Chest PainSECURENCT01572220
Stress Echo Ultrasound Contrast in an Urban Safety Net Hospital to Refine Ischemia Evaluation
A study testing UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECT in people with Chest Pain and Symptomatic Ischemic Equivalent, run by Denver Health and Hospital Authority at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The current study is designed to have broad generalizability and inform a potential shift toward greater utilization of stress echocardiography with UCA. This will be accomplished by comparing UCA stress echocardiography with myocardial SPECT among hospitalized patients presenting with atraumatic chest pain. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Chest Pain, Symptomatic Ischemic Equivalent
- What is being tested?
- UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECT
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 240 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Apr 2012to Oct 2017
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients must meet all of the following inclusion criteria to be eligible for participation in this study:
- Males or females aged ≥ 18 years
- Evaluated for symptoms of chest discomfort or ischemic equivalent
- Clinical indication for stress imaging, defined as one of the following clinical risk estimates for CAD based upon the Diamond and Forrester classification7:
- Intermediate pretest probability of CAD and electrocardiogram (ECG) is clinically interpretable and patient is able to exercise
- Intermediate pretest probability of CAD and ECG is clinically interpretable or patient is unable to exercise
Show all 9Show fewer
- High pretest probability of CAD regardless of ECG interpretability and ability to exercise
- Willing and able to provide written informed consent to participate in this study
- Agrees to remain under observation (e.g., inpatient or observational status) until all study procedures from the hospital stay are completed, and to complete a 30-day follow up call
Who cannot join
- Patients who meet any of the following exclusion criteria are not to be enrolled in this study:
- Documented medical history or discovery during screening and/or admission of any of the following:
- Severe aortic or mitral stenosis
- Significant resting left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (velocity > 3 cm/s)
- Mobile left ventricular apical thrombus
- Acute pericarditis or pericardial tamponade
Show all 21Show fewer
- Ascending or thoracic aortic aneurysm that is not stable or meets surgical criteria
- Acute decompensated congestive heart failure
- Established severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%)
- Definite acute coronary syndrome (e.g., unstable angina, acute myocardial infarction) as confirmed by elevated Troponin I (>0.6 ng/L) on two successive measurements or ECG changes diagnostic for unstable angina (e.g. localized ST changes) in conjunction with clinical appraisal
- Any of the following other abnormalities on the ECG at screening:
- Paced ventricular rhythm or complete left bundle branch block
- Uncontrolled arrhythmias defined by frequent premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) > 10/minute, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, or atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response
- 2nd or 3rd degree heart block
- Uncontrolled hypertension defined as systolic blood pressure ≥ 200 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 110 mmHg at screening
- Hemoglobin (Hb) < 7.5 mg/dL at screening or within 3 months prior to screening
- Potassium < 3.0 mmol/L or > 5.5 mmol/L or severe electrolyte abnormality at screening that, in the opinion of the supervising physician or Investigator, makes stress testing unsafe
- Females who are pregnant or nursing
- Known intolerance to any of the study stress agents (dipyridamole, dobutamine) or study cardiac imaging agents (Optison, Cardiolite)
- Weight ≥ 350lbs
- Any physical or psychological condition that, in the opinion of the Investigator, may adversely affect the safety of the patient if enrolled in this trial.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Denver Health Medical Center
Denver, Colorado, 80204
About this study
The current study is designed to have broad generalizability and inform a potential shift toward greater utilization of stress echocardiography with UCA. This will be accomplished by comparing UCA stress echocardiography with myocardial SPECT among hospitalized patients presenting with atraumatic chest pain. This study seeks to demonstrate: clinical comparability of the 2 modalities (based on non-diagnostic test rates), improved care efficiency (based on length of stay), lower costs, improved provider satisfaction, and a presumed improved safety profile through the elimination of radiation exposure.
Primary Hypothesis: A strategy of routine UCA (Optison™) enhanced stress echocardiography will result in a clinically non-diagnostic test rate comparable to myocardial SPECT among patients hospitalized (inpatient or hospital observation status) with atraumatic chest pain.
- Conditions
- Chest Pain, Symptomatic Ischemic Equivalent
- Being tested
- UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECT
- Keywords
- Hospitalized patients
- Medical subject headings
- Chest Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECTOther
Comparative Effectiveness of cardiac stress imaging modalities
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| stress echocardiography | Other | Comparative effectiveness Receives: Other: UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECT |
| Myocardial SPECT | Other | CER Receives: Other: UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECT |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Rate of non-diagnostic tests between ultrasound contrast enhanced stress echocardiography and myocardial SPECT
Non-diagnostic test rates will be the principal outcome of interest and are defined as those studies that do not allow a clinical decision for patient disposition (alternative non-invasive modality ordered, imaging inadequate to exclude ischemia, target heart rate not achieved, adverse side effects and test was terminated, discharge, further invasive testing such as coronary angiography) or require cardiology consultation for further evaluation.
Measured: Within 5 days of stress imaging
Secondary outcomes (3)
Similarity in rates of cardiac catheterization and acute coronary syndrome events between UCA stress echocardiography and myocardial SPECT
- 30-day rates of cardiac catheterization between the two imaging modalities
- Difference in the 30-day composite rate of acute coronary syndrome re-hospitalization, revascularization, and death between the two imaging modalities
- Similarity in positive predictive value (PPV) of the two imaging modalities
- Inter-rater reliability estimates for non-diagnostic echocardiogram studies
Measured: by 30 +/- 7 days post-discharge
Shorter length of stay and lower cost of inpatient hospital care for UCA stress echocardiography than for myocardial SPECT
- Length of inpatient hospital stay of UCA stress echocardiography versus myocardial SPECT
- Difference in time-to-cardiac catheterization beginning from time of admission
- Differences in time-to-stress test completion beginning from time of admission30-day hospital costs of UCA stress echocardiography versus myocardial SPECT
Measured: 30 day assesment
Greater physician satisfaction when using UCA stress echocardiography than for myocardial SPECT
•Physician satisfaction as assessed on questionnaire with UCA stress echocardiography versus myocardial SPECT. Physician(s) will be the provider(s) who supervised patient care during inpatient hospital stay.
Measured: 5 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Apr 2012 (estimated)
- Study startApr 2012
- Primary completionAug 2014
- Study completionOct 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chest PainStudies 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
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 240 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Denver Health and Hospital Authority
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- General Electric
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Mori Krantz, Denver Health and Hospital Authority
- Investigators
- Mori Krantz, MD FACC FACP, Principal investigator, Denver Health Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01572220
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 12-0009
- Acronym
- SECURE
- Status last verified
- Dec 2017
- First submitted
- 3 Apr 2012
- Last updated
- 11 Dec 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Garber AM, Solomon NA. Cost-effectiveness of alternative test strategies for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 1999 May 4;130(9):719-28. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-9-199905040-00003.
PubMed 10357690Berrington de Gonzalez A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, Land C. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med. 2009 Dec 14;169(22):2071-7. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.440.
PubMed 20008689Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, Ting HH, Shah ND, Nasir K, Einstein AJ, Nallamothu BK. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009 Aug 27;361(9):849-57. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0901249.
PubMed 19710483Kisacik HL, Ozdemir K, Altinyay E, Oguzhan A, Kural T, Kir M, Kutuk E, Goksel S. Comparison of exercise stress testing with simultaneous dobutamine stress echocardiography and technetium-99m isonitrile single-photon emission computerized tomography for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 1996 Jan;17(1):113-9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a014669.
PubMed 8682117Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1979 Jun 14;300(24):1350-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197906143002402.
PubMed 440357Salame G, Juselius WE, Burden M, Long CS, Bendelow T, Beaty B, Masoudi FA, Krantz MJ. Contrast-Enhanced Stress Echocardiography and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Patients Hospitalized With Chest Pain: A Randomized Study. Crit Pathw Cardiol. 2018 Jun;17(2):98-104. doi: 10.1097/HPC.0000000000000141.
PubMed 29768319
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Dec 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Stress Echo Ultrasound Contrast in an Urban Safety Net Hospital to Refine Ischemia Evaluation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01572220
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SECURE / 12-0009
- Conditions
- Chest Pain, Symptomatic Ischemic Equivalent
- Keywords
- Hospitalized patients
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 240 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Denver Health and Hospital AuthorityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- General Electric
- Study start
- Apr 2012
- Primary completion
- Aug 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Apr 2012 (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.
The current study is designed to have broad generalizability and inform a potential shift toward greater utilization of stress echocardiography with UCA. This will be accomplished by comparing UCA stress echocardiography with myocardial SPECT among hospitalized patients presenting with atraumatic chest pain. This study seeks to demonstrate: clinical comparability of the 2 modalities (based on non-diagnostic test rates), improved care efficiency (based on length of stay), lower costs, improved provider satisfaction, and a presumed improved safety profile through the elimination of radiation exposure.
