Morbimortality of Contegra Duct Replacements Versus Homografts in Pulmonary Position
NCT ID: NCT03048071
Last Updated: 2017-11-22
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.
COMPLETED
84 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2017-02-14
2017-06-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The increasing demand for homografts currently induces a shortage and unmet demands. This lack of availability, and the durability of homografts in young patients, has encouraged the search for alternative conducts.For example, in 1999, Medtronic® put a bovine jugular vein xenograft (VJB) on the market, the Contegra® conduct, as alternative for the homograft for RVOT reconstruction. This duct naturally has a central valve with three valvules, and there is on both sides of the valve a generous duct length allowing unique adaptation options. This conduit, however, is not perfect.
Whether using Contegra® ducts or homografts, replacement is inevitable. The aim of this study is to compare operative morbidity and mortality when replacing Contegra® or homograft.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The increasing demand for homografts currently induces a shortage and unmet demands. This lack of availability, and the durability of homografts in young patients, has encouraged the search for alternative conducts. For example, in 1999, Medtronic® put a bovine jugular vein xenograft (VJB) on the market, the Contegra® conduct, as alternative for the homograft for RVOT reconstruction. This duct naturally has a central valve with three valvules, and there is on both sides of the valve a generous duct length allowing unique adaptation options. It is stored in a glutaraldehyde solution in concentrations sufficient enough to make it non-antigenic, yet low enough to maintain the flexibility of the tissue.This conduit has many advantages: 1) Immediate availability 2) Available size range from 12 to 22mm internal diameter 3) Possibility of adaptation to morphology and easily suturable 4) Good hemodynamics 5) No need for proximal or distal extension 6) lower cost than homograft and 7) non-antigenicity.
This conduit, however, is not perfect. On the one hand, it has no growth potential and therefore risks becoming too small and no longer suitable as the child develops. This problem is particularly encountered in small patients, in whom ducts less than 16mm in diameter have been implanted, and is not specific to the duct in VJB. On the other hand, there is a source of failure specific to the Contegra® prosthesis. These are the stenoses at the level of the distal anastomosis between the duct and the pulmonary artery. Several mechanisms explain this distal stenosis: 1) hypoplasia or distal stenosis of the branches of the pulmonary artery, 2) difference in size between the duct and the pulmonary artery being too important, 3) the surgical technique , 4) immunological and inflammatory reactions, 5) neointimal proliferation, 6) thrombi formation. The most likely cause is multifactorial, with a combination of factors cited above.
Prior et al proposed an operative protocol for reducing the distal stenosis rate. With this protocol distal stenosis has become a rare complication but there are still situations in which the VJB conduit needs to be replaced.
Therefore, whether using Contegra® ducts or homografts, replacement is inevitable. The aim of this study is to compare operative morbidity and mortality when replacing Contegra® or homograft.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_CONTROL
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Homograft in pulmonary position replacement
All patients having had the replacement of an homograft in pulmonary position between January 1999 and October 2016, within the Queen Fabiola Children Hospital of Brussels, Belgium.
Data collection within medical files
Data collection within medical files
Contegra conduct replacement
All patients having had the replacement of a Contegra conduct between January 1999 and October 2016, within the Queen Fabiola Children Hospital of Brussels, Belgium.
Data collection within medical files
Data collection within medical files
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Data collection within medical files
Data collection within medical files
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Pierre Wauthy
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Pierre Wauthy
Head of clinic
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Nicolas Poinot
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
CHU Brugmann
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
CHU Brugmann
Brussels, , Belgium
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Ross DN. Replacement of aortic and mitral valves with a pulmonary autograft. Lancet. 1967 Nov 4;2(7523):956-8. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(67)90794-5. No abstract available.
Ross DN, Somerville J. Correction of pulmonary atresia with a homograft aortic valve. Lancet. 1966 Dec 31;2(7479):1446-7. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(66)90600-3. No abstract available.
Boethig D, Goerler H, Westhoff-Bleck M, Ono M, Daiber A, Haverich A, Breymann T. Evaluation of 188 consecutive homografts implanted in pulmonary position after 20 years. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007 Jul;32(1):133-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2007.02.025. Epub 2007 Apr 18.
Brown JW, Ruzmetov M, Rodefeld MD, Vijay P, Darragh RK. Valved bovine jugular vein conduits for right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction in children: an attractive alternative to pulmonary homograft. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006 Sep;82(3):909-16. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.03.008.
Hickey EJ, McCrindle BW, Blackstone EH, Yeh T Jr, Pigula F, Clarke D, Tchervenkov CI, Hawkins J; CHSS Pulmonary Conduit Working Group. Jugular venous valved conduit (Contegra) matches allograft performance in infant truncus arteriosus repair. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008 May;33(5):890-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2007.12.052. Epub 2008 Mar 4.
Corno AF, Hurni M, Griffin H, Galal OM, Payot M, Sekarski N, Tozzi P, von Segesser LK. Bovine jugular vein as right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery valved conduit. J Heart Valve Dis. 2002 Mar;11(2):242-7; discussion 248.
Fiore AC, Brown JW, Turrentine MW, Ruzmetov M, Huynh D, Hanley S, Rodefeld MD. A bovine jugular vein conduit: a ten-year bi-institutional experience. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011 Jul;92(1):183-90; discussion 190-2. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.02.073. Epub 2011 May 6.
Urso S, Rega F, Meuris B, Gewillig M, Eyskens B, Daenen W, Heying R, Meyns B. The Contegra conduit in the right ventricular outflow tract is an independent risk factor for graft replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011 Sep;40(3):603-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.081. Epub 2011 Feb 19.
Yong MS, Yim D, d'Udekem Y, Brizard CP, Robertson T, Galati JC, Konstantinov IE. Medium-term outcomes of bovine jugular vein graft and homograft conduits in children. ANZ J Surg. 2015 May;85(5):381-5. doi: 10.1111/ans.13018. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
Prior N, Alphonso N, Arnold P, Peart I, Thorburn K, Venugopal P, Corno AF. Bovine jugular vein valved conduit: up to 10 years follow-up. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011 Apr;141(4):983-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.08.037. Epub 2010 Sep 29.
Shebani SO, McGuirk S, Baghai M, Stickley J, De Giovanni JV, Bu'lock FA, Barron DJ, Brawn WJ. Right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction using Contegra valved conduit: natural history and conduit performance under pressure. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006 Mar;29(3):397-405. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2005.11.040. Epub 2006 Jan 24.
Holmes AA, Co S, Human DG, Leblanc JG, Campbell AI. The Contegra conduit: Late outcomes in right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction. Ann Pediatr Cardiol. 2012 Jan;5(1):27-33. doi: 10.4103/0974-2069.93706.
Corno AF, Mickaily-Huber ES. Comparative computational fluid dynamic study of two distal Contegra conduit anastomoses. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2008 Feb;7(1):1-5. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2007.162412. Epub 2007 Sep 28.
Poinot N, Fils JF, Demanet H, Dessy H, Biarent D, Wauthy P. Pulmonary valve replacement after right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction with homograft vs Contegra(R): a case control comparison of mortality and morbidity. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018 Jan 17;13(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13019-018-0698-5.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CHUB-Conegra vs homografts
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id