Acute Coronary SyndromeCMR-IMPACTNCT01931852
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Strategy for the Management of Patients With Acute Chest Pain and Detectable to Elevated Troponin
A study testing Cardiac MRI and ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care in people with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Chest Pain, run by Wake Forest University Health Sciences at 4 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The broad, long-term objective is to improve outcomes by optimizing healthcare delivery processes for patients with detectable to elevated serum troponin. This clinical trial involving emergency department (ED) patients with intermediate to high-risk chest pain and detectable to minimally elevated serum troponin… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Acute Coronary Syndrome, Chest Pain
- What is being tested?
- Cardiac MRI and ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 312 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Sep 2013to 2 Oct 2020
- 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 21 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age greater than or equal to 21 years of age at the time of enrollment
- Symptoms consistent with acute coronary syndrome
- At least 1 troponin > lower limit of detection and ≤1.0 ng/ml within 6 hours of the initial evaluation
Who cannot join
- Any troponin >1.0 ng/ml at the time of consent
- New ST-segment elevation (≥ 1 mV) or depression (≥ 2 mV)
- Hemodynamic instability (symptomatic systolic BP <90 mmHg, dysrhythmia)
- Ongoing, unrelieved symptoms thought to represent cardiac ischemia and requiring immediate cardiac catheterization
- Known severe multi-vessel CAD previously determined to be not amendable to mechanical intervention
- Coronary revascularization in the past 6 months
Show all 10Show fewer
- Contra-indications to magnetic resonance imaging Examples: Unable to lie flat, pacemaker, defibrillator, cerebral aneurysm clips, metallic ocular foreign body, implanted devices, severe claustrophobia, pregnancy
- Life expectancy less than 12 months
- Increased risk for nephrogenic systemic fibrosis i. Creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min at the time of enrollment ii. clinical concern for acute kidney injury and/or acute renal failure* iii. Hepato-renal syndrome or chronic liver disease with a creatinine clearance of <60 ml/min at the time of enrollment iv. History of liver, heart, or kidney transplant
- This may be manifested by a recent or concurrent rise in serum creatinine, or a reduction in baseline creatinine clearance.
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country.
United States4 sites
The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center
Columbus, Ohio, 43210
University of Mississippi Medical Center
Jackson, Mississippi, 39216
William Beaumont Hospital
Royal Oak, Michigan, 48073
Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157
About this study
The broad, long-term objective is to improve outcomes by optimizing healthcare delivery processes for patients with detectable to elevated serum troponin. This clinical trial involving emergency department (ED) patients with intermediate to high-risk chest pain and detectable to minimally elevated serum troponin within 6 hours of evaluation.
Read the detailed description
In the evaluation of patients with possible acute coronary syndrome, serum troponin measurement is a critical determinant of myocardial necrosis. The recent implementation of high-sensitivity troponin assays allows detection of lower levels of serum troponin than possible with less sensitive predecessors. As a result, 30% more patients are diagnosed with myocardial injury but the optimal management of these patients is unclear. Guidelines from the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology recommend an invasive management strategy (Class 1a) but acknowledge that data supporting an invasive strategy were based on less sensitive troponin assays than those available today. Clinical trials of an invasive strategy in patients with detectable to minimally elevated troponin values demonstrate conflicting results. Observational data suggest aggressive medical therapy rather than increased use of revascularization drives improved outcomes in these patients. Meanwhile, these patients with minimally elevated serum troponin values have experienced a near doubling in the rate of invasive angiography. In short, it is uncertain whether patients with detectable to minimally elevated troponin results benefit from current invasive-based care strategies. As an alternative, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is highly accurate for detecting significant coronary disease and the need for coronary revascularization.
Objectives: The broad, long-term objective is to improve outcomes by optimizing healthcare delivery processes for patients with detectable to elevated serum troponin. To achieve this goal, we propose a clinical trial (n=312) involving emergency department patients with intermediate to high-risk chest pain and detectable to minimally elevated serum troponin within 6 hours of evaluation.
Methods: Participants will be randomized to one of two care strategies: a) invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy, or b) CMR-guided. Outcomes will be assessed over an average of 2.3 years. The specific aims of this proposal are 1) Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces the composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and cardiac-related hospital readmission over the study duration, and 2) Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces invasive angiography, coronary revascularization, recurrent cardiac testing, and cardiac-related emergency department visits.
- Conditions
- Acute Coronary Syndrome, Chest Pain
- Being tested
- Cardiac MRI, ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care
- Keywords
- Acute Coronary Syndrome, Chest pain, Cardiac MRI, Risk Stratification, Emergency Department, Elevated Troponin, Troponin, Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
- Medical subject headings
- Acute Coronary Syndrome, Chest Pain, Emergencies, Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Cardiac MRIProcedure or surgery
Also called CMR, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Participants in the CMR-guided care group will receive a cardiac MRI.
ACC/AHA Guideline adherent careOther
Participants in the invasive-based guideline-adherent care group will receive care adherent with current American College of Cardiology / American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline recommendations. ( ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care )
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| CMR-guided care | Experimental | Participants in this group will receive a cardiac MRI Receives: Procedure: Cardiac MRI |
| Invasive-based guideline-adherent care | Active comparator | Participants will receive care adherent with current ACC/AHA guideline recommendations. ( ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care ) Receives: Other: ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Reduction in composite death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac-related hospital readmissions, and cardiac-related Emergency Department (ED) visits.
Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces the composite of death, nonfatal MI, cardiac-related hospital readmission, and cardiac-related ED visits over time.
Measured: 5 years
Secondary outcomes (3)
Reduction in invasive angiography.
Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces invasive angiography.
Measured: 5 years
Reduction in coronary revascularization.
Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces coronary revascularization.
Measured: 5 years
Reduction in recurrent cardiac testing.
Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces recurrent cardiac testing.
Measured: 5 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Aug 2013 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2013
- Primary completion29 Jul 2020
- Study completion2 Oct 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (69)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Acute Coronary SyndromeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Wake Forest University Health SciencesThe 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
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 312 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Chadwick Miller, MD, MS, Principal investigator, WFBMC
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01931852
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IRB00022322
- Other IDs
- 1R01HL118263-01A1
- Acronym
- CMR-IMPACT
- Status last verified
- Jul 2020
- First submitted
- 26 Aug 2013
- Last updated
- 4 Mar 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Pitts SR, Niska RW, Xu J, Burt CW. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2006 emergency department summary. Natl Health Stat Report. 2008 Aug 6;(7):1-38.
PubMed 18958996Christenson J, Innes G, McKnight D, Thompson CR, Wong H, Yu E, Boychuk B, Grafstein E, Rosenberg F, Gin K, Anis A, Singer J. A clinical prediction rule for early discharge of patients with chest pain. Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Jan;47(1):1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.08.007. Epub 2005 Oct 19.
PubMed 16387209Wright RS, Anderson JL, Adams CD, Bridges CR, Casey DE Jr, Ettinger SM, Fesmire FM, Ganiats TG, Jneid H, Lincoff AM, Peterson ED, Philippides GJ, Theroux P, Wenger NK, Zidar JP, Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, Bridges CR, Califf RM, Casey DE Jr, Chavey WE 2nd, Fesmire FM, Hochman JS, Levin TN, Lincoff AM, Peterson ED, Theroux P, Wenger NK, Wright RS. 2011 ACCF/AHA focused update of the Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (updating the 2007 guideline): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 May 10;57(19):1920-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.02.009. Epub 2011 Mar 28. No abstract available.
PubMed 21450428Tatum JL, Jesse RL, Kontos MC, Nicholson CS, Schmidt KL, Roberts CS, Ornato JP. Comprehensive strategy for the evaluation and triage of the chest pain patient. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Jan;29(1):116-25. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(97)70317-2.
PubMed 8998090Hoffmann U, Nagurney JT, Moselewski F, Pena A, Ferencik M, Chae CU, Cury RC, Butler J, Abbara S, Brown DF, Manini A, Nichols JH, Achenbach S, Brady TJ. Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation. 2006 Nov 21;114(21):2251-60. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.634808. Epub 2006 Oct 30.
PubMed 17075011Gomberg-Maitland M, Murphy SA, Moliterno DJ, Cannon CP. Are we appropriately triaging patients with unstable angina? Am Heart J. 2005 Apr;149(4):613-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.09.035.
