Instent RestenosisNCT00481780
PTA vs. CB-PTA for Treatment of Femoropopliteal Artery In-Stent Restenosis
A study testing plain balloon angioplasty and cutting balloon angioplasty in people with Instent Restenosis and Cutting Balloon Angioplasty, run by Vienna General Hospital at 1 site in Austria.
Trial summary
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of superficial femoropopliteal artery (SFA) obstructions or occlusions in patients with intermittent claudication as well as critical limb ischemia. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Instent Restenosis, Cutting Balloon Angioplasty
- What is being tested?
- plain balloon angioplasty and cutting balloon angioplasty
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustria
- Study dates
- Nov 2004to Apr 2007
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- patients with in-stent restenosis (ultrasonographic stenosis > 50% of the vessel lumen diameter) after prior PTA and Stent placement of the SFA
- symptomatic peripheral artery disease with intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia
Who cannot join
- history of intolerance of anti-platelet therapy
- adverse reaction to heparin
- bleeding diathesis
- creatinine >2.5 mg/dL
- hemodialysis
- active bacterial infection
Show all 9Show fewer
- allergy to contrast media
- pregnancy
- disability to give informed consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Conventional Balloon Angioplasty vs. Cutting Balloon Angioplasty for Treatment of Femoropopliteal Artery In-Stent Restenosis - A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of superficial femoropopliteal artery (SFA) obstructions or occlusions in patients with intermittent claudication as well as critical limb ischemia. Initial technical success rates of above 95% can be achieved and acceptably low rates of complications are consistently reported in the literature. There is a direct relation between treated vessel length and patency rates. One year patency of lesions longer than 10cm has only been 22% at one-year follow up. This major drawback limits a widespread applicability of PTA, and the indication of PTA particularly in patients with intermittent claudication is discussed controversially.With the introduction of endovascular stents, the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection could be resolved and initial reports of stenting for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA showed promising results with primary and secondary patency rates of 87% to 90% after 18 months. However, subsequent studies demonstrated that exaggerated neo-intimal hyperplasia in the stented segment frequently leads to instent restenosis. This condition will be of greater importance with increasing number of stent implantation procedures during the last years. The concept of cutting balloon seems appealing for this indication, as the balloon-mounted microtomes guarantee smooth lumen gain within the stent, without the risk of vessel wall perforation. Initial reports of the use of the cutting balloon for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA show promising results, indicating that the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection might be resolved. The cutting balloon has four tiny microtomes (< 0.1mm height) on the outside, which cut the fibrous plaque during expansion of the balloon. Consequently the problem of elastic recoil is ideally addressed, additionally less trauma is exercised on the vessel wall during dilatation of the balloon. This might be achieved by a reduction of vessel wall trauma, vessel wall inflammation and consequently reduced neointimal formation. Although the indications for CB-PTA in the SFA includes significant residual stenosis or in-stent restenosis, there are currently no published randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing PTA vs. cutting balloon angioplasty (CB-PTA) for any specific condition. This lack of data led us to initiate a RCT comparing primary PTA vs. CB-PTA for treatment of in-stent restenoses in patients with intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia with TASC category A-B in the femoropopliteal artery .
Read the detailed description
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of superficial femoropopliteal artery (SFA) obstructions or occlusions in patients with intermittent claudication as well as critical limb ischemia. Initial technical success rates of above 95% can be achieved and acceptably low rates of complications are consistently reported in the literature. There is a direct relation between treated vessel length and patency rates. One year patency of lesions longer than 10cm has only been 22% at one-year follow up. This major drawback limits a widespread applicability of PTA, and the indication of PTA particularly in patients with intermittent claudication is discussed controversially.
With the introduction of endovascular stents, the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection could be resolved and initial reports of stenting for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA showed promising results with primary and secondary patency rates of 87% to 90% after 18 months. However, subsequent studies demonstrated that exaggerated neo-intimal hyperplasia in the stented segment frequently leads to instent restenosis. This condition will be of greater importance with increasing number of stent implantation procedures during the last years. Repeated PTA of instent restenosis is performed for revascularisation in these patients, but the gold standard for treatment of instent restenosis is unknown and the rate of recurrence after repeat treatment of instent restenosis remains high. The concept of cutting balloon seems appealing for this indication, as the balloon-mounted microtomes guarantee smooth lumen gain within the stent, without the risk of vessel wall perforation (due to the protecting effect of the stent as the outer limit for the microtomes).
