Angina PectorisNCT01480726
Long-term Results Following Endoscopic Vein Harvesting in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
An observational study of Angina Pectoris, run by Aalborg University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
Trial summary
Vena saphena magna is still frequently used as graft material in coronary artery bypass grating(CABG, and vein grafts can harvest with either the conventional open technique (Ovh = open vein harvesting), or with less invasive endoscopic techniques (EVH = Endoscopic vein harvesting). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 43 to 90 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Angina Pectoris
- What is being tested?
- Surgery
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 132 participants
- Where
- 1 siteDenmark
- Study dates
- Nov 2011to Jan 2015
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 43 to 90 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: A total of 132 patients who underwent CABG 4-7 years ago. All patients participated in a randomized study focusing on wound complications from the leg following either open or endoscopic vein harvest.
Who may be able to join
- Patients who participated in the previous randomized study
- Informed consent from the patient
Who cannot join
- Survival until date of reexamination
- No informed consent
- CT scan of the heart will not be performed in patients with if: atrial fibrillation,p-creatinin >120 micromol/l, allergy to contrast, pregnancy, lactating.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Endoscopic Versus Open Vein Harvest in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Clinical and CT-angiographic Long-term Result From a Randomized Study.
Vena saphena magna is still frequently used as graft material in coronary artery bypass grating(CABG, and vein grafts can harvest with either the conventional open technique (Ovh = open vein harvesting), or with less invasive endoscopic techniques (EVH = Endoscopic vein harvesting). The endoscopic techniques have been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative wound complications while patients are more satisfied with the cosmetic result of the operation on the leg.
Non-randomized studies have raised doubts about patency rates of the vein grafts following EVH compared to OVH, while other studies failed to detect any problems in relation to this. There are only very few data on long-term patency rates from randomized studies.
Read more
The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcome and patency rates of the vein grafts following either EVH and OVH in 132 patients who underwent CABG for 4-7 years ago as part of a randomized study investigation wound complications. A cost-effectiveness analysis will also be performed.
The hypothesis is: Patency rates following EVH are worse compared to OVH in CABG 4-7 years postoperatively.
Read the detailed description
Background
Vena saphena magna is frequently used as graft material in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG. Vein grafts can be harvested with conventional open technique (OVH = open vein harvesting), or with various endoscopic less invasive techniques (EVH = Endoscopic vein harvesting). The endoscopic techniques have been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative wound complications and patients are more satisfied with the cosmetic surgery results.
Non-randomized trials, however, cast doubt on the patency rates of the vein grafts following EVH compared to OVH, while other studies including one randomized trial failed to detect any problems regarding this. There are no data regarding long-term patency rate following EVH.
It is therefore valuable to conduct a secondary follow-up among CABG patients who 4-7 years ago were included in a randomized trial focusing on wound complications from the leg. Although the study was not designed to evaluate the clinical results and patency rates of vein graft, such a study may still contribute with important knowledge because the results will come from a randomized patient cohorts, in contrast to results from most other studies.
Purpose
To investigate long-term patency rates (4-7 years) patency rates and clinical outcomes following EVH and OVH in first-time CABG.
We also want to perform a health economic analysis (cost-effectiveness analysis) to assess which of the two harvesting methods.
Hypotheses:
- Patency rates following EVH are worse compared to OVH in CABG 4-7 years postoperatively.
- EVH is associated with an increased incidence of recurrence of angina and the need for re-revascularization compared with OVH.
- Although EVH immediately leads to higher direct costs compared with OVH, there is a health economic benefit of this method in the long run.
Methods:
This experiment consists of a follow-up among 129 of 132 former patients who underwent first-time CABG between April 2004 - June 2007 at Aalborg Hospital, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, comparing EVH and OVH. Register data will be collected and patient records will be reviewed. Surviving patients will be invited for a clinical evaluation. CT-angio in order to compare long-term patency rates of the vein grafts will be performed. Furthermore the incidence of recurrent angina, acute coronary syndrome, need for re-revascularization and cardiovascular death since the operation wil be evaluated.
All direct and indirect costs of the two methods of surgery and throughout the postoperative course until this study will be valued in order to perform a health economic analysis (cost-effectiveness analysis).