PubMed 15990742Stowers SA, Eisenstein EL, Th Wackers FJ, Berman DS, Blackshear JL, Jones AD Jr, Szymanski TJ Jr, Lam LC, Simons TA, Natale D, Paige KA, Wagner GS. An economic analysis of an aggressive diagnostic strategy with single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging and early exercise stress testing in emergency department patients who present with chest pain but nondiagnostic electrocardiograms: results from a randomized trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2000 Jan;35(1):17-25. doi: 10.1016/S0196-0644(00)70100-4.
PubMed 10613936Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Ross MA, O'Neil BJ, Raff GL. A randomized controlled trial of multi-slice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Feb 27;49(8):863-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.08.064. Epub 2007 Feb 12.
PubMed 17320744Heller GV, Stowers SA, Hendel RC, Herman SD, Daher E, Ahlberg AW, Baron JM, Mendes de Leon CF, Rizzo JA, Wackers FJ. Clinical value of acute rest technetium-99m tetrofosmin tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with acute chest pain and nondiagnostic electrocardiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998 Apr;31(5):1011-7. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00057-6.
PubMed 9562001Farkouh ME, Smars PA, Reeder GS, Zinsmeister AR, Evans RW, Meloy TD, Kopecky SL, Allen M, Allison TG, Gibbons RJ, Gabriel SE. A clinical trial of a chest-pain observation unit for patients with unstable angina. Chest Pain Evaluation in the Emergency Room (CHEER) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1998 Dec 24;339(26):1882-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199812243392603.
PubMed 9862943Body R, Carley S, McDowell G, Jaffe AS, France M, Cruickshank K, Wibberley C, Nuttall M, Mackway-Jones K. Rapid exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in patients with undetectable troponin using a high-sensitivity assay. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Sep 20;58(13):1332-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.026.
PubMed 21920261Mills NL, Churchhouse AM, Lee KK, Anand A, Gamble D, Shah AS, Paterson E, MacLeod M, Graham C, Walker S, Denvir MA, Fox KA, Newby DE. Implementation of a sensitive troponin I assay and risk of recurrent myocardial infarction and death in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. JAMA. 2011 Mar 23;305(12):1210-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.338.
PubMed 21427373Mehta SR, Cannon CP, Fox KA, Wallentin L, Boden WE, Spacek R, Widimsky P, McCullough PA, Hunt D, Braunwald E, Yusuf S. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA. 2005 Jun 15;293(23):2908-17. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.23.2908.
PubMed 15956636Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, Vicari R, Frey MJ, Lakkis N, Neumann FJ, Robertson DH, DeLucca PT, DiBattiste PM, Gibson CM, Braunwald E; TACTICS (Treat Angina with Aggrastat and Determine Cost of Therapy with an Invasive or Conservative Strategy)--Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 18 Investigators. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. N Engl J Med. 2001 Jun 21;344(25):1879-87. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200106213442501.
PubMed 11419424Qayyum R, Khalid MR, Adomaityte J, Papadakos SP, Messineo FC. Systematic review: comparing routine and selective invasive strategies for the acute coronary syndrome. Ann Intern Med. 2008 Feb 5;148(3):186-96. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-148-3-200802050-00005.
PubMed 18252682
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Mar 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Strategy for the Management of Patients With Acute Chest Pain and Detectable to Elevated Troponin
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01931852
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CMR-IMPACT / IRB00022322
- Conditions
- Acute Coronary Syndrome, Chest Pain
- Keywords
- Acute Coronary Syndrome, Chest pain, Cardiac MRI, Risk Stratification, Emergency Department, Elevated Troponin, Troponin, Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 312 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Wake Forest University Health SciencesUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
- Study start
- Sep 2013 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 29 Jul 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 2 Oct 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Aug 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.
The broad, long-term objective is to improve outcomes by optimizing healthcare delivery processes for patients with detectable to elevated serum troponin. This clinical trial involving emergency department (ED) patients with intermediate to high-risk chest pain and detectable to minimally elevated serum troponin within 6 hours of evaluation.