Initial reports of the use of the cutting balloon for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA show promising results, indicating that the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection might be resolved. The cutting balloon has four tiny microtomes (< 0.1mm height) on the outside, which cut the fibrous plaque during expansion of the balloon. Consequently the problem of elastic recoil is ideally addressed, additionally less trauma is exercised on the vessel wall during dilatation of the balloon. This might be achieved by a reduction of vessel wall trauma, vessel wall inflammation and consequently reduced neointimal formation. The cutting balloon can be used for pre-dilatation with diameters slightly less than the target vessel diameter, but still cuts the fibrous plaque, the desired target vessel diameter is then achieved by final touch up dilatation with a standard angioplasty balloon. In the coronary arteries the cutting balloon has been used in randomized studies comparing CB-PTCA to PTCA, as well as in trials for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. All of these trials demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the cutting balloon, only larger randomized trials failed to proof superiority to conventional PTCA. Data in the peripheral arteries are at least scarce. Although the indications for CB-PTA in the SFA includes significant residual stenosis or in-stent restenosis, there are currently no published randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing PTA vs. cutting balloon angioplasty (CB-PTA) for any specific condition. This lack of data led us to initiate a RCT comparing primary PTA vs. CB-PTA for treatment of in-stent restenoses in patients with intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia with TASC category A-B in the femoropopliteal artery . The primary endpoint is the occurrence of restenosis as an ultrasonographic reduction of the vessel lumen diameter >50% within 6 months after endovascular treatment. In addition, the course of postintervention inflammation as indicated by serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA) and fibrinogen will be assessed.
STUDY DESIGN, INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA. Patients with in-stent restenosis (ultrasonographic stenosis > 50% of the vessel lumen diameter) after prior PTA and Stent placement of the SFA will be enrolled to this single-center prospective RCT. The protocol has to be approved by the institutional ethics committee and all patients have to provide written informed consent before enrollment. Entry criteria include symptomatic peripheral artery disease with intermittent claudication (Fontaine stage IIa or b), or critical limb ischemia related to a recurrent stenosis in a previously stented segment of up to 20 cm length. Exclusion criteria history of intolerance of anti-platelet therapy, or adverse reaction to heparin, bleeding diathesis, creatinine >2.5 mg/dL, hemodialysis, active bacterial infection, and allergy to contrast media, pregnancy and disability to give informed consent.
FOLLOW-UP. ABI testing, treadmill exercise, and Duplex-sonography of the treated vessels will be performed in all patients at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. A peak systolic velocity of ≥ 2.4 was considered indicative of a >50% narrowing and was defined as indicative of a restenosis10. Reintervention or surgical bypass at the treated segment are also defined as a restenosis and loss of primary patency. An improvement of at least one Fontaine category above baseline is used to define clinical success in association with maintenance of at least a 0.15 increase in exercise ABI from the preprocedure level.
COMPLICATIONS are classified as either major or minor (as described in Appendix A). Major complications are e.g. bleedings at the puncture side with hematoma and a decrease of serum hemoglobin more than 2 g/dl, loss of stent in the artery , vessel rupture, amputation, macroembolisation with need for further revascularisation and life threatening bleeding complications.
STUDY ENDPOINTS. The primary study endpoint is the occurrence of a >50% restenosis at the treated segment at 6 months post-intervention as determined by duplex ultrasound (in-segment restenosis). Secondary objectives are primary technical success rates (residual stenosis <30% without need for secondary stent implantation, primary assisted and secondary patency, clinical patency, target vessel and target lesion revascularization, and cardiovascular adverse events at 1, 3, and 6 months after the procedure. Furthermore, the course of inflammatory parameters will be assessed.
