AzTrials
AzTrials

Coronary Bifurcation StenosisPhase 4BIOSS LIMNCT01430364

BIfurcation Optimal Treatment Strategy With LYMus Eluting Dedicated Bifurcation Versus Convention Stent Randomized Study

A Phase 4 study testing BIOSS LIM implantation, BIOSS Lim and CarloS in people with Coronary Bifurcation Stenosis, run by Medica Cor Heart Hospital at 1 site in Bulgaria.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Study aims: to compare two intervention strategies for bifurcation treatment - provisional T-stenting (PTS) with drug-eluting stent (sirolimus eluting), with kissing balloon inflation at the end of procedure - the best treatment strategy at the moment, with stenting of bifurcation lesions with dedicated bifurcation… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 20 to 90 years
Conditions the study is for
Coronary Bifurcation Stenosis
What is being tested?
BIOSS LIM implantation, BIOSS Lim and CarloS
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
60 participants
Where
1 siteBulgaria
Study dates
Sep 2011to May 2014
Phase
Phase 4
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 20 to 90 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult
  1. Inclusion Criteria
  • Subject at least 18 years of age.
  • Subject able to verbally confirm understandings of risks, benefits of receiving PCI for true bifurcation lesions, and he/she or his/her legally authorized representative provides written informed consent prior to any study related procedure.
  • Target main branch lesion(s) located in a native coronary artery with diameter of ≥ 2.5 mm and ≤ 4.5 mm. Target side branch lesion(s) located in a native coronary artery with diameter of ≥ 2.0 mm.
  • Target lesion(s) amenable for PCI with balloon angioplasty of the side branch.
  1. Exclusion Criteria
  • STEMI
  • Non-cardiac co-morbid conditions are present with life expectancy <1 year or that may result in protocol non-compliance (per site investigator's medical judgment).
  • Subjects who refuse to give informed consent.
  • Subjects with LVEF<30%
  • Subjects with moderate or severe degree valvular heart disease or primary cardiomyopathy
  • Contraindications for 12 months DAP

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Dobrin Vassilev, MD, PhD contact

00359886846550

dobrinv@gmail.com

Kristiyan Ivanov, MD contact

00359884460101

kristik@abv.bg

Bulgaria1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Medica Cor Heart Hospital

    Rousse, 7000

    Dobrin Vassilev, MD, PhD, 00359886846550, dobrinv@gmail.com

    Kristiyan Ivanov, MD, 00359884460101, kristik@abv.bg

    Recruiting

Other trials in Bulgaria

About this study

Official title: BIfurcation Optimal Treatment Strategy With LIMus Eluting Dedicated Bifurcation Versus Convention Stent Randomized Study

Study aims: to compare two intervention strategies for bifurcation treatment - provisional T-stenting (PTS) with drug-eluting stent (sirolimus eluting), with kissing balloon inflation at the end of procedure - the best treatment strategy at the moment, with stenting of bifurcation lesions with dedicated bifurcation drug-eluting stent BiOSS Lym.

Read the detailed description

The coronary bifurcation lesions pose a therapeutic problem with high rates of periprocedural complications, higher rates of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. These are lesions where stenting is not superior in comparison to balloon angioplasty in regard to side branch. It was demonstrated many times, in literature and in daily practice, that angiographically high grade ostial side branch stenosis is not flow limiting and do not cause ischemia, therefore do not require treatment. From the other side, our own data with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) demonstrated that occurrence of angiographic stenosis more than 70% in diameter is associated with periprocedural myonecrosis in the region of side branch. This fact puts a very important question about the mechanisms of this myonecrosis. If the jailed side branch has no significant flow limiting stenosis, but there is some degree of residual ischemia, which after some period of persistence could lead to myonecrosis, will mean that more aggressive treatment of ostial stenosis is needed. It is interesting that the strategy of treatment is very important, because techniques with second stent implantation (with primary purpose to limit side branch (SB) ischemia) are associated with higher grade of troponin increase. Of course this is association and not causality, despite that in randomized study it was confirmed also.

