Cardiovascular DiseaseNCT02163031
Left vs. Right Radial Approach for Routine Catheterization of Heart Transplant Patients
A study testing devices used in the coronary angiography in people with Cardiovascular Disease, run by Hospital Clinic of Barcelona at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Orthotopic heart transplantation is a well established therapeutic measure for end stage heart failure, leading to significant improvements in survival and quality of life. In the routine clinical practice, orthotopic heart transplantation patients receive periodic cardiac catheterization for early detection of… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Cardiovascular Disease
- What is being tested?
- devices used in the coronary angiography
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- Jun 2014to Jan 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
None listed.
Who cannot join
- chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine >2.0 mg/dl) with the potential necessity of using the radial artery as a native fistula will be considered one of the exclusion criteria;
- in case of an abnormal or doubtful bilateral Allen's test, a pletysmography will be done. The presence of a type A or B curve will be considered a marker of adequate hand collaterals and the procedure will be able by this access. Only the presence of bilateral type C or D curves will be considered a contraindication to trans radial approach.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: RADIAL 2 Heart Transplant Study: Left vs. Right Radial Approach Randomized Comparison for Routine Catheterization of Heart Transplant Patients
Orthotopic heart transplantation is a well established therapeutic measure for end stage heart failure, leading to significant improvements in survival and quality of life. In the routine clinical practice, orthotopic heart transplantation patients receive periodic cardiac catheterization for early detection of allograft vascular disease.
The coronary angiography of these patients is characterized for several technical difficulties, generally related to the presence of the aortotomy with anomalous implantation of the coronary ostia and to the orthotopic position of the allograft. For these reasons, trans femoral approach is usually preferred. In the last two decades, trans radial approach for coronary angiography emerged to be effective, safe and able to improve patient comfort. However, there is no universal consensus on the optimal choice of radial access from either the left or the right artery. Currently, this choice is largely dependent on the operator's preference. The trans right radial approach is generally preferred in routine clinical practice mainly due to its easier catheter manipulation for the operators from patient's right side, and the current design of radial compression devices for the right wrist in medical market. As such, a major barrier to prevent the wide adoption of the left radial access lies in some difficulty to reach the left wrist leaning over the patient, particularly for shorter operators or in obese patients. However, a great deal of attention has been recently directed toward the trans left radial access, as it has an important anatomical advantage due to the vascular anatomy of epiaortic vessels with a straighter route to the left coronary ostium, which could also reduce the risk of cerebrovascular complications.
Read more
However, no data are available about the performance of trans left radial or trans-right radial approach in coronary angiography orthotopic heart transplantation patients. However, in this particular setting of patients, the left radial approach might reduce the technical difficulties related to the anatomical variations.
In this single centre, prospective, randomized study, we sought to compare trans right radial versus trans left radial approach in terms of amount of contrast medium, radiation exposure, number of catheters used, cross over to the other access site rate and local and systemic complications in orthotopic heart transplantation patients.
Read the detailed description
Orthotopic heart transplantation is a well established therapeutic measure for end stage heart failure, leading to significant improvements in survival and quality of life. Allograft vascular disease remains the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality after orthotopic heart transplantation, with angiographic evidence of allograft vascular disease around 50% of patients at 5- to 15-year follow-up. In the routine clinical practice, orthotopic heart transplantation patients receive periodic cardiac catheterization for early detection of allograft vascular disease.
The coronary angiography of these patients is characterized for several technical difficulties, generally related to the presence of the aortotomy with anomalous implantation of the coronary ostia and to the orthotopic position of the allograft. For these reasons, trans femoral approach is usually preferred. In the last two decades, trans radial approach for coronary angiography emerged to be effective, safe and able to improve patient comfort. However, there is no universal consensus about the optimal choice of radial access from either the left or the right artery. Currently, this choice is largely dependent on the operator's preference. The trans-right-radial approach is generally preferred in routine clinical practice mainly due to its easier catheter manipulation for the operators from patient's right side, and the current design of radial compression devices for the right wrist in medical market. As such, a major barrier to prevent the wide adoption of the left radial access lies in some difficulty to reach the left wrist leaning over the patient, particularly for shorter operators or in obese patients. However, a great deal of attention has been recently directed toward the trans-left-radial access, as it has an important anatomical advantage due to the vascular anatomy of epiaortic vessels with a straighter route to the left coronary ostium, which could also reduce the risk of cerebrovascular complications.
