Ruling Out Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy:a Multicenter Outcome Study
| Tracking Information | |
|---|---|
| First Received Date ICMJE | October 10, 2008 |
| Last Updated Date | October 12, 2012 |
| Start Date ICMJE | September 2008 |
| Estimated Primary Completion Date | January 2014 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) |
| Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Proportion of patients with a symptomatic thromboembolic event in the three month follow-up among those in whom PE was ruled out by the diagnostic strategy and who were left untreated by anticoagulants. [ Time Frame: 3 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ] |
| Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current |
| Change History | Complete list of historical versions of study NCT00771303 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site |
| Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
| Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current |
| Current Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided |
| Original Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided |
| Descriptive Information | |
| Brief Title ICMJE | Ruling Out Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy:a Multicenter Outcome Study |
| Official Title ICMJE | Ruling Out Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy:a Multicenter Outcome Study |
| Brief Summary | Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a major cause of maternal morbidity and mortality in developed countries. Objective diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in pregnancy is crucial. Failure to identify PE or/or DVT will place the mother's life at risk, and unnecessary treatment will not only expose her to anticoagulants but will also label her as having had VTE. Thus, this diagnosis has serious implications for the management of her present pregnancy, and for other aspects of her life ranging from contraception to thromboprophylaxis in future pregnancies and hormone replacement therapy in later life. It is therefore critical that all women with symptoms or signs that suggest venous thromboembolism have appropriate investigation and diagnosis based on objective diagnostic tests. The current diagnostic approach in suspected PE is based on sequential diagnostic tests: 1) assessment of clinical probability, 2) fibrin D-dimer measurement, 3) compression ultrasonography of lower limb veins and 4) multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT). However, physicians are reluctant to perform MSCT in pregnant women because of potential adverse effect of radiation exposure to the fetus. For this reason, ventilation/perfusion or perfusion-only lung scan has been the cornerstone of PE diagnosis in pregnant women. Indeed, perfusion lung scan was assumed to be associated with less radiation than computed tomography (CT). However, this technique is now widely abandoned in the usual diagnostic strategy of PE for the following reasons: it is not widely available; its interpretation may be difficult and the test may be inconclusive in the presence of other chest abnormalities. Moreover, recent data convincingly show that the radiation exposure associated with single-slice or multi-slice CT exposes the fetus to less radiation than perfusion lung scan. However, the use of CT has never been adequately validated in pregnant women with clinically suspected PE. The investigators, therefore, plan to set up a prospective management study in which pregnant women with suspected PE will undergo a sequential diagnostic strategy based on 1) assessment of clinical probability 2) D-dimer measurement 3) compression ultrasonography, and 4) MSCT. Nowadays, the overestimated fear of radiation exposure for the fetus leads to an irrational attitude and inadequate investigations in pregnant women with suspected PE, even though both European [3, 4] and North-American guidelines [5] suggest that only objective testing may accurately rule out the disease. The proposed study should lead to an increased awareness of the risks and benefits of appropriate imaging in pregnant women suspected of PE and should result in a more rational management of this under-studied patient group. |
| Detailed Description | Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a major cause of maternal morbidity and mortality in developed countries. Objective diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in pregnancy is crucial. Failure to identify PE or/or DVT will place the mother's life at risk, and unnecessary treatment will not only expose her to anticoagulants but will also label her as having had VTE. Thus, this diagnosis has serious implications for the management of her present pregnancy, and for other aspects of her life ranging from contraception to thromboprophylaxis in future pregnancies and hormone replacement therapy in later life. It is therefore critical that all women with symptoms or signs that suggest venous thromboembolism have appropriate investigation and diagnosis based on objective diagnostic tests. Diagnosis of VTE on a clinical basis is unreliable, especially during pregnancy because leg swelling and mild dyspnea are frequent during normal pregnancy. The current diagnostic approach in suspected PE is based on sequential diagnostic tests: 1) assessment of clinical probability, 2) fibrin D-dimer measurement, 3) compression ultrasonography of lower limb veins and 4) multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT). However, physicians are reluctant to perform MSCT in pregnant women because of potential adverse effect of radiation exposure to the fetus. For this reason, ventilation/perfusion or perfusion-only lung scan has been the cornerstone of PE diagnosis in pregnant women. Indeed, perfusion lung scan was assumed to be associated with less radiation than computed tomography (CT). However, this technique is now widely abandoned in the usual diagnostic strategy of PE for the following reasons: it is not widely available; its interpretation may be difficult and the test may be inconclusive in the presence of other chest abnormalities. Moreover, recent data convincingly show that the radiation exposure associated with single-slice or multi-slice CT exposes the fetus to less radiation than perfusion lung scan. However, the use of CT has never been adequately validated in pregnant women with clinically suspected PE. We, therefore, plan to set up a prospective management study in which pregnant women with suspected PE will undergo a sequential diagnostic strategy based on 1) assessment of clinical probability 2) D-dimer measurement 3) compression ultrasonography, and 4) MSCT. Nowadays, the overestimated fear of radiation exposure for the fetus leads to an irrational attitude and inadequate investigations in pregnant women with suspected PE, even though both European and North-American guidelines suggest that only objective testing may accurately rule out the disease. The proposed study should lead to an increased awareness of the risks and benefits of appropriate imaging in pregnant women suspected of PE and should result in a more rational management of this under-studied patient group. |
| Study Type ICMJE | Observational |
| Study Design ICMJE | Observational Model: Cohort Time Perspective: Prospective |
| Target Follow-Up Duration | Not Provided |
| Biospecimen | Retention: Samples Without DNA Description: Nt-pro BNP measurement |
| Sampling Method | Non-Probability Sample |
| Study Population | Pregnant women with suspected PE. |
| Condition ICMJE |
|
| Intervention ICMJE | Other: Pregnant patients with suspected PE will undergo a strategy based on clinical probability assessment, D-dimer, lower limb vein ultrasonography and MSCT. |
| Study Group/Cohort (s) | Ct scan
Pregnant patients with suspected PE will undergo a strategy based on clinical probability assessment, D-dimer measurement, lower limb compression ultrasonography and multi-slice computed tomography.
Intervention: Other: Pregnant patients with suspected PE will undergo a strategy based on clinical probability assessment, D-dimer, lower limb vein ultrasonography and MSCT. |
| Publications * | Not Provided |
|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|
| Recruitment Information | |
| Recruitment Status ICMJE | Recruiting |
| Estimated Enrollment ICMJE | 300 |
| Estimated Completion Date | April 2014 |
| Estimated Primary Completion Date | January 2014 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) |
| Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
| Gender | Female |
| Ages | 18 Years to 50 Years |
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers | No |
| Contacts ICMJE | Not Provided |
| Location Countries ICMJE | France, Switzerland |
| Administrative Information | |
| NCT Number ICMJE | NCT00771303 |
| Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | 3200B0-120760, Swiss medical Foundation |
| Has Data Monitoring Committee | Yes |
| Responsible Party | Marc Righini, Geneva University Hospital |
| Study Sponsor ICMJE | University Hospital, Geneva |
| Collaborators ICMJE | Swiss National Science Foundation |
| Investigators ICMJE | Not Provided |
| Information Provided By | University Hospital, Geneva |
| Verification Date | October 2012 |
|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |
|