Primary Hypothesis: A strategy of routine UCA (Optison™) enhanced stress echocardiography will result in a clinically non-diagnostic test rate comparable to myocardial SPECT among patients hospitalized (inpatient or hospital observation status) with atraumatic chest pain.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| stress echocardiography | Other | Other: UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECTComparative effectiveness |
| Myocardial SPECT | Other | Other: UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECTCER |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Patients must meet all of the following inclusion criteria to be eligible for participation in this study:
Key exclusion criteria (21 listed)
- Patients who meet any of the following exclusion criteria are not to be enrolled in this study:
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 |
|---|---|---|
| UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECTComparative Effectiveness of cardiac stress imaging modalities | Other | Myocardial SPECT, stress echocardiography |
Primary outcome
Rate of non-diagnostic tests between ultrasound contrast enhanced stress echocardiography and myocardial SPECT
Time frame: Within 5 days of stress imaging
Non-diagnostic test rates will be the principal outcome of interest and are defined as those studies that do not allow a clinical decision for patient disposition (alternative non-invasive modality ordered, imaging inadequate to exclude ischemia, target heart rate not achieved, adverse side effects and test was terminated, discharge, further invasive testing such as coronary angiography) or require cardiology consultation for further evaluation.
3 secondary outcomes
Similarity in rates of cardiac catheterization and acute coronary syndrome events between UCA stress echocardiography and myocardial SPECT
Time frame: by 30 +/- 7 days post-discharge
Shorter length of stay and lower cost of inpatient hospital care for UCA stress echocardiography than for myocardial SPECT
Time frame: 30 day assesment
Greater physician satisfaction when using UCA stress echocardiography than for myocardial SPECT
Time frame: 5 days
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 Dec 2017.
- Background: PubMed 10357690Garber AM, Solomon NA. Cost-effectiveness of alternative test strategies for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 1999 May 4;130(9):719-28. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-9-199905040-00003.
- Background: PubMed 20008689Berrington de Gonzalez A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, Land C. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med. 2009 Dec 14;169(22):2071-7. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.440.
- Background: PubMed 19710483Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, Ting HH, Shah ND, Nasir K, Einstein AJ, Nallamothu BK. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009 Aug 27;361(9):849-57. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0901249.
- Background: PubMed 8682117Kisacik HL, Ozdemir K, Altinyay E, Oguzhan A, Kural T, Kir M, Kutuk E, Goksel S. Comparison of exercise stress testing with simultaneous dobutamine stress echocardiography and technetium-99m isonitrile single-photon emission computerized tomography for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 1996 Jan;17(1):113-9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a014669.
- Background: PubMed 440357Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1979 Jun 14;300(24):1350-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197906143002402.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29768319Salame G, Juselius WE, Burden M, Long CS, Bendelow T, Beaty B, Masoudi FA, Krantz MJ. Contrast-Enhanced Stress Echocardiography and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Patients Hospitalized With Chest Pain: A Randomized Study. Crit Pathw Cardiol. 2018 Jun;17(2):98-104. doi: 10.1097/HPC.0000000000000141.
- 6\. ACCF/ASE/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR 2011 Appropriate Use Criteria for EchocardiographyLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Chest Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Warm Footbath Combined With Relaxation Exercise on Pain and Anxiety During Chest Tube Removal After Cardiac Surgery
Chest Tube Removal
Not yet recruiting
Lung Cancer and Aging: Improving Well-being for Older Adults With Lung Cancer
Lung Cancer
Recruiting
CT Stress Myocardial Perfusion, Fractional Flow Reserve and Angiography in Patients With Stable Chest Pain Syndromes
Coronary Artery Disease, Chest Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 4
Early Single Antiplatelet Therapy After IVUS-Guided PCI in Acute Coronary Syndrome
Acute Coronary Syndromes, STEMI
Recruiting
AI-Assisted Interpretation of Cardiac CT in the Emergency Department
Chest Pain, Acute Coronary Syndrome
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.
Mori Krantz, MD FACC FACP principal investigator
Denver Health Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing UCA stress echocardiography or myocardial SPECT in people with Chest Pain and Symptomatic Ischemic Equivalent, run by Denver Health and Hospital Authority at 1 site 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 9 inclusion and 21 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 Dec 2017. 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 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?
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?
Rate of non-diagnostic tests between ultrasound contrast enhanced stress echocardiography and myocardial SPECT (time frame: Within 5 days of stress imaging). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01572220, which also lists 6 linked publications.
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 Dec 2017.