Study Results
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.
TERMINATED
PHASE4
261 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-01-31
2017-02-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Stability in Non-Culprit Vessels at ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction(STEMI)
NCT01065103
Clinical Usefulness of Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement for Significant Stenosis in Proximal Coronary Artery
NCT02475291
Safety of Negative FrActional Flow Reserve in Patients With ChallEnging Lesions
NCT02590926
RFR and FFR for the the Prediction of Post-PCI Results
NCT04417634
Comparison of Devices Evaluating Fractional Flow Reserve in Coronary Arteries
NCT03052803
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The concept of using fractional flow reserve (FFR) to predict the functional significance of coronary lesions was described \> 20 years ago. In 1996, Pijls et al showed that measurements of FFR in the cardiac catheterization laboratory can accurately predict provoked ischemia upon non-invasive functional testing. The DEFER study (2007) showed that coronary lesions with non-ischemic FFR values can be treated with medical therapy with good clinical outcome at 5-year follow up. The FAME-1 study (2009) evaluated the strategy of PCI guided by angiography versus PCI guided by FFR measurements in multi-vessel disease. The primary end-point was the 1-year composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and any repeat revascularization. Fewer stents were used per patient for the FFR-guided group (2.7 versus 1.9 stents per patient), less contrast agent used (302 versus 272 ml), and lower in-lab equipment cost ($6,007 US versus $5,332 US), all significant with P\<0.001. A total of 1,005 patients were randomized. At 1-year follow up, the composite end-point of death, MI and target vessel revascularization was 18.2% for the angiography-guided group versus 13.3% for the FFR-guided group (p \< 0.02). At 2-year follow up, the incidence of death and MI was lower for the FFR-guided group (12.7% versus 8.4%, p\<0.03), and the incidence of MI in the FFR-guided and PCI deferred population was very low at 0.2%.
Since the publication of the FAME-1 study, the use of pressure wires to measure FFR increased from \~400 cases per year to \~1,000 cases per year in BC. However, in comparison with an annual non-emergent PCI volume of \>6,000 cases per year, the use of FFR appears highly selective (1,058 out of 6,169, 17%, based on year 2011 statistics). In a series of 442 consecutive FFR cases done at the Vancouver General and St. Paul's Hospitals (year 2011 to 2012), the use of FFR identified non-ischemic lesions in 52%, and this resulted in a change in management decision in 68%. In addition, provincial data showed significant variation in the use of FFR among the 5 PCI capable hospitals in BC (from \<5% to \~30%). Based on the recent European Society of Cardiology guidelines, the use of FFR to guide revascularization has a class 1a indication in multi-vessel disease, while the US guidelines (American College of Cardiology, ACC) has a class 2a recommendation for the use of FFR in evaluating coronary lesions of intermediate severity. It is possible that a highly selective approach to the use of FFR may lead to underuse, which in turn may lead to overuse of PCI, with increased cost, and adverse clinical outcome.
We hypothesize that the routine use of FFR may improve clinical outcome, decrease the number of PCI, and decrease direct cost in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. We propose a randomized study to compare 2 approaches of using FFR to guide PCI: (1) routine use - the experimental arm; and (2) selective use - the current standard.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Routine use of FFR
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) used in most cases to guide PCI
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) performed per guidelines to guide PCI
Selective use of FFR
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) used at investigator discretion (Current practice)
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) performed per guidelines to guide PCI
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) performed per guidelines to guide PCI
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. At least one obstructive coronary lesion is present with vessel reference diameter ≥2.5 mm and diameter stenosis ≥50% by visual estimate. Lesions must be technically suitable for the FFR procedure and angioplasty with stent placement.
3. Physician will classify all target lesions and need for FFR before randomization, and there is a plan to perform a non-emergent PCI.
4. Subject is ≥18 years old, with signed informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Planned treatment with CABG.
3. Planned treatment with medical therapy.
4. Left main disease \> 50% diameter stenosis based on visual estimate.
5. Safety issues:
1. Unstable hemodynamics or serious arrhythmias during procedure;
2. Ongoing ischemic chest pain;
3. High grade AV block (unless pacemaker);
4. Allergic to adenosine.
6. When FFR is clearly not needed:
1. Target vessel with slow flow (\< TIMI-3);
2. Single vessel disease with ≥90% stenosis;
3. Single vessel disease with ≥80% stenosis and documented ischemia on functional imaging test;
4. In acute coronary syndrome, ≥70 stenosis identified as culprit.
7. When FFR is clearly needed for all target lesions: as declared by the operator.
8. Technical difficulty:
1. Severe vessel tortuosity;
2. Severe coronary calcification;
3. Anticipate difficult wiring;
4. Aorto-ostial lesion (ok for IV adenosine is used as the hyperemic agent).
9. Interpretation difficulty:
1. Target vessel acting as a major collateral donor;
2. When RA pressure very high;
3. STEMI within past 5 days.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Provincial Health Services Authority
OTHER
Cardiology Research UBC
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Anthony Fung, MD
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Anthony Fung, MBBS, FRCPC
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of British Columbia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Kelowna General Hospital
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
St. Paul's Hospital
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Vancouver General Hospital
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Royal Jubilee Hospital
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
H13-02709
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.