Subjects The age of the previous trial subjects was 65 years (range 43-90 years, at the time they were included in the previous study, and survivors will be 4-7 years old today.
It is expected that most of the surviving former patients will participate in the study.
Inclusion Criteria
All 129 former patients who were included in the initial trial may be included. Deceased patients are only included in the trial regarding registry data and medical records.
Exclusion criteria (in relation to the clinical examination):
Lack of consent. (Register Data for previous patients who did not give their informed consent for a clinical follow-up may be included in the study)
Exclusion criteria (in relation to CT-angio):
Former patients with at least one of the following exclusion criteria will not have a CT-angio performed:
p-creatinine> 120 micromol / l Estimated GFR (eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate) per 1.73 m2 <60 ml / min.
Atrial fibrillation Allergy to contrast media Pregnancy Breastfeeding Lack of consent
- Conditions
- Angina Pectoris
- Being tested
- Surgery
- Medical subject headings
- Angina Pectoris
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
SurgeryProcedure or surgery
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Open vein harvest | Conventional open vein harvest from the lower leg Receives: Procedure: Surgery | |
| Endoscopic vein harvest | Endoscopic vein harvest from the calf Receives: Procedure: Surgery |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patency rates of vein grafts
Measured: 5-7 years postoperatively
Secondary outcomes (1)
recurrence of angina pectoris
Measured: 5-7 years postoperatively
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Nov 2011 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2011
- Primary completionDec 2013
- Study completionJan 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Angina PectorisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Aalborg University HospitalThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Aalborg University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Aalborg University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jan Jesper Andreasen, MD, PhD, Aalborg University Hospital
- Investigators
- Jan J. Andreasen, MD. PhD, Principal investigator, Aalborg University Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01480726
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- N20110023
- Status last verified
- Nov 2011
- First submitted
- 24 Nov 2011
- Last updated
- 14 Apr 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Apr 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Endoscopic Versus Open Vein Harvest in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Clinical and CT-angiographic Long-term Result From a Randomized Study.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01480726
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- N20110023
- Conditions
- Angina Pectoris
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Aalborg University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Aalborg University
- Study start
- Nov 2011
- Primary completion
- Dec 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jan 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Nov 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.
Vena saphena magna is still frequently used as graft material in coronary artery bypass grating(CABG, and vein grafts can harvest with either the conventional open technique (Ovh = open vein harvesting), or with less invasive endoscopic techniques (EVH = Endoscopic vein harvesting). The endoscopic techniques have been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative wound complications while patients are more satisfied with the cosmetic result of the operation on the leg.
Non-randomized studies have raised doubts about patency rates of the vein grafts following EVH compared to OVH, while other studies failed to detect any problems in relation to this. There are only very few data on long-term patency rates from randomized studies.
The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcome and patency rates of the vein grafts following either EVH and OVH in 132 patients who underwent CABG for 4-7 years ago as part of a randomized study investigation wound complications. A cost-effectiveness analysis will also be performed.
The hypothesis is: Patency rates following EVH are worse compared to OVH in CABG 4-7 years postoperatively.
Detailed description
Background
Vena saphena magna is frequently used as graft material in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG. Vein grafts can be harvested with conventional open technique (OVH = open vein harvesting), or with various endoscopic less invasive techniques (EVH = Endoscopic vein harvesting). The endoscopic techniques have been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative wound complications and patients are more satisfied with the cosmetic surgery results.
Non-randomized trials, however, cast doubt on the patency rates of the vein grafts following EVH compared to OVH, while other studies including one randomized trial failed to detect any problems regarding this. There are no data regarding long-term patency rate following EVH.
It is therefore valuable to conduct a secondary follow-up among CABG patients who 4-7 years ago were included in a randomized trial focusing on wound complications from the leg. Although the study was not designed to evaluate the clinical results and patency rates of vein graft, such a study may still contribute with important knowledge because the results will come from a randomized patient cohorts, in contrast to results from most other studies.
Purpose
To investigate long-term patency rates (4-7 years) patency rates and clinical outcomes following EVH and OVH in first-time CABG.