Detailed description
In the evaluation of patients with possible acute coronary syndrome, serum troponin measurement is a critical determinant of myocardial necrosis. The recent implementation of high-sensitivity troponin assays allows detection of lower levels of serum troponin than possible with less sensitive predecessors. As a result, 30% more patients are diagnosed with myocardial injury but the optimal management of these patients is unclear. Guidelines from the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology recommend an invasive management strategy (Class 1a) but acknowledge that data supporting an invasive strategy were based on less sensitive troponin assays than those available today. Clinical trials of an invasive strategy in patients with detectable to minimally elevated troponin values demonstrate conflicting results. Observational data suggest aggressive medical therapy rather than increased use of revascularization drives improved outcomes in these patients. Meanwhile, these patients with minimally elevated serum troponin values have experienced a near doubling in the rate of invasive angiography. In short, it is uncertain whether patients with detectable to minimally elevated troponin results benefit from current invasive-based care strategies. As an alternative, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is highly accurate for detecting significant coronary disease and the need for coronary revascularization.
Objectives: The broad, long-term objective is to improve outcomes by optimizing healthcare delivery processes for patients with detectable to elevated serum troponin. To achieve this goal, we propose a clinical trial (n=312) involving emergency department patients with intermediate to high-risk chest pain and detectable to minimally elevated serum troponin within 6 hours of evaluation.
Methods: Participants will be randomized to one of two care strategies: a) invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy, or b) CMR-guided. Outcomes will be assessed over an average of 2.3 years. The specific aims of this proposal are 1) Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces the composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and cardiac-related hospital readmission over the study duration, and 2) Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces invasive angiography, coronary revascularization, recurrent cardiac testing, and cardiac-related emergency department visits.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| CMR-guided care | Experimental | Procedure: Cardiac MRIParticipants in this group will receive a cardiac MRI |
| Invasive-based guideline-adherent care | Active comparator | Other: ACC/AHA Guideline adherent careParticipants will receive care adherent with current ACC/AHA guideline recommendations. ( ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care ) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Age greater than or equal to 21 years of age at the time of enrollment
- Symptoms consistent with acute coronary syndrome
- At least 1 troponin > lower limit of detection and ≤1.0 ng/ml within 6 hours of the initial evaluation
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Any troponin >1.0 ng/ml at the time of consent
- New ST-segment elevation (≥ 1 mV) or depression (≥ 2 mV)
- Hemodynamic instability (symptomatic systolic BP <90 mmHg, dysrhythmia)
- Ongoing, unrelieved symptoms thought to represent cardiac ischemia and requiring immediate cardiac catheterization
- Known severe multi-vessel CAD previously determined to be not amendable to mechanical intervention
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Cardiac MRIAlso: CMR, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ImagingParticipants in the CMR-guided care group will receive a cardiac MRI. | Procedure or surgery | CMR-guided care |
| ACC/AHA Guideline adherent careParticipants in the invasive-based guideline-adherent care group will receive care adherent with current American College of Cardiology / American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline recommendations. ( ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care ) | Other | Invasive-based guideline-adherent care |
Primary outcome
Reduction in composite death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac-related hospital readmissions, and cardiac-related Emergency Department (ED) visits.
Time frame: 5 years
Test whether a CMR-guided strategy (versus invasive-based guideline-adherent strategy) reduces the composite of death, nonfatal MI, cardiac-related hospital readmission, and cardiac-related ED visits over time.
3 secondary outcomes
Reduction in invasive angiography.
Time frame: 5 years
Reduction in coronary revascularization.
Time frame: 5 years
Reduction in recurrent cardiac testing.
Time frame: 5 years
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 4 Mar 2022.
- Background: PubMed 18958996Pitts SR, Niska RW, Xu J, Burt CW. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2006 emergency department summary. Natl Health Stat Report. 2008 Aug 6;(7):1-38.
- Background: PubMed 16387209Christenson J, Innes G, McKnight D, Thompson CR, Wong H, Yu E, Boychuk B, Grafstein E, Rosenberg F, Gin K, Anis A, Singer J. A clinical prediction rule for early discharge of patients with chest pain. Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Jan;47(1):1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.08.007. Epub 2005 Oct 19.
- Background: PubMed 21450428Wright RS, Anderson JL, Adams CD, Bridges CR, Casey DE Jr, Ettinger SM, Fesmire FM, Ganiats TG, Jneid H, Lincoff AM, Peterson ED, Philippides GJ, Theroux P, Wenger NK, Zidar JP, Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, Bridges CR, Califf RM, Casey DE Jr, Chavey WE 2nd, Fesmire FM, Hochman JS, Levin TN, Lincoff AM, Peterson ED, Theroux P, Wenger NK, Wright RS. 2011 ACCF/AHA focused update of the Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (updating the 2007 guideline): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 May 10;57(19):1920-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.02.009. Epub 2011 Mar 28. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 8998090Tatum JL, Jesse RL, Kontos MC, Nicholson CS, Schmidt KL, Roberts CS, Ornato JP. Comprehensive strategy for the evaluation and triage of the chest pain patient. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Jan;29(1):116-25. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(97)70317-2.