Even after the introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions, important basic problems remain. It was proposed that these problems are related to non-dedicated design of conventional stent intended for treatment of straight vessel segments. Thus any deformation of the stents during bifurcation implantation depends on the stent cell shape, size and material properties (11). To resolve these problems it was suggested to make dedicated bifurcation stents (1, 2, 11). However, the special "dedication" per se is not defined and unclear as terminology - the stent could be dedicated for patient fitting the anatomical characteristics of particular bifurcation point (vessel diameters, angulations), giving better hemodynamic conditions; or stent could be dedicated for operator to make the procedure quicker and safer, eliminating or limiting SB compromise. Probably the best option is the combination of both characteristics.

The currently available stents on the market generally target the second requirement. Three groups of stents are available at this moment - proximal main vessel (MV) stent (Axxess, Devax, USA), MV stenting across the SB with different designs making possible permanent access to SB and finally purely SB dedicated stents (Tryton, Sideguard, Biguard). Neither of these stents did not match proximal - distal MV size difference nor take into account between vessel angulations. The device success rate varies considerably (75% - 100%); however the study with 100% success was performed in only 11 patients. For all other devices the success rate is around 85%. The proximal MV stent and SB only stents require additional stent implantation for non-intended vessel. Stents designed to have permanent access to SB are implanted over 2 wires, which in reality makes the procedure more difficult and demanding rather to simplify it (which was the primary intention of those stents). The reasons are wires crisscrossing, wire-bias in proper orientation of device to SB (rotational and axial positioning). This, along with requirement of larger guide catheter size explains why the dedicated stents do not gain popularity in the interventional cardiology community.

The BiOSS Lim stent (Balton, Warsaw, Poland) is completely different from the above systems. The stent is designed to be user friendly: it tracked over one wire and its profile is quite low (1.08mm), which make it possible to implant it even through 5 Fr guiding catheter. The stent fits the bifurcation anatomy - it matches the proximal - distal diameters of the main vessel (MV); as it permits deformation in its mid-part it can adapt exactly on main vessel - main branch angle angle, making wide opening to SB. If the SB must be dilated the stent recrossing is very easy, because wider proximal and narrow distal parts give step-down at carina tip region, in this way self direct wire to SB. The proximal and distal parts of the stent work independently and SB could be safely dilated without need from kissing balloon inflation as no deformation of contralateral wall strut. This simplifies and shortens the procedure. And finally, the stent construction prevents carina displacement, as a basic mechanism of side branch compromise.

Study aims: to compare two intervention strategies for bifurcation treatment - provisional T-stenting (PTS) with drug-eluting stent (sirolimus eluting), with kissing balloon inflation at the end of procedure - the best treatment strategy at the moment, with stenting of bifurcation lesions with dedicated bifurcation drug-eluting stent BiOSS Lym.

Being tested
BIOSS LIM implantation, BIOSS Lim, CarloS
Keywords
coronary bifurcation stenosis, dedicated bifurcation stent, sirolymus, PTS, BiOSS Lym

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • BIOSS LIM implantationDevice

    BIOSS LIM is a dedicated bifurcation stent system with sirolymus elution.

  • BIOSS LimDevice

  • CarloSDevice

Study groups in NCT01430364
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
BIOSS implantationActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Device: BIOSS LIM implantation; Device: BIOSS Lim; Device: CarloS

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE)

    death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR)

    Measured: 12 months

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Target lesion revascularization (TLR)

    Clinically driven revascularization rates.

    Measured: 12 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted8 Sep 2011 (estimated)
  2. Study startSep 2011
  3. Primary completionDec 2013 (estimated)
  4. Study completionMay 2014 (estimated)

Resources

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 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
60 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01430364
Sponsor's protocol ID
BIOSS LIM
Acronym
BIOSS LIM
Status last verified
Dec 2013
First submitted
3 Sep 2011
Last updated
25 Dec 2013
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 4 study testing BIOSS LIM implantation, BIOSS Lim and CarloS in people with Coronary Bifurcation Stenosis, run by Medica Cor Heart Hospital at 1 site in Bulgaria.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Dec 2013. 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 Bulgaria. 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.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Dobrin Vassilev, MD, PhD (00359886846550, dobrinv@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (time frame: 12 months). 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 25 Dec 2013.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in