- Conditions
- Instent Restenosis, Cutting Balloon Angioplasty
- Being tested
- plain balloon angioplasty, cutting balloon angioplasty
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
plain balloon angioplastyDevice
cutting balloon angioplastyDevice
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The primary study endpoint is the occurrence of a >50% restenosis at the treated segment at 6 months postintervention as determined by duplex ultrasound (in-segment restenosis)
Measured: within 6 months follow up
Secondary outcomes (1)
primary technical success rates residual stenosis <30% without need for secondary stent implantation, primary assisted and secondary patency, clinical patency, target vessel and target lesion revascularization, cardiovascular adverse events
Measured: within 6 months follow up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Jun 2007 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2004
- Study completionApr 2007
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Instent RestenosisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Vienna General Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Minar Erich, Prof.Dr., Principal investigator, General Hospital of Vienna
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00481780
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2004
- Status last verified
- May 2007
- First submitted
- 1 Jun 2007
- Last updated
- 11 Sep 2007
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Sep 2007. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Conventional Balloon Angioplasty vs. Cutting Balloon Angioplasty for Treatment of Femoropopliteal Artery In-Stent Restenosis - A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00481780
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2004
- Conditions
- Instent Restenosis, Cutting Balloon Angioplasty
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Vienna General HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2004
- Study completion
- Apr 2007
- First posted
- 4 Jun 2007 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of superficial femoropopliteal artery (SFA) obstructions or occlusions in patients with intermittent claudication as well as critical limb ischemia. Initial technical success rates of above 95% can be achieved and acceptably low rates of complications are consistently reported in the literature. There is a direct relation between treated vessel length and patency rates. One year patency of lesions longer than 10cm has only been 22% at one-year follow up. This major drawback limits a widespread applicability of PTA, and the indication of PTA particularly in patients with intermittent claudication is discussed controversially.With the introduction of endovascular stents, the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection could be resolved and initial reports of stenting for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA showed promising results with primary and secondary patency rates of 87% to 90% after 18 months. However, subsequent studies demonstrated that exaggerated neo-intimal hyperplasia in the stented segment frequently leads to instent restenosis. This condition will be of greater importance with increasing number of stent implantation procedures during the last years. The concept of cutting balloon seems appealing for this indication, as the balloon-mounted microtomes guarantee smooth lumen gain within the stent, without the risk of vessel wall perforation. Initial reports of the use of the cutting balloon for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA show promising results, indicating that the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection might be resolved. The cutting balloon has four tiny microtomes (< 0.1mm height) on the outside, which cut the fibrous plaque during expansion of the balloon. Consequently the problem of elastic recoil is ideally addressed, additionally less trauma is exercised on the vessel wall during dilatation of the balloon. This might be achieved by a reduction of vessel wall trauma, vessel wall inflammation and consequently reduced neointimal formation. Although the indications for CB-PTA in the SFA includes significant residual stenosis or in-stent restenosis, there are currently no published randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing PTA vs. cutting balloon angioplasty (CB-PTA) for any specific condition. This lack of data led us to initiate a RCT comparing primary PTA vs. CB-PTA for treatment of in-stent restenoses in patients with intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia with TASC category A-B in the femoropopliteal artery .
Detailed description
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of superficial femoropopliteal artery (SFA) obstructions or occlusions in patients with intermittent claudication as well as critical limb ischemia. Initial technical success rates of above 95% can be achieved and acceptably low rates of complications are consistently reported in the literature. There is a direct relation between treated vessel length and patency rates. One year patency of lesions longer than 10cm has only been 22% at one-year follow up. This major drawback limits a widespread applicability of PTA, and the indication of PTA particularly in patients with intermittent claudication is discussed controversially.
With the introduction of endovascular stents, the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection could be resolved and initial reports of stenting for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA showed promising results with primary and secondary patency rates of 87% to 90% after 18 months. However, subsequent studies demonstrated that exaggerated neo-intimal hyperplasia in the stented segment frequently leads to instent restenosis. This condition will be of greater importance with increasing number of stent implantation procedures during the last years. Repeated PTA of instent restenosis is performed for revascularisation in these patients, but the gold standard for treatment of instent restenosis is unknown and the rate of recurrence after repeat treatment of instent restenosis remains high. The concept of cutting balloon seems appealing for this indication, as the balloon-mounted microtomes guarantee smooth lumen gain within the stent, without the risk of vessel wall perforation (due to the protecting effect of the stent as the outer limit for the microtomes).