In this context, a recent metanalysis demonstrated that trans left radial access is preferable to trans-right-radial approach in terms of fluoroscopy time and contrast use for the diagnostic or interventional coronary procedures. Moreover, as expected, there was an indication of lowered failure rate of radial access from the left than the right. No data are available about the performance of trans left radial access or trans right radial approach in coronary angiography of orthotopic heart transplantation patients. However, in this particular setting of patients, the trans-left-radial access might reduce the technical difficulties related to the anatomical variations.
In this single-centre, prospective, randomized study, we sought to compare trans right radial approach versus trans-left-radial access in terms of amount of contrast medium, radiation exposure, number of catheters used, cross-over to the other access site rate and local and systemic complications in orthotopic heart transplantation patients.
Study objectives
- To demonstrate the superiority of trans left radial access, compared to trans right radial approach during coronary angiography of orthotopic heart transplantation patients, in terms of amount of contrast medium, radiation exposure, number of catheters used, cross-over to other access site rate local and systemic complications
- To determine the relationship of operator experience with radiation exposure to answer the question that whether we can minimize fluoroscopy time with increased operator experience ("post-hoc analysis");
- To assess the cost effectiveness of coronary angiography performed by trans right radial approach versus trans left radial access ("post hoc analysis").
Method section Clinical data A detailed anamnesis of each trial participant will be collected: age, gender, weight, high, BMI, coronary risk factors (hypertension, dyslipemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking habit, obesity), cause of transplantation, date of transplantation, current clinical status and therapy, ejection fraction, renal function and complete blood count. In particular, creatinine values will be evaluated at baseline, 3-4 days after the interventional procedure and, if impaired, also at 7-10 days from the coronary angiography.
Procedure Participating interventional cardiologists will be high-volume radial operators (meeting minimal proficiency criteria of ≥50% interventional cases by radial approach per year). Each variable will be analyzed separately in consultants, fellows, and post graduate fellows (trainees). In particular, participating interventional cardiologists will be divided in well experienced radial operators (defined as the person who has performed >500 radial procedures including >200 procedures in a recent year), less experienced (the person who has done 200-500 radial procedures in a recent year), and trainee (the person who has done <200 radial procedures). The procedures will be performed according to current guidelines. At the end of the coronary angiography, after introducer removal, a hand wrist compression device (TR Band, Terumo) will be used in the both group.
The procedural time was measured from the arterial puncture up to vascular hemostasis.
The radiation exposure will be measured using:
- dose area product meters, which reflects both the dose of radiation administered and the area on the patient it is administered to. This is a continuous variable measured in microgray meter squared (μGym2).
- fluoroscopy time, which reflects the length of time the patient and operator are exposed to radiation;
- total dose, measured in milligray (mGy), administered from the angiography system.
The amount of contrast medium for each procedure will be recorded. The number and type of catheters employed as well as the number and the type of wires used in the interventional procedure will be detected.
The cross-over to other access site were also collected. In addition, systemic and vascular complications will be evaluated pre-discharge.
In particular, vascular complications will be defined as haemoglobin loss at least 2 mmol/l, necessity of a blood transfusion and vascular repair, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm and arterial occlusion. The renal failure after procedure will be defined as a raise in serum values of creatinine ≥ 0.5 mg/dl or ≥ 25% within 24-72 hours after the exposure to the contrast medium.
Statistical Analysis
All clinical and procedural characteristics will be summarized as mean ± Standard Deviation for continuous variables with normal distribution, median (interquartile range) for those continuous but with skewed distribution, and number (percentage) for categorical variables; The Student t, Mann-Whitney U and Fisher exact tests will be computed when appropriate for bivariate analyses. Firstly, all analyses will be conducted on intention to treat basis, regardless possible access site cross-over. Afterwards, efficacy subset analyses will be performed. A two-tailed p-value <0.05 will be considered statistically significant. Data will be analyzed using SPSS for Windows version 20.0 software (SPSS Inc. Chicago, USA). The sample size will be calculated in order to provide, with a 80% power, the difference of 20 ml with a Standard Deviation of ± 30 of amount of contrast dose (alpha value=0.05) between trans-left-radial access vs. trans-right-radial access.
- Conditions
- Cardiovascular Disease
- Being tested
- devices used in the coronary angiography
- Keywords
- heart transplant, radial approach, catheterization
- Medical subject headings
- Cardiovascular Diseases
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
devices used in the coronary angiographyDevice
Also called catheters, wires, contrast medium
devices used in coronary angiography by left or right radial route
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| right radial approach | Active comparator | devices used in the coronary angiography by right radial approach Receives: Device: devices used in the coronary angiography |
| left radial approach | Active comparator | devices used in the coronary angiography by left radial approach Receives: Device: devices used in the coronary angiography |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans right radial approach in terms of amount of contrast medium.
