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ] Postoperative morbidity (frequency of peroperative/ postoperative infarction, arrythmias, use of IABP, inotropic support, pulmonary, renal and cerebral complications, length of stay in the ICU, etc. according to registration schemes). [ Time Frame: 3 months postoperatively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ] Risk of recurrent angina and need for antianginal medication [ Time Frame: 1, 5 and 10 years postoperatively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ] Data on functional status and social rehabilitation at clinical controls [ Time Frame: 3 months, 1, 5 and 10 years postoperatively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ] |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Condition † | Coronary Arteriosclerosis Ischemic Heart Disease Angina Pectoris |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Intervention † | Procedure: Total arterial revascularization Procedure: Conventional revascularization |
||||||||||||||||||||
| MEDLINE PMIDs | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Links | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Recruitment Information Fields | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Recruitment Status † | Active, not recruiting | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Enrollment † | 331 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Start Date † | February 2002 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date | February 2015 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Eligibility Criteria † | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Gender | Both | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Ages | 18 Years to 70 Years | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers | No | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Contacts †† | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Location Countries † | Denmark | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Administrative Information Fields | |||||||||||||||||||||
| NCT ID † | NCT00159991 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Organization ID | 961502837 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary IDs †† | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Study Sponsor † | Rigshospitalet, Denmark | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Collaborators †† | Danish Heart Foundation The Lundbeck Foundation Copenhagen Hospital Corporation |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Investigators † |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Information Provided By | Rigshospitalet, Denmark | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Verification Date | January 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| First Received Date † | September 8, 2005 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Last Updated Date | February 12, 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||