AzTrials
AzTrials

Coronary Artery DiseaseNCT02983721

Trans Radial Versus Transfemoral Route for Coronary Angiography

A study testing transradial and Transfemoral in people with Coronary Artery Disease, run by Sheri Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the feasibility, success and safety of Transradial approach (TRA) verses Transfemoral approach (TFA) for diagnostic and therapeutic coronary angiography and coronary interventions, in terms of procedural time, access time, fluoroscopy time, procedural failure, … Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 20 to 85 years
Conditions the study is for
Coronary Artery Disease
What is being tested?
transradial and Transfemoral
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
400 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
Aug 2011to Aug 2015
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 20 to 85 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • diagnostic angiography of coronary vessels, PCI

Who cannot join

  • Patients with impaired renal function tests.
  • Lack of informed consent.
  • Severe infection.
  • Previous contrast allergy.
  • Severe intrinsic/iatrogenic caogulopathy INR>2.
  • Abnormal modified Allen's test.

About this study

Official title: Comparison Between Transradial and Transfemoral Routes of Coronary Angiography and Interventions

The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the feasibility, success and safety of Transradial approach (TