Organ TransplantationRIPNODNCT01515072
Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Neurological Death Organ Donors
A study testing RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning) in people with Organ Transplantation, run by Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to determine whether application of lower limb remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) after determination of brain death improves donor stability, organ quality, organ yield, and early post transplant clinical outcomes. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 6 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Organ Transplantation
- What is being tested?
- RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 321 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Jul 2011to Apr 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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 6 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Neurological death donors in whom brain death determination is imminent
- First person consent or next of kin consent for research
- Donors >=6 years of age
- Organ recovery not expected within 6 hours of consent.
- Both sexes and ethnicities.
Who cannot join
- Donation after cardiac death donors (DCD)
- Live organ donors
- No first person consent and next of kin decline research consent
- Donor Age < 6 years
- Lower extremity trauma or recent amputation
- Tissue only donors
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Newark, New Jersey, 07101
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
About this study
The purpose of this study is to determine whether application of lower limb remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) after determination of brain death improves donor stability, organ quality, organ yield, and early post transplant clinical outcomes.
Neurological death donors will be stratified into standard and extended criteria donors (SCD/ECD) and randomized in a 1:1 fashion to RIPC or No intervention. The primary outcome is the number of organs recovered per donor. Secondary outcomes include donor hemodynamic state, donor organ-specific function parameters, pulsatile perfusion parameters, number of organs transplanted per donor, recipient hospital free survival and delayed graft function of kidneys. The sample size is powered to detect a difference of 0.44 organs recovered.
Read the detailed description
Study Design and Participants The RIPNOD trial was conducted from July 2011 to July 2014 as a prospective randomized trial in two OPOs (in New Jersey and in Texas) in the U.S. The funding organization, institutional review boards and the physician committees of the two organ procurement organizations (OPOs) approved the study. Exemptions for consent from potential recipients and for a data and safety monitoring board were granted. Consent for research was obtained from the donor's next of kin by OPO staff unless a 'first-person' consent existed. The study population consisted of neurological death organ donors. Eligible donors were age > 6 years, in whom death declaration was either imminent or completed, and organ recovery was not expected within 6 hours of enrollment. Donors with severe trauma to lower extremity or on sulfonylurea agents were excluded (Trial Protocol in Supplement).
Procedures Randomization (1:1) to No RIPC or RIPC groups in standard and extended criteria donors (SCD and ECD) strata occurred based on a computer-generated random table of numbers. In Texas, field coordinators performed the randomization through a website and administered the intervention. In New Jersey, research staff performed all trial activities and randomized using opaque, sealed envelopes. Organ recovery teams were informed of the study and sometimes knew of the group assignment. The recipient care teams and recipients were not aware of the group assignment.
The intervention consisted of four cycles of inflation of a tourniquet around mid-thigh to 250 mm Hg for 5 minutes followed by 5 minutes of deflation. The initial intervention occurred in the right thigh as early as possible after declaration of death. The second intervention occurred in the left thigh 24 hours after the initial intervention, or immediately before recovery, if this was earlier. Videoconferences between the two sites helped standardize the intervention before the trial commenced. All decisions regarding donor management, organ recovery, machine perfusion of kidneys, transplantation of organs and care after transplantation were independent of the research teams.
Outcomes and Data Collection The primary outcome was the total number of organs recovered per donor. Secondary outcomes were number of organs transplanted per donor, and changes from baseline to terminal (before aortic cross clamp) in vasopressor support, serum lactate, creatinine clearance, left ventricular ejection fraction, serum troponins, partial pressure of arterial oxygen: fraction inspired oxygen (P:F) ratio, dynamic and static lung compliance, and perfusate flow and resistance in machine perfused kidneys, delayed graft function (DGF) in transplanted kidneys and six-month hospital free survival in all recipients. A score quantified vasopressor support.14 All laboratory tests were performed at donor hospitals. Cockcroft-Gault equation was used to calculate creatinine clearance.15 Donor hospital cardiologists estimated the ventricular ejection fraction in transthoracic echocardiograms. OPO policies dictated machine perfusion of kidneys; perfusion, occurred at a central location in each OPO. Delayed graft function was defined as dialysis in the first week after transplant. Six month hospital-free survival was defined as the number of days recipients survived following the initial discharge after the transplant. All donor data were obtained prospectively from OPO records. Data after transplantation were obtained from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). The SRTR data system includes data on all donors, waitlist candidates, and transplant recipients in the United States, submitted by members of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services provides oversight to the activities of the OPTN and SRTR contractors.
Sample Size A sample size of 150 donors in each arm was estimated to provide 80% power to detect a difference of 0.44 of an organ recovered and 0.48 of an organ transplanted per donor. The difference criterion was chosen based on published results achieved with hormonal resuscitation in organ donors. 6 Pooled standard deviations (organs recovered: 1.35; organs transplanted: 1.5) from data of two OPOs were used.
Statistical Analyses Intention to treat principle was used in all analyses. Discrete descriptive data are reported as counts and percent and continuous data as means (sd) or medians (interquartile range). Continuous variables were compared using either t, or equivalent non-parametric tests. Categorical variables were compared using chi square tests. Multivariate modeling with backward elimination - linear ones to model RIPC on recovery and transplantation of all (0-8) and abdominal organs (0-5) per donor, and logistic ones to model recovery/transplantation of > 1 thoracic organ per donor and DGF - was performed. Because only seven fewer thoracic organs were transplanted than recovered the model for organs transplanted was used to analyze both outcomes. Donor characteristics of age, sex, race, cause of death, BMI, comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, alcohol use, and hepatitis C), treatments (insulin, diuretics and steroids) and laboratory parameters (serum creatinine and P:F ratio) and OPO site were predictor variables in organ yield models. Donor age or stratum, cold ischemia, number of human leukocyte antigen mismatches and recipients' characteristics of age, sex, race, BMI, diabetes, hypertension, etiology of renal failure, panel reactive antibody and OPO site were predictor variables in models of DGF. For linear regression models, adjusted R2 was computed and residuals were assessed for normality; the C statistic was used to assess goodness of the fit for logistic regression. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
Post Hoc Analyses Rates of acute rejection of kidney during the first six months were compared between the two groups using chi square tests. Kaplan-Meier estimates and log rank tests were used to compare unadjusted outcomes of graft and patient survival at 6, 12 and 24 months. In heart, lung and liver recipients, retransplantation or death was defined as graft loss. In all other organs graft loss was death-censored. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of RIPC on the adjusted hazard ratio for six-month graft loss after controlling for OPO site, donor age or stratum and sex, cold ischemia time, number of antigen mismatches, organ transplanted, and recipient age, sex, race, BMI, diabetes and hypertension.
- Conditions
- Organ Transplantation
- Being tested
- RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning)
- Keywords
- Remote Ischemic Preconditioning, Brain death organ donors, Delayed graft function, Donor management, Pulsatile perfusion
- Medical subject headings
- Delayed Graft Function
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning)Other
Remote Ischemic Preconditioning (RIPC) by Inflation of Pneumatic Tourniquet. The intervention will consist of tourniquet inflation on the mid-thigh for 5 minutes, followed by a deflation period of 5 minutes for a total of 4 cycles. The intervention will take place at two time points: First, after determination of brain death and consent for organ donation and again upon incision for organ recovery. The second intervention will occur in a manner identical to the first intervention but in the opposite limb.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| No Remote Ischemic Preconditioning | No intervention | The donors assigned to this group will receive standard of care of management of brain death donors in each organ procurement organization. |
| Remote Ischemic Preconditioning | Experimental | The donors assigned to this group would receive two RIPC interventions. The first one would occur immediately after brain death declaration and consent for organ donation. The second one would occur immediately before commencement of organ recovery. At each occasion RIPC would be induced by 4 cycles of mid-thigh inflation of tourniquet for 5 min followed by deflation for 5 minutes. Receives: Other: RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Organs Recovered Per Donor
Number of organs recovered per organ donor
Measured: At time of organ recovery, up to 1 day
Secondary outcomes (11)
Number of Organs Transplanted Per Donor
Number of organs transplanted from each organ donor
Measured: Within 24 hours of organ recovery
Change in Vasopressor Score
Changes in the following: Vasopressor usage, serum Lactate, Creatinine clearance, arterial oxygen pressure:fraction of inspired oxygen (P:F) ratios, Lung Compliance, Cardiac biomarkers, ejection fraction (EF) from 2-dimensional Echocardiogram.
Here we will present data for the change in vasopressor use evaluated using a vasopressor score.