Measured: 1 week
Secondary outcomes (5)
Superiority of trans-left radial approach in terms of procedural time
Measured: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of radiation exposure (dose area product, fluoroscopy time, total dose administered from the angiography system)
Measured: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of number of catheters used
Measured: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of 4) cross-over to the other access site rate
Measured: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of 5) local and systemic complications
Measured: 1week
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Jun 2014 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2014
- Primary completionDec 2016
- Study completionJan 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cardiovascular DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Hospital Clinic of BarcelonaThe 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
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Clinic of Barcelona
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Manel Sabate, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona
- Investigators
- Manel Sabatè, Principal investigator, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02163031
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0187635
- Status last verified
- Jul 2017
- First submitted
- 9 Jun 2014
- Last updated
- 26 Jul 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: If requested for meta-analysis.
Publications
Norgaz T, Gorgulu S, Dagdelen S. A randomized study comparing the effectiveness of right and left radial approach for coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Aug 1;80(2):260-4. doi: 10.1002/ccd.23463. Epub 2012 Feb 14.
PubMed 22334420Biondi-Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A, Bodi V, Fernandez-Portales J, Kanei Y, Romagnoli E, Agostoni P, Sangiorgi G, Lotrionte M, Modena MG. Right versus left radial artery access for coronary procedures: an international collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis including 5 randomized trials and 3210 patients. Int J Cardiol. 2013 Jul 1;166(3):621-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.11.100. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
PubMed 22192284Sciahbasi A, Romagnoli E, Burzotta F, Trani C, Sarandrea A, Summaria F, Pendenza G, Tommasino A, Patrizi R, Mazzari M, Mongiardo R, Lioy E. Transradial approach (left vs right) and procedural times during percutaneous coronary procedures: TALENT study. Am Heart J. 2011 Jan;161(1):172-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.10.003.
PubMed 21167351
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jul 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- RADIAL 2 Heart Transplant Study: Left vs. Right Radial Approach Randomized Comparison for Routine Catheterization of Heart Transplant Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02163031
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 0187635
- Conditions
- Cardiovascular Disease
- Keywords
- heart transplant, radial approach, catheterization
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Clinic of BarcelonaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2014
- Primary completion
- Dec 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jan 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jun 2014 (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.
Orthotopic heart transplantation is a well established therapeutic measure for end stage heart failure, leading to significant improvements in survival and quality of life. In the routine clinical practice, orthotopic heart transplantation patients receive periodic cardiac catheterization for early detection of allograft vascular disease.
The coronary angiography of these patients is characterized for several technical difficulties, generally related to the presence of the aortotomy with anomalous implantation of the coronary ostia and to the orthotopic position of the allograft. For these reasons, trans femoral approach is usually preferred. In the last two decades, trans radial approach for coronary angiography emerged to be effective, safe and able to improve patient comfort. However, there is no universal consensus on the optimal choice of radial access from either the left or the right artery. Currently, this choice is largely dependent on the operator's preference. The trans right radial approach is generally preferred in routine clinical practice mainly due to its easier catheter manipulation for the operators from patient's right side, and the current design of radial compression devices for the right wrist in medical market. As such, a major barrier to prevent the wide adoption of the left radial access lies in some difficulty to reach the left wrist leaning over the patient, particularly for shorter operators or in obese patients. However, a great deal of attention has been recently directed toward the trans left radial access, as it has an important anatomical advantage due to the vascular anatomy of epiaortic vessels with a straighter route to the left coronary ostium, which could also reduce the risk of cerebrovascular complications.
However, no data are available about the performance of trans left radial or trans-right radial approach in coronary angiography orthotopic heart transplantation patients. However, in this particular setting of patients, the left radial approach might reduce the technical difficulties related to the anatomical variations.
In this single centre, prospective, randomized study, we sought to compare trans right radial versus trans left radial approach in terms of amount of contrast medium, radiation exposure, number of catheters used, cross over to the other access site rate and local and systemic complications in orthotopic heart transplantation patients.
Detailed description
Orthotopic heart transplantation is a well established therapeutic measure for end stage heart failure, leading to significant improvements in survival and quality of life. Allograft vascular disease remains the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality after orthotopic heart transplantation, with angiographic evidence of allograft vascular disease around 50% of patients at 5- to 15-year follow-up. In the routine clinical practice, orthotopic heart transplantation patients receive periodic cardiac catheterization for early detection of allograft vascular disease.