We also want to perform a health economic analysis (cost-effectiveness analysis) to assess which of the two harvesting methods.
Hypotheses:
- Patency rates following EVH are worse compared to OVH in CABG 4-7 years postoperatively.
- EVH is associated with an increased incidence of recurrence of angina and the need for re-revascularization compared with OVH.
- Although EVH immediately leads to higher direct costs compared with OVH, there is a health economic benefit of this method in the long run.
Methods:
This experiment consists of a follow-up among 129 of 132 former patients who underwent first-time CABG between April 2004 - June 2007 at Aalborg Hospital, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, comparing EVH and OVH. Register data will be collected and patient records will be reviewed. Surviving patients will be invited for a clinical evaluation. CT-angio in order to compare long-term patency rates of the vein grafts will be performed. Furthermore the incidence of recurrent angina, acute coronary syndrome, need for re-revascularization and cardiovascular death since the operation wil be evaluated.
All direct and indirect costs of the two methods of surgery and throughout the postoperative course until this study will be valued in order to perform a health economic analysis (cost-effectiveness analysis).
Subjects The age of the previous trial subjects was 65 years (range 43-90 years, at the time they were included in the previous study, and survivors will be 4-7 years old today.
It is expected that most of the surviving former patients will participate in the study.
Inclusion Criteria
All 129 former patients who were included in the initial trial may be included. Deceased patients are only included in the trial regarding registry data and medical records.
Exclusion criteria (in relation to the clinical examination):
Lack of consent. (Register Data for previous patients who did not give their informed consent for a clinical follow-up may be included in the study)
Exclusion criteria (in relation to CT-angio):
Former patients with at least one of the following exclusion criteria will not have a CT-angio performed:
p-creatinine> 120 micromol / l Estimated GFR (eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate) per 1.73 m2 <60 ml / min.
Atrial fibrillation Allergy to contrast media Pregnancy Breastfeeding Lack of consent
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Open vein harvest | – | Procedure: SurgeryConventional open vein harvest from the lower leg |
| Endoscopic vein harvest | – | Procedure: SurgeryEndoscopic vein harvest from the calf |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 43 to 90 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- A total of 132 patients who underwent CABG 4-7 years ago. All patients participated in a randomized study focusing on wound complications from the leg following either open or endoscopic vein harvest.
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients who participated in the previous randomized study
- Informed consent from the patient
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Survival until date of reexamination
- No informed consent
- CT scan of the heart will not be performed in patients with if: atrial fibrillation,p-creatinin >120 micromol/l, allergy to contrast, pregnancy, lactating.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Surgery | Procedure or surgery | Endoscopic vein harvest, Open vein harvest |
Primary outcome
Patency rates of vein grafts
Time frame: 5-7 years postoperatively
1 secondary outcome
recurrence of angina pectoris
Time frame: 5-7 years postoperatively
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 14 Apr 2015.
Related trials for Angina Pectoris
RecruitingPhase 4
Early Single Antiplatelet Therapy After IVUS-Guided PCI in Acute Coronary Syndrome
Acute Coronary Syndromes, STEMI
Active, not recruiting
A Single Center Diagnostic, Cross-sectional Study of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction
Coronary Microvascular Disease, Ischemic Heart Disease
Recruiting
Invasive Evaluation and Phenotype-Guided Treatment of ANOCA in Women
ANOCA - Angina With Non-obstructive Coronary Arteries, Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction (CMD)
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Simultaneous Measurement of EpicArdial and Microvascular ResisTance Via Angiographic FLOW Study
Non-obstructive Coronary Disease, Acute or Chronic Coronary Artery Disease
Recruiting
Intracoronary Cryotherapy Effect on Stabilization of Vulnerable Plaque in Patients With Stable Angina or ACS - A Traditional Feasibility Study
Coronary Arterial Disease (CAD), Plaque
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.
Jan J. Andreasen, MD. PhD principal investigator
Aalborg University Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Angina Pectoris, run by Aalborg University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
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 3 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 14 Apr 2015. 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 Denmark. 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?
Patency rates of vein grafts (time frame: 5-7 years postoperatively). 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 14 Apr 2015.