A numerical score calculated for number and dose of Vasopressors in use. The score is calculated using the following formula (from Zuppa AF et. al.CRIT CARE MED 2004 Vol. 32 p 2318-2322):
Vasopressor Score= (dopamine dose[y=ug/kg/min x 1]) + (dobutamine dose [ug/kg/min] x 1) + (epinephrine dose [ug/kg/min] x100) + (norepinephrine dose [ug/kg/min] x 100) + (phenylephrine dose [ug/kg/min] x 100).
The range for our study was 0-4900 with higher doses indicating higher vasopressor use in the donor.
Measured: Vasopressor score was determined before aortic cross clamp minus the value prior to the first intervention, an average of 19 hours
Change in Serum Lactate
Change in serum lactate levels (mg/dL) from before intervention to the final value
Measured: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in Creatinine Clearance
Change in creatinine clearance (mL/min by Cockcroft-Gault method) from before intervention to terminal value
Measured: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in P:F Ratio
Change in ratio of arterial oxygen pressure:fraction inspired oxygen ratio from before intervention to terminal value
Measured: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in Dynamic Compliance
Change in dynamic compliance of the lung from before intervention to terminal value
Cdyn = Dynamic compliance; Vt = tidal volume; PIP = Peak inspiratory pressure (the maximum pressure during inspiration); PEEP = Positive End Expiratory Pressure:
Cdyn= Vt/PIP - PEEP
Measured: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in Troponins
Change in serum troponin I (ng/mL) from before intervention to terminal value
Measured: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Pulsatile Perfusion Flow
Perfusate flow (mL/min) in machine perfused kidneys.
Measured: Up to 24 hours of machine perfusion
Six Month Hospital Free Survival of All Organ Recipients
Six month hospital-free survival was defined as the number of days recipients survived following the initial discharge after the transplant.
Measured: 6 months post-transplant
Delayed Graft Function (DGF) of Kidney Recipients.
DGF is defined as the need for dialysis within the first week post transplantation.
Measured: 7 days post-transplant
Pulsatile Perfusion Parameters
Perfusate resistance (mm Hg/mL/min) in machine perfused kidneys.
Measured: Up to 24 hours of machine perfusion
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Jan 2012 (estimated)
- Study startJul 2011
- Primary completionJul 2014
- Study completionApr 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for Organ TransplantationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Rutgers, The State University of New JerseyThe 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
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 321 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Baburao Koneru, MD, MPH, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
- Investigators
- Baburao Koneru, MD, Principal investigator, University of Medicine and Dentistry New Jersey-NewarkWilliam K Washburn, MD, Principal investigator, University of Texas Health Sciences at San Antonio
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01515072
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0120110125
- Acronym
- RIPNOD
- Status last verified
- Nov 2018
- First submitted
- 28 Oct 2011
- Last updated
- 19 Dec 2018
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Dec 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Neurological Death Organ Donors
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01515072
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RIPNOD / 0120110125
- Conditions
- Organ Transplantation
- Keywords
- Remote Ischemic Preconditioning, Brain death organ donors, Delayed graft function, Donor management, Pulsatile perfusion
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 321 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Rutgers, The State University of New JerseyUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
- Study start
- Jul 2011
- Primary completion
- Jul 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Jan 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 20 Jun 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether application of lower limb remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) after determination of brain death improves donor stability, organ quality, organ yield, and early post transplant clinical outcomes.
Neurological death donors will be stratified into standard and extended criteria donors (SCD/ECD) and randomized in a 1:1 fashion to RIPC or No intervention. The primary outcome is the number of organs recovered per donor. Secondary outcomes include donor hemodynamic state, donor organ-specific function parameters, pulsatile perfusion parameters, number of organs transplanted per donor, recipient hospital free survival and delayed graft function of kidneys. The sample size is powered to detect a difference of 0.44 organs recovered.
Detailed description
Study Design and Participants The RIPNOD trial was conducted from July 2011 to July 2014 as a prospective randomized trial in two OPOs (in New Jersey and in Texas) in the U.S. The funding organization, institutional review boards and the physician committees of the two organ procurement organizations (OPOs) approved the study. Exemptions for consent from potential recipients and for a data and safety monitoring board were granted. Consent for research was obtained from the donor's next of kin by OPO staff unless a 'first-person' consent existed. The study population consisted of neurological death organ donors. Eligible donors were age > 6 years, in whom death declaration was either imminent or completed, and organ recovery was not expected within 6 hours of enrollment. Donors with severe trauma to lower extremity or on sulfonylurea agents were excluded (Trial Protocol in Supplement).
Procedures Randomization (1:1) to No RIPC or RIPC groups in standard and extended criteria donors (SCD and ECD) strata occurred based on a computer-generated random table of numbers. In Texas, field coordinators performed the randomization through a website and administered the intervention. In New Jersey, research staff performed all trial activities and randomized using opaque, sealed envelopes. Organ recovery teams were informed of the study and sometimes knew of the group assignment. The recipient care teams and recipients were not aware of the group assignment.
The intervention consisted of four cycles of inflation of a tourniquet around mid-thigh to 250 mm Hg for 5 minutes followed by 5 minutes of deflation. The initial intervention occurred in the right thigh as early as possible after declaration of death. The second intervention occurred in the left thigh 24 hours after the initial intervention, or immediately before recovery, if this was earlier. Videoconferences between the two sites helped standardize the intervention before the trial commenced. All decisions regarding donor management, organ recovery, machine perfusion of kidneys, transplantation of organs and care after transplantation were independent of the research teams.
Outcomes and Data Collection The primary outcome was the total number of organs recovered per donor. Secondary outcomes were number of organs transplanted per donor, and changes from baseline to terminal (before aortic cross clamp) in vasopressor support, serum lactate, creatinine clearance, left ventricular ejection fraction, serum troponins, partial pressure of arterial oxygen: fraction inspired oxygen (P:F) ratio, dynamic and static lung compliance, and perfusate flow and resistance in machine perfused kidneys, delayed graft function (DGF) in transplanted kidneys and six-month hospital free survival in all recipients. A score quantified vasopressor support.14 All laboratory tests were performed at donor hospitals. Cockcroft-Gault equation was used to calculate creatinine clearance.15 Donor hospital cardiologists estimated the ventricular ejection fraction in transthoracic echocardiograms. OPO policies dictated machine perfusion of kidneys; perfusion, occurred at a central location in each OPO. Delayed graft function was defined as dialysis in the first week after transplant. Six month hospital-free survival was defined as the number of days recipients survived following the initial discharge after the transplant. All donor data were obtained prospectively from OPO records. Data after transplantation were obtained from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). The SRTR data system includes data on all donors, waitlist candidates, and transplant recipients in the United States, submitted by members of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services provides oversight to the activities of the OPTN and SRTR contractors.
Sample Size A sample size of 150 donors in each arm was estimated to provide 80% power to detect a difference of 0.44 of an organ recovered and 0.48 of an organ transplanted per donor. The difference criterion was chosen based on published results achieved with hormonal resuscitation in organ donors. 6 Pooled standard deviations (organs recovered: 1.35; organs transplanted: 1.5) from data of two OPOs were used.
Statistical Analyses Intention to treat principle was used in all analyses. Discrete descriptive data are reported as counts and percent and continuous data as means (sd) or medians (interquartile range). Continuous variables were compared using either t, or equivalent non-parametric tests. Categorical variables were compared using chi square tests. Multivariate modeling with backward elimination - linear ones to model RIPC on recovery and transplantation of all (0-8) and abdominal organs (0-5) per donor, and logistic ones to model recovery/transplantation of > 1 thoracic organ per donor and DGF - was performed. Because only seven fewer thoracic organs were transplanted than recovered the model for organs transplanted was used to analyze both outcomes. Donor characteristics of age, sex, race, cause of death, BMI, comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, alcohol use, and hepatitis C), treatments (insulin, diuretics and steroids) and laboratory parameters (serum creatinine and P:F ratio) and OPO site were predictor variables in organ yield models. Donor age or stratum, cold ischemia, number of human leukocyte antigen mismatches and recipients' characteristics of age, sex, race, BMI, diabetes, hypertension, etiology of renal failure, panel reactive antibody and OPO site were predictor variables in models of DGF. For linear regression models, adjusted R2 was computed and residuals were assessed for normality; the C statistic was used to assess goodness of the fit for logistic regression. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
Post Hoc Analyses Rates of acute rejection of kidney during the first six months were compared between the two groups using chi square tests. Kaplan-Meier estimates and log rank tests were used to compare unadjusted outcomes of graft and patient survival at 6, 12 and 24 months. In heart, lung and liver recipients, retransplantation or death was defined as graft loss. In all other organs graft loss was death-censored. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of RIPC on the adjusted hazard ratio for six-month graft loss after controlling for OPO site, donor age or stratum and sex, cold ischemia time, number of antigen mismatches, organ transplanted, and recipient age, sex, race, BMI, diabetes and hypertension.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| No Remote Ischemic Preconditioning | No intervention | –The donors assigned to this group will receive standard of care of management of brain death donors in each organ procurement organization. |
| Remote Ischemic Preconditioning | Experimental | Other: RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning)The donors assigned to this group would receive two RIPC interventions. The first one would occur immediately after brain death declaration and consent for organ donation. The second one would occur immediately before commencement of organ recovery. At each occasion RIPC would be induced by 4 cycles of mid-thigh inflation of tourniquet for 5 min followed by deflation for 5 minutes. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 6 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Neurological death donors in whom brain death determination is imminent
- First person consent or next of kin consent for research
- Donors >=6 years of age
- Organ recovery not expected within 6 hours of consent.