The coronary angiography of these patients is characterized for several technical difficulties, generally related to the presence of the aortotomy with anomalous implantation of the coronary ostia and to the orthotopic position of the allograft. For these reasons, trans femoral approach is usually preferred. In the last two decades, trans radial approach for coronary angiography emerged to be effective, safe and able to improve patient comfort. However, there is no universal consensus about the optimal choice of radial access from either the left or the right artery. Currently, this choice is largely dependent on the operator's preference. The trans-right-radial approach is generally preferred in routine clinical practice mainly due to its easier catheter manipulation for the operators from patient's right side, and the current design of radial compression devices for the right wrist in medical market. As such, a major barrier to prevent the wide adoption of the left radial access lies in some difficulty to reach the left wrist leaning over the patient, particularly for shorter operators or in obese patients. However, a great deal of attention has been recently directed toward the trans-left-radial access, as it has an important anatomical advantage due to the vascular anatomy of epiaortic vessels with a straighter route to the left coronary ostium, which could also reduce the risk of cerebrovascular complications.
In this context, a recent metanalysis demonstrated that trans left radial access is preferable to trans-right-radial approach in terms of fluoroscopy time and contrast use for the diagnostic or interventional coronary procedures. Moreover, as expected, there was an indication of lowered failure rate of radial access from the left than the right. No data are available about the performance of trans left radial access or trans right radial approach in coronary angiography of orthotopic heart transplantation patients. However, in this particular setting of patients, the trans-left-radial access might reduce the technical difficulties related to the anatomical variations.
In this single-centre, prospective, randomized study, we sought to compare trans right radial approach versus trans-left-radial access in terms of amount of contrast medium, radiation exposure, number of catheters used, cross-over to the other access site rate and local and systemic complications in orthotopic heart transplantation patients.
Study objectives
- To demonstrate the superiority of trans left radial access, compared to trans right radial approach during coronary angiography of orthotopic heart transplantation patients, in terms of amount of contrast medium, radiation exposure, number of catheters used, cross-over to other access site rate local and systemic complications
- To determine the relationship of operator experience with radiation exposure to answer the question that whether we can minimize fluoroscopy time with increased operator experience ("post-hoc analysis");
- To assess the cost effectiveness of coronary angiography performed by trans right radial approach versus trans left radial access ("post hoc analysis").
Method section Clinical data A detailed anamnesis of each trial participant will be collected: age, gender, weight, high, BMI, coronary risk factors (hypertension, dyslipemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking habit, obesity), cause of transplantation, date of transplantation, current clinical status and therapy, ejection fraction, renal function and complete blood count. In particular, creatinine values will be evaluated at baseline, 3-4 days after the interventional procedure and, if impaired, also at 7-10 days from the coronary angiography.
Procedure Participating interventional cardiologists will be high-volume radial operators (meeting minimal proficiency criteria of ≥50% interventional cases by radial approach per year). Each variable will be analyzed separately in consultants, fellows, and post graduate fellows (trainees). In particular, participating interventional cardiologists will be divided in well experienced radial operators (defined as the person who has performed >500 radial procedures including >200 procedures in a recent year), less experienced (the person who has done 200-500 radial procedures in a recent year), and trainee (the person who has done <200 radial procedures). The procedures will be performed according to current guidelines. At the end of the coronary angiography, after introducer removal, a hand wrist compression device (TR Band, Terumo) will be used in the both group.
The procedural time was measured from the arterial puncture up to vascular hemostasis.
The radiation exposure will be measured using:
- dose area product meters, which reflects both the dose of radiation administered and the area on the patient it is administered to. This is a continuous variable measured in microgray meter squared (μGym2).
- fluoroscopy time, which reflects the length of time the patient and operator are exposed to radiation;
- total dose, measured in milligray (mGy), administered from the angiography system.
The amount of contrast medium for each procedure will be recorded. The number and type of catheters employed as well as the number and the type of wires used in the interventional procedure will be detected.
The cross-over to other access site were also collected. In addition, systemic and vascular complications will be evaluated pre-discharge.
In particular, vascular complications will be defined as haemoglobin loss at least 2 mmol/l, necessity of a blood transfusion and vascular repair, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm and arterial occlusion. The renal failure after procedure will be defined as a raise in serum values of creatinine ≥ 0.5 mg/dl or ≥ 25% within 24-72 hours after the exposure to the contrast medium.
Statistical Analysis
All clinical and procedural characteristics will be summarized as mean ± Standard Deviation for continuous variables with normal distribution, median (interquartile range) for those continuous but with skewed distribution, and number (percentage) for categorical variables; The Student t, Mann-Whitney U and Fisher exact tests will be computed when appropriate for bivariate analyses. Firstly, all analyses will be conducted on intention to treat basis, regardless possible access site cross-over. Afterwards, efficacy subset analyses will be performed. A two-tailed p-value <0.05 will be considered statistically significant. Data will be analyzed using SPSS for Windows version 20.0 software (SPSS Inc. Chicago, USA). The sample size will be calculated in order to provide, with a 80% power, the difference of 20 ml with a Standard Deviation of ± 30 of amount of contrast dose (alpha value=0.05) between trans-left-radial access vs. trans-right-radial access.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| right radial approach | Active comparator | Device: devices used in the coronary angiographydevices used in the coronary angiography by right radial approach |
| left radial approach | Active comparator | Device: devices used in the coronary angiographydevices used in the coronary angiography by left radial approach |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (0 listed)
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine >2.0 mg/dl) with the potential necessity of using the radial artery as a native fistula will be considered one of the exclusion criteria;
- in case of an abnormal or doubtful bilateral Allen's test, a pletysmography will be done. The presence of a type A or B curve will be considered a marker of adequate hand collaterals and the procedure will be able by this access. Only the presence of bilateral type C or D curves will be considered a contraindication to trans radial approach.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| devices used in the coronary angiographyAlso: catheters, wires, contrast mediumdevices used in coronary angiography by left or right radial route | Device | left radial approach, right radial approach |
Primary outcome
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans right radial approach in terms of amount of contrast medium.
Time frame: 1 week
5 secondary outcomes
Superiority of trans-left radial approach in terms of procedural time
Time frame: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of radiation exposure (dose area product, fluoroscopy time, total dose administered from the angiography system)
Time frame: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of number of catheters used
Time frame: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of 4) cross-over to the other access site rate
Time frame: 1 week
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans-right radial approach in terms of 5) local and systemic complications
Time frame: 1week
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 26 Jul 2017.
- Results publication: PubMed 22334420Norgaz T, Gorgulu S, Dagdelen S. A randomized study comparing the effectiveness of right and left radial approach for coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Aug 1;80(2):260-4. doi: 10.1002/ccd.23463. Epub 2012 Feb 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 22192284Biondi-Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A, Bodi V, Fernandez-Portales J, Kanei Y, Romagnoli E, Agostoni P, Sangiorgi G, Lotrionte M, Modena MG. Right versus left radial artery access for coronary procedures: an international collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis including 5 randomized trials and 3210 patients. Int J Cardiol. 2013 Jul 1;166(3):621-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.11.100. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
- Results publication: PubMed 21167351Sciahbasi A, Romagnoli E, Burzotta F, Trani C, Sarandrea A, Summaria F, Pendenza G, Tommasino A, Patrizi R, Mazzari M, Mongiardo R, Lioy E. Transradial approach (left vs right) and procedural times during percutaneous coronary procedures: TALENT study. Am Heart J. 2011 Jan;161(1):172-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.10.003.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. If requested for meta-analysis.
Related trials for Cardiovascular Disease
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
ENDOTHELION Study Group: Effect of Bosentan in NAION Patients
Ischemic Optic Neuropathy
Active, not recruiting
Digital Reinforcement of Motivational Interviewing Micro-Skills Among Primary Care Healthcare Professionals
Hypertension (Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus)
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Study of YKST02 in Adults With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma
Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)
RecruitingPhase 2
Engaging T-cells to Eliminate MRD in Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Optimizing Response With Talquetmab and Teclistamab (ROTATE)
Multiple Myeloma
Recruiting
PAW-Hydrogel for Chronic Wound Healing
Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU), Pressure Ulcer (PU)
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.
Manel Sabatè principal investigator
Hospital Clinic of Barcelona
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing devices used in the coronary angiography in people with Cardiovascular Disease, run by Hospital Clinic of Barcelona at 1 site in Spain.
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 0 inclusion and 2 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 26 Jul 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 Spain. 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?
Superiority of trans-left radial approach vs. trans right radial approach in terms of amount of contrast medium. (time frame: 1 week). 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 NCT02163031, which also lists 3 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 26 Jul 2017.