- Background: PubMed 17075011Hoffmann U, Nagurney JT, Moselewski F, Pena A, Ferencik M, Chae CU, Cury RC, Butler J, Abbara S, Brown DF, Manini A, Nichols JH, Achenbach S, Brady TJ. Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation. 2006 Nov 21;114(21):2251-60. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.634808. Epub 2006 Oct 30.
- Background: PubMed 15990742Gomberg-Maitland M, Murphy SA, Moliterno DJ, Cannon CP. Are we appropriately triaging patients with unstable angina? Am Heart J. 2005 Apr;149(4):613-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.09.035.
- Background: PubMed 10613936Stowers SA, Eisenstein EL, Th Wackers FJ, Berman DS, Blackshear JL, Jones AD Jr, Szymanski TJ Jr, Lam LC, Simons TA, Natale D, Paige KA, Wagner GS. An economic analysis of an aggressive diagnostic strategy with single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging and early exercise stress testing in emergency department patients who present with chest pain but nondiagnostic electrocardiograms: results from a randomized trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2000 Jan;35(1):17-25. doi: 10.1016/S0196-0644(00)70100-4.
- Background: PubMed 17320744Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Ross MA, O'Neil BJ, Raff GL. A randomized controlled trial of multi-slice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Feb 27;49(8):863-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.08.064. Epub 2007 Feb 12.
- Background: PubMed 9562001Heller GV, Stowers SA, Hendel RC, Herman SD, Daher E, Ahlberg AW, Baron JM, Mendes de Leon CF, Rizzo JA, Wackers FJ. Clinical value of acute rest technetium-99m tetrofosmin tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with acute chest pain and nondiagnostic electrocardiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998 Apr;31(5):1011-7. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00057-6.
- Background: PubMed 9862943Farkouh ME, Smars PA, Reeder GS, Zinsmeister AR, Evans RW, Meloy TD, Kopecky SL, Allen M, Allison TG, Gibbons RJ, Gabriel SE. A clinical trial of a chest-pain observation unit for patients with unstable angina. Chest Pain Evaluation in the Emergency Room (CHEER) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1998 Dec 24;339(26):1882-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199812243392603.
- Background: PubMed 21920261Body R, Carley S, McDowell G, Jaffe AS, France M, Cruickshank K, Wibberley C, Nuttall M, Mackway-Jones K. Rapid exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in patients with undetectable troponin using a high-sensitivity assay. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Sep 20;58(13):1332-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.026.
- Background: PubMed 21427373Mills NL, Churchhouse AM, Lee KK, Anand A, Gamble D, Shah AS, Paterson E, MacLeod M, Graham C, Walker S, Denvir MA, Fox KA, Newby DE. Implementation of a sensitive troponin I assay and risk of recurrent myocardial infarction and death in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. JAMA. 2011 Mar 23;305(12):1210-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.338.
- Wake Forest Baptist Medical CenterLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Acute Coronary Syndrome
Recruiting
CT Stress Myocardial Perfusion, Fractional Flow Reserve and Angiography in Patients With Stable Chest Pain Syndromes
Coronary Artery Disease, Chest Syndrome
Recruiting
WIN Ratio Analysis to Determine a Strategy of Non- Invasive SUpport for Respiratory Failure in the EmeRgency Department
Acute Hypoxic Respiratory Failure, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)
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
Enrolling by invitation
Optical Coherence Tomography in Acute Vessel Evaluation
Ischemic Heart Disease, Ischemic Coronary Artery Disease
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Chadwick Miller, MD, MS principal investigator
WFBMC
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Cardiac MRI and ACC/AHA Guideline adherent care in people with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Chest Pain, run by Wake Forest University Health Sciences at 4 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 3 inclusion and 10 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 4 Mar 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 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?
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?
Reduction in composite death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac-related hospital readmissions, and cardiac-related Emergency Department (ED) visits. (time frame: 5 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 NCT01931852, which also lists 69 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 4 Mar 2022.