Initial reports of the use of the cutting balloon for the treatment of occlusive atherosclerotic disease of the SFA show promising results, indicating that the problems of elastic recoil and residual stenoses due to arterial dissection might be resolved. The cutting balloon has four tiny microtomes (< 0.1mm height) on the outside, which cut the fibrous plaque during expansion of the balloon. Consequently the problem of elastic recoil is ideally addressed, additionally less trauma is exercised on the vessel wall during dilatation of the balloon. This might be achieved by a reduction of vessel wall trauma, vessel wall inflammation and consequently reduced neointimal formation. The cutting balloon can be used for pre-dilatation with diameters slightly less than the target vessel diameter, but still cuts the fibrous plaque, the desired target vessel diameter is then achieved by final touch up dilatation with a standard angioplasty balloon. In the coronary arteries the cutting balloon has been used in randomized studies comparing CB-PTCA to PTCA, as well as in trials for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. All of these trials demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the cutting balloon, only larger randomized trials failed to proof superiority to conventional PTCA. Data in the peripheral arteries are at least scarce. Although the indications for CB-PTA in the SFA includes significant residual stenosis or in-stent restenosis, there are currently no published randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing PTA vs. cutting balloon angioplasty (CB-PTA) for any specific condition. This lack of data led us to initiate a RCT comparing primary PTA vs. CB-PTA for treatment of in-stent restenoses in patients with intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia with TASC category A-B in the femoropopliteal artery . The primary endpoint is the occurrence of restenosis as an ultrasonographic reduction of the vessel lumen diameter >50% within 6 months after endovascular treatment. In addition, the course of postintervention inflammation as indicated by serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA) and fibrinogen will be assessed.
STUDY DESIGN, INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA. Patients with in-stent restenosis (ultrasonographic stenosis > 50% of the vessel lumen diameter) after prior PTA and Stent placement of the SFA will be enrolled to this single-center prospective RCT. The protocol has to be approved by the institutional ethics committee and all patients have to provide written informed consent before enrollment. Entry criteria include symptomatic peripheral artery disease with intermittent claudication (Fontaine stage IIa or b), or critical limb ischemia related to a recurrent stenosis in a previously stented segment of up to 20 cm length. Exclusion criteria history of intolerance of anti-platelet therapy, or adverse reaction to heparin, bleeding diathesis, creatinine >2.5 mg/dL, hemodialysis, active bacterial infection, and allergy to contrast media, pregnancy and disability to give informed consent.
FOLLOW-UP. ABI testing, treadmill exercise, and Duplex-sonography of the treated vessels will be performed in all patients at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. A peak systolic velocity of ≥ 2.4 was considered indicative of a >50% narrowing and was defined as indicative of a restenosis10. Reintervention or surgical bypass at the treated segment are also defined as a restenosis and loss of primary patency. An improvement of at least one Fontaine category above baseline is used to define clinical success in association with maintenance of at least a 0.15 increase in exercise ABI from the preprocedure level.
COMPLICATIONS are classified as either major or minor (as described in Appendix A). Major complications are e.g. bleedings at the puncture side with hematoma and a decrease of serum hemoglobin more than 2 g/dl, loss of stent in the artery , vessel rupture, amputation, macroembolisation with need for further revascularisation and life threatening bleeding complications.
STUDY ENDPOINTS. The primary study endpoint is the occurrence of a >50% restenosis at the treated segment at 6 months post-intervention as determined by duplex ultrasound (in-segment restenosis). Secondary objectives are primary technical success rates (residual stenosis <30% without need for secondary stent implantation, primary assisted and secondary patency, clinical patency, target vessel and target lesion revascularization, and cardiovascular adverse events at 1, 3, and 6 months after the procedure. Furthermore, the course of inflammatory parameters will be assessed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- patients with in-stent restenosis (ultrasonographic stenosis > 50% of the vessel lumen diameter) after prior PTA and Stent placement of the SFA
- symptomatic peripheral artery disease with intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- history of intolerance of anti-platelet therapy
- adverse reaction to heparin
- bleeding diathesis
- creatinine >2.5 mg/dL
- hemodialysis
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| plain balloon angioplasty | Device | – |
| cutting balloon angioplasty | Device | – |
Primary outcome
The primary study endpoint is the occurrence of a >50% restenosis at the treated segment at 6 months postintervention as determined by duplex ultrasound (in-segment restenosis)
Time frame: within 6 months follow up
1 secondary outcome
primary technical success rates residual stenosis <30% without need for secondary stent implantation, primary assisted and secondary patency, clinical patency, target vessel and target lesion revascularization, cardiovascular adverse events
Time frame: within 6 months follow up
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Sep 2007.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Minar Erich, Prof.Dr. principal investigator
General Hospital of Vienna
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing plain balloon angioplasty and cutting balloon angioplasty in people with Instent Restenosis and Cutting Balloon Angioplasty, run by Vienna General Hospital at 1 site in Austria.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Sep 2007. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Austria. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The primary study endpoint is the occurrence of a >50% restenosis at the treated segment at 6 months postintervention as determined by duplex ultrasound (in-segment restenosis) (time frame: within 6 months follow up). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Sep 2007.