Coronary Artery DiseaseCRAGSNCT01838746
CRAGS (Coronary aRtery diseAse in younG adultS)
An observational study of Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes, run by University of Turku at 9 sites in 4 countries.
Trial summary
Young patients requiring myocardial revascularization are generally considered at low operative risk, but data on their immediate and late outcome are scarce. The decision-making process in these young patients is complicated by the potentially aggressive nature of premature coronary artery disease and their likely… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 50 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Young Patient
- How many people
- 2,000 participants
- Where
- 9 sitesin 4 countries
- Study dates
- Apr 2013to Dec 2016
- 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 18 to 50 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Study population: Patients aged < 50 years who underwent CABG or PCI from 2005 to 2012 will be collected from multiple institutions.
Who may be able to join
- age < 50
Who cannot join
- age > 50
Trial locations and contacts
9 sites in 4 countries.
9 sites in 4 countries
Finland5 sites
Oulu University Hospital
Oulu
Satakunta Central Hospital
Pori
Tampere University Hospital
Tampere
Turku University Hospital
Turku
Vaasa Central Hospital
Vaasa
Italy2 sites
University of Catania
Catania
University of Verona Medical School
Verona
About this study
Official title: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients Aged < 50 Years: a Multicenter Study
Young patients requiring myocardial revascularization are generally considered at low operative risk, but data on their immediate and late outcome are scarce. The decision-making process in these young patients is complicated by the potentially aggressive nature of premature coronary artery disease and their likely long expectancy of life, which expose them to a significantly higher risk of recurrent coronary events as well as the need of repeat revascularization. The lack of data on long-term outcome as well as on operative details (in particular, on the use of arterial grafts) and peri- and postoperative medication prevent any conclusive results on the durability either of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in these young patients. Furthermore, recent advances in stents technology as well in peri- and postoperative medical treatment indicate the need a comparative study to define the baseline characteristics of patients aged < 50 years undergoing either PCI or CABG and to evaluate their current immediate and late outcome.
Read the detailed description
Age is, without any doubt, one of the most important risk factors for adverse events after any cardiovascular procedure and because of this it is incorporated in all major risk scoring methods. There is abundant literature dealing with the outcome of elderly patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures as their operative risk is significantly increased and preoperative risk assessment is of great importance in the decision-making process of these fragile patients (1). In the very elderly patients percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an attractive treatment method, particularly in those with multiple comorbidities (2). On the other hand, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been shown to be a durable procedure also among octogenarians (2).
Young patients requiring myocardial revascularization are generally considered at low operative risk, but data on their immediate and late outcome are scarce. However, the decision-making process in these young patients is complicated by the potentially aggressive nature of premature coronary artery disease and their likely long expectancy of life, which expose them to a significantly higher risk of recurrent coronary events as well as the need of repeat revascularization. CABG seems to more durable compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (3), particularly because of excellent late results with the use arterial grafts (4). Therefore, young patients with diffuse coronary artery diffuse may likely benefit of surgical revascularization. However, no formal comparative analysis of these two treatment methods has been previously performed in this young patient population. Since CABG is a major procedure with a potential risk of operative mortality and major morbidity, this is an argument against surgical revascularization, even if recent pooled data showed that it can be performed with an exceedingly low mortality risk (0.9%) (Biancari et al. submitted, Fig. 1).
Such a low postoperative mortality rate is similar to that reported by Khawaja et al. (5) in patients aged ≤ 50 years treated by PCI (0.86%). However, PCI was performed in 41% of these patients with single vessel coronary artery disease. This is likely to significantly differ from surgical series (6).
Only two studies evaluated the outcome after CABG in patients aged < 40 years (7) and < 50 years (8) and estimated a survival rate at 10 years of about 75%. A study by Ellis (9) addressed survival after PCI in 86 patients aged < 40 years and showed a 10-year survival rate of about 91%, but a significant number of patients underwent repeat PCI (37%) and/or CABG (22%). These findings should be viewed in the light of the fact that most of patients did not have diffuse coronary artery disease (3-vessel disease was present in 11% of patients) and they were treated about two decades ago. Khawaja et al. (6) reported on 2922 patients aged ≤ 50 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention since 1979 and having a 5-year survival of about 95%. They reported repeat target revascularization rates ranging from 19% to 27% according to different study periods.
The lack of data on long-term outcome as well as on operative details (in particular, on the use of arterial grafts) and peri- and postoperative medication prevent any conclusive results on the durability either of CABG of PCI in these young patients. Furthermore, recent advances in stents technology as well in peri- and postoperative medical treatment indicate the need a comparative study to define the baseline characteristics of patients aged < 50 years undergoing either PCI or CABG and to evaluate their current immediate and late outcome.
- Conditions
- Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Young Patient, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
- Keywords
- Percutaneous coronary intervention, Coronary artery bypass grafting, Coronary artery bypass surgery, Survival, Acute coronary syndrome, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, Younge patient
- Medical subject headings
- Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndrome, ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| PCI | Patients undergoing PCI | |
| CABG | Patients undergoing CABG |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Repeat revascularization
Any percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting after primary revascularization
Measured: Three years
Secondary outcomes (4)
All-cause mortality
Measured: Three years
Major cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE)
Measured: Three years
Stroke
Measured: Three years
Myocardial infarction
Measured: Three years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Apr 2013 (estimated)
- Study startApr 2013
- Primary completionDec 2014
- Study completionDec 2016 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (9)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Coronary Artery DiseaseStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 2,000 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Turku
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Fausto Biancari, MD, University of Turku
- Investigators
- Fausto Biancari, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Oulu University HospitalJuhani Airaksinen, MD, PhD, Study chair, Turku University Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01838746
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CRAGS-1
- Acronym
- CRAGS
- Status last verified
- May 2015
- First submitted
- 16 Apr 2013
- Last updated
- 28 May 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Gunn J, Kuttila K, Vasques F, Virtanen R, Lahti A, Airaksinen J, Biancari F. Comparison of results of coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in octogenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2012 Oct 15;110(8):1125-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.05.055. Epub 2012 Jul 3.
PubMed 22762714Nissinen J, Wistbacka JO, Loponen P, Korpilahti K, Teittinen K, Virkkila M, Tarkka M, Biancari F. Coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians: long-term outcome can be better than expected. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010 Apr;89(4):1119-24. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.12.063.
PubMed 20338317Kappetein AP, Feldman TE, Mack MJ, Morice MC, Holmes DR, Stahle E, Dawkins KD, Mohr FW, Serruys PW, Colombo A. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. Eur Heart J. 2011 Sep;32(17):2125-34. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr213. Epub 2011 Jun 22.
PubMed 21697170Locker C, Schaff HV, Dearani JA, Joyce LD, Park SJ, Burkhart HM, Suri RM, Greason KL, Stulak JM, Li Z, Daly RC. Multiple arterial grafts improve late survival of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: analysis of 8622 patients with multivessel disease. Circulation. 2012 Aug 28;126(9):1023-30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.084624. Epub 2012 Jul 18.
PubMed 22811577Cole JH, Miller JI 3rd, Sperling LS, Weintraub WS. Long-term follow-up of coronary artery disease presenting in young adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Feb 19;41(4):521-8. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(02)02862-0.
PubMed 12598059Canver CC, Nichols RD, Cooler SD, Heisey DM, Murray EL, Kroncke GM. Influence of increasing age on long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996 Oct;62(4):1123-7. doi: 10.1016/0003-4975(96)00446-8.
PubMed 8823100Ellis CJ, French JK, White HD, Ormiston JA, Whitlock RM, Webster MW. Results of percutaneous coronary angioplasty in patients <40 years of age. Am J Cardiol. 1998 Jul 15;82(2):135-9. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00318-x.
PubMed 9678280Lautamaki A, Airaksinen KE, Kiviniemi T, Vinco G, Ribichini F, Gunn J, Anttila V, Heikkinen J, Korpilahti K, Karjalainen P, Kajander O, Eskola M, Ilveskoski E, Axelsson T, Gudbjartsson T, Jeppsson A, Biancari F. Prognosis and disease progression in patients under 50 years old undergoing PCI: the CRAGS (Coronary aRtery diseAse in younG adultS) study. Atherosclerosis. 2014 Aug;235(2):483-7. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.05.953. Epub 2014 Jun 9.
PubMed 24953487Biancari F, Gudbjartsson T, Heikkinen J, Anttila V, Makikallio T, Jeppsson A, Thimour-Bergstrom L, Mignosa C, Rubino AS, Kuttila K, Gunn J, Wistbacka JO, Teittinen K, Korpilahti K, Onorati F, Faggian G, Vinco G, Vassanelli C, Ribichini F, Juvonen T, Axelsson TA, Sigurdsson AF, Karjalainen PP, Mennander A, Kajander O, Eskola M, Ilveskoski E, D'Oria V, De Feo M, Kiviniemi T, Airaksinen KE. Comparison of 30-day and 5-year outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients aged</=50 years (the Coronary aRtery diseAse in younG adultS Study). Am J Cardiol. 2014 Jul 15;114(2):198-205. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.04.025. Epub 2014 May 2.
PubMed 24878127
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 May 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients Aged < 50 Years: a Multicenter Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01838746
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CRAGS / CRAGS-1
- Conditions
- Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Young Patient, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
- Keywords
- Percutaneous coronary intervention, Coronary artery bypass grafting, Coronary artery bypass surgery, Survival, Acute coronary syndrome, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, Younge patient
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 2,000 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of TurkuUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research
- Study start
- Apr 2013
- Primary completion
- Dec 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2016 (estimated)
- First posted
- 24 Apr 2013 (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.
Young patients requiring myocardial revascularization are generally considered at low operative risk, but data on their immediate and late outcome are scarce. The decision-making process in these young patients is complicated by the potentially aggressive nature of premature coronary artery disease and their likely long expectancy of life, which expose them to a significantly higher risk of recurrent coronary events as well as the need of repeat revascularization. The lack of data on long-term outcome as well as on operative details (in particular, on the use of arterial grafts) and peri- and postoperative medication prevent any conclusive results on the durability either of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in these young patients. Furthermore, recent advances in stents technology as well in peri- and postoperative medical treatment indicate the need a comparative study to define the baseline characteristics of patients aged < 50 years undergoing either PCI or CABG and to evaluate their current immediate and late outcome.
Detailed description
Age is, without any doubt, one of the most important risk factors for adverse events after any cardiovascular procedure and because of this it is incorporated in all major risk scoring methods. There is abundant literature dealing with the outcome of elderly patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures as their operative risk is significantly increased and preoperative risk assessment is of great importance in the decision-making process of these fragile patients (1). In the very elderly patients percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an attractive treatment method, particularly in those with multiple comorbidities (2). On the other hand, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been shown to be a durable procedure also among octogenarians (2).
Young patients requiring myocardial revascularization are generally considered at low operative risk, but data on their immediate and late outcome are scarce. However, the decision-making process in these young patients is complicated by the potentially aggressive nature of premature coronary artery disease and their likely long expectancy of life, which expose them to a significantly higher risk of recurrent coronary events as well as the need of repeat revascularization. CABG seems to more durable compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (3), particularly because of excellent late results with the use arterial grafts (4). Therefore, young patients with diffuse coronary artery diffuse may likely benefit of surgical revascularization. However, no formal comparative analysis of these two treatment methods has been previously performed in this young patient population. Since CABG is a major procedure with a potential risk of operative mortality and major morbidity, this is an argument against surgical revascularization, even if recent pooled data showed that it can be performed with an exceedingly low mortality risk (0.9%) (Biancari et al. submitted, Fig. 1).
Such a low postoperative mortality rate is similar to that reported by Khawaja et al. (5) in patients aged ≤ 50 years treated by PCI (0.86%). However, PCI was performed in 41% of these patients with single vessel coronary artery disease. This is likely to significantly differ from surgical series (6).
Only two studies evaluated the outcome after CABG in patients aged < 40 years (7) and < 50 years (8) and estimated a survival rate at 10 years of about 75%. A study by Ellis (9) addressed survival after PCI in 86 patients aged < 40 years and showed a 10-year survival rate of about 91%, but a significant number of patients underwent repeat PCI (37%) and/or CABG (22%). These findings should be viewed in the light of the fact that most of patients did not have diffuse coronary artery disease (3-vessel disease was present in 11% of patients) and they were treated about two decades ago. Khawaja et al. (6) reported on 2922 patients aged ≤ 50 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention since 1979 and having a 5-year survival of about 95%. They reported repeat target revascularization rates ranging from 19% to 27% according to different study periods.
The lack of data on long-term outcome as well as on operative details (in particular, on the use of arterial grafts) and peri- and postoperative medication prevent any conclusive results on the durability either of CABG of PCI in these young patients. Furthermore, recent advances in stents technology as well in peri- and postoperative medical treatment indicate the need a comparative study to define the baseline characteristics of patients aged < 50 years undergoing either PCI or CABG and to evaluate their current immediate and late outcome.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| PCI | – | –Patients undergoing PCI |
| CABG | – | –Patients undergoing CABG |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 50 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
- Study population
- Patients aged < 50 years who underwent CABG or PCI from 2005 to 2012 will be collected from multiple institutions.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- age < 50
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- age > 50
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Repeat revascularization
Time frame: Three years
Any percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting after primary revascularization
4 secondary outcomes
All-cause mortality
Time frame: Three years
Major cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE)
Time frame: Three years
Stroke
Time frame: Three years
Myocardial infarction
Time frame: Three years
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 May 2015.
- Background: PubMed 22762714Gunn J, Kuttila K, Vasques F, Virtanen R, Lahti A, Airaksinen J, Biancari F. Comparison of results of coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in octogenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2012 Oct 15;110(8):1125-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.05.055. Epub 2012 Jul 3.
- Background: PubMed 20338317Nissinen J, Wistbacka JO, Loponen P, Korpilahti K, Teittinen K, Virkkila M, Tarkka M, Biancari F. Coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians: long-term outcome can be better than expected. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010 Apr;89(4):1119-24. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.12.063.
- Background: PubMed 21697170Kappetein AP, Feldman TE, Mack MJ, Morice MC, Holmes DR, Stahle E, Dawkins KD, Mohr FW, Serruys PW, Colombo A. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. Eur Heart J. 2011 Sep;32(17):2125-34. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr213. Epub 2011 Jun 22.
- Background: PubMed 22811577Locker C, Schaff HV, Dearani JA, Joyce LD, Park SJ, Burkhart HM, Suri RM, Greason KL, Stulak JM, Li Z, Daly RC. Multiple arterial grafts improve late survival of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: analysis of 8622 patients with multivessel disease. Circulation. 2012 Aug 28;126(9):1023-30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.084624. Epub 2012 Jul 18.
- Background: PubMed 12598059Cole JH, Miller JI 3rd, Sperling LS, Weintraub WS. Long-term follow-up of coronary artery disease presenting in young adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Feb 19;41(4):521-8. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(02)02862-0.
- Background: PubMed 8823100Canver CC, Nichols RD, Cooler SD, Heisey DM, Murray EL, Kroncke GM. Influence of increasing age on long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996 Oct;62(4):1123-7. doi: 10.1016/0003-4975(96)00446-8.
- Background: PubMed 9678280Ellis CJ, French JK, White HD, Ormiston JA, Whitlock RM, Webster MW. Results of percutaneous coronary angioplasty in patients <40 years of age. Am J Cardiol. 1998 Jul 15;82(2):135-9. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00318-x.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 24953487Lautamaki A, Airaksinen KE, Kiviniemi T, Vinco G, Ribichini F, Gunn J, Anttila V, Heikkinen J, Korpilahti K, Karjalainen P, Kajander O, Eskola M, Ilveskoski E, Axelsson T, Gudbjartsson T, Jeppsson A, Biancari F. Prognosis and disease progression in patients under 50 years old undergoing PCI: the CRAGS (Coronary aRtery diseAse in younG adultS) study. Atherosclerosis. 2014 Aug;235(2):483-7. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.05.953. Epub 2014 Jun 9.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 24878127Biancari F, Gudbjartsson T, Heikkinen J, Anttila V, Makikallio T, Jeppsson A, Thimour-Bergstrom L, Mignosa C, Rubino AS, Kuttila K, Gunn J, Wistbacka JO, Teittinen K, Korpilahti K, Onorati F, Faggian G, Vinco G, Vassanelli C, Ribichini F, Juvonen T, Axelsson TA, Sigurdsson AF, Karjalainen PP, Mennander A, Kajander O, Eskola M, Ilveskoski E, D'Oria V, De Feo M, Kiviniemi T, Airaksinen KE. Comparison of 30-day and 5-year outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients aged</=50 years (the Coronary aRtery diseAse in younG adultS Study). Am J Cardiol. 2014 Jul 15;114(2):198-205. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.04.025. Epub 2014 May 2.
Related trials for Coronary Artery Disease
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use During Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal After Coronary Angiography
Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal, Stress Ball
Active, not recruiting
Shockwave™ vs Surgical Endarterectomy for Calcified Severe Common Femoral Artery Stenosis: Comparison of Efficacy, Safety and Long-Term Outcomes
Common Femoral Artery Stenosis, Calcification; Heart
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Roxadustat and Myocardial Injury After Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
RecruitingObservational study
Preoperative Gastric Ultrasound and Left Ventricular Function in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Coronary Artery Disease, Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction
Active, not recruiting
The OCTOBER Trial - European Trial on Optical Coherence Tomography Optimized Bifurcation Event Reduction (OCTOBER)
Ischaemic Heart Disease, Ischemic Heart 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.
Fausto Biancari, MD, PhD principal investigator
Oulu University Hospital
Juhani Airaksinen, MD, PhD study chair
Turku University Hospital
9 sites in 4 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes, run by University of Turku at 9 sites in 4 countries.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 May 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 9 sites in Finland, Italy, Iceland, Sweden. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
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?
Repeat revascularization (time frame: Three years). 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 NCT01838746, which also lists 9 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 28 May 2015.