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.
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
- 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.
- 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.
Bulgaria1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Medica Cor Heart Hospital
Rousse, 7000
Dobrin Vassilev, MD, PhD, 00359886846550, dobrinv@gmail.com
Kristiyan Ivanov, MD, 00359884460101, kristik@abv.bg
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.
- Conditions
- Coronary Bifurcation Stenosis
- 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 group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| BIOSS implantation | Active comparator | Not 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.
Major adverse cardiac events (MACE)
death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR)
Measured: 12 months
Secondary outcomes (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.
- First posted8 Sep 2011 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2011
- Primary completionDec 2013 (estimated)
- Study completionMay 2014 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Coronary Bifurcation StenosisStudies 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 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medica Cor Heart Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Dec 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- BIfurcation Optimal Treatment Strategy With LIMus Eluting Dedicated Bifurcation Versus Convention Stent Randomized Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01430364
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BIOSS LIM / BIOSS LIM
- Conditions
- Coronary Bifurcation Stenosis
- Keywords
- coronary bifurcation stenosis, dedicated bifurcation stent, sirolymus, PTS, BiOSS Lym
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Medica Cor Heart HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Sep 2011
- Primary completion
- Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Study completion
- May 2014 (estimated)
- First posted
- 8 Sep 2011 (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.
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.
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| BIOSS implantation | Active comparator | Device: BIOSS LIM implantation, Device: BIOSS Lim, Device: CarloS |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 90 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
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 |
|---|---|---|
| BIOSS LIM implantationBIOSS LIM is a dedicated bifurcation stent system with sirolymus elution. | Device | BIOSS implantation |
| BIOSS Lim | Device | BIOSS implantation |
| CarloS | Device | BIOSS implantation |
Primary outcome
Major adverse cardiac events (MACE)
Time frame: 12 months
death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR)
1 secondary outcome
Target lesion revascularization (TLR)
Time frame: 12 months
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Dec 2013.
Related trials for Coronary Bifurcation Stenosis
RecruitingObservational study
Crossover vs Accurate Ostial PCI for Medina 0.0.1 and 0.1.0 Left Main Bifurcation Lesions
Coronary Bifurcation Lesion, Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)
RecruitingObservational study
Restrospective Analysis of MACE in Patients Treated With Drug-elluting Balloons.
Coronary Arterial Disease (CAD), Restenosis, Coronary
Not yet recruiting
COMPETE-LM Trial: Drug-Coated Balloon-Enhanced Provisional Stenting in Complex Left Main Disease.
Complex Left Main Bifurcation Stenosis, Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis
RecruitingObservational study
µQFR for Branch Stenosis After Single Stent in Bifurcation Lesions
Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Artery Disease (Left Main)
Active, not recruiting
The Nordic-Baltic Bifurcation Study IV
Coronary Artery Disease
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.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
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.