- Both sexes and ethnicities.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Donation after cardiac death donors (DCD)
- Live organ donors
- No first person consent and next of kin decline research consent
- Donor Age < 6 years
- Lower extremity trauma or recent amputation
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 |
|---|---|---|
| RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning)Remote Ischemic Preconditioning (RIPC) by Inflation of Pneumatic Tourniquet. The intervention will consist of tourniquet inflation on the mid-thigh for 5 minutes, followed by a deflation period of 5 minutes for a total of 4 cycles. The intervention will take place at two time points: First, after determination of brain death and consent for organ donation and again upon incision for organ recovery. The second intervention will occur in a manner identical to the first intervention but in the opposite limb. | Other | Remote Ischemic Preconditioning |
Primary outcome
Number of Organs Recovered Per Donor
Time frame: At time of organ recovery, up to 1 day
Number of organs recovered per organ donor
11 secondary outcomes
Number of Organs Transplanted Per Donor
Time frame: Within 24 hours of organ recovery
Change in Vasopressor Score
Time frame: Vasopressor score was determined before aortic cross clamp minus the value prior to the first intervention, an average of 19 hours
Change in Serum Lactate
Time frame: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in Creatinine Clearance
Time frame: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in P:F Ratio
Time frame: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in Dynamic Compliance
Time frame: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Change in Troponins
Time frame: Subjects will be followed from admission to explantation, an average of 4.5 days
Pulsatile Perfusion Flow
Time frame: Up to 24 hours of machine perfusion
Six Month Hospital Free Survival of All Organ Recipients
Time frame: 6 months post-transplant
Delayed Graft Function (DGF) of Kidney Recipients.
Time frame: 7 days post-transplant
Pulsatile Perfusion Parameters
Time frame: Up to 24 hours of machine perfusion
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Dec 2018.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Organ Transplantation
Not yet recruiting
New Biomarkers for Organ Viability Assessment During Hypothermic Machine Perfusion in Liver Transplantation: the Role of Extemporaneous Histological Examination.
Liver Transplantation (LT), Early Allograft Dysfunction
Recruiting
Multidisciplinary Non-Pharmacological Intervention to Improve Quality of Life in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Heart Transplant Patients, Kidney Transplant Patients
RecruitingObservational study
Establishing a Reference Framework for Outcomes After Machine-Preserved Liver Transplantation in Europe
End-stage Liver Disease (ESLD), Acute Liver Failure
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Brain-based Prediction of the Dying Duration in Humans After Withdrawal of Life Sustaining Therapies to Inform Donation After Circulatory Death
Organ Donation After Circulatory Death
Recruiting
In-situ vs Ex-situ Liver Preservation
Liver Disease (Alcoholic or Not), Transplantation
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.
Baburao Koneru, MD principal investigator
University of Medicine and Dentistry New Jersey-Newark
William K Washburn, MD principal investigator
University of Texas Health Sciences at San Antonio
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing RIPC (Remote Ischemic Preconditioning) in people with Organ Transplantation, run by Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey at 2 sites in United States.
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 5 inclusion and 6 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 19 Dec 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. 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?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 20 Jun 2017). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Number of Organs Recovered Per Donor (time frame: At time of organ recovery, up to 1 day). 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 19 Dec 2018.