The COOPerative Establishment for Necessary Investigation in Clinical Outcome After Stenting

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

5100 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-03-31

Study Completion Date

2021-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The superiority of a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by one stent over another in terms of clinical outcome is usually documented in large randomized controlled trials (RCT). Although generated from selected study populations these data form the basis for evidence based practice (EBP) in the entire population of patients considered for coronary intervention. An inherent limitation of this approach is that study populations differ significantly from all comers in terms of patient characteristics and prognosis undermining the foundation for extrapolation of trial results to all comers. Furthermore, other trials are based on a "one-fits-all" concept, while the benefits of an "individual-tailored" approach that might be superior, is not investigated.

The Purpose of the current study is to

* Compare clinical outcome between several CE marked drug eluting stents
* Compare clinical outcome between several CE marked bare metal stents
* Compare clinical outcome in all comers with that of the selected study population of RCT's
* Evolve methods to compare clinical outcomes between the generalized "one-fits-all" versus the individualized or "individual-tailored" stent selection approaches

The Method employed is

* All comer PCI registry - single centre
* Randomisation of all eligible patients within the registry to one of several study stent
* Quality assurance in non-randomized population within the registry by periodical alternating the institutional standard stent
* Continuous follow up of all patients included the registry by means of systematic event detection and classification by an independent safety and end point committee
* Assessment of effects on quality of life by heart and health questionnaires

Outcome Measures

Primary endpoints:

* Composite of cardiac death, acute myocardial infraction and target vessel revascularisation
* Stent thrombosis
* A specifically developed Treatment Failure Rate classification

Secondary outcome measures include each of the above, target lesion revascularisation and total death analyzed in a hierarchical fashion at 2, 3, 4 and 5 years.

Tertiary outcome measure is self reported quality of life based on health questionnaires on general health and cardiac symptoms.

Power Calculations An event rate of 20% within 5 years, a relative difference of 25% (an absolute difference of 5%), P\< 5%, Power \> 80% =\> 900 patients in each of two treatment arms.

Prespecified Analysis include

1. The MACE rates between stent types
2. The Stent thrombosis rates between stent types
3. The Treatment failure rates between stent types
4. The randomized population versus non-randomized population
5. The individualized versus the generalized Population
6. QOL between stent types

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

A Trial of Everolimus-eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice: The COMPARE Trial

NCT01016041

Stable Angina Unstable Angina Acute Coronary Syndrome

COMPLETED PHASE3

The 3D Stent Study

NCT06898021

Coronary Artery Disease Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI)

RECRUITING

The Efficacy of Three Different Limus Agent-Eluting Stents to Prevent Restenosis

NCT00332397

Coronary Disease

COMPLETED PHASE4

Efficacy Study of Rapamycin- vs. Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents to Reduce Coronary Restenosis

NCT00598533

Coronary Heart Disease

COMPLETED PHASE4

Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis

NCT01735825

Restenosis

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

All MACE and stent thromboses are adjudicated by an independent end point and safety committee chaired by Jørgen Jeppesen known from the very same task he executed in the SORT OUT II.

Further question may be answered by the four key investigators:

Steen Carstensen, Anders Galløe, Ole Havndrup, Lars Kjøller-Hansen

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Ischemic Heart Disease

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Intervention Type DEVICE

Biomatrix drug eluting stent

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Biomatrix drug eluting stent

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Biomatrix

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* to enter COPERNICOS registry for quality assessment: Each and every patient assigned to percutaneous coronary intervention will be included.
* to enter COPERNICOS randomization: If the patient fulfil the Helsinki declaration and have a Danish personal security identification number they are asked to give written informed consent to participate in the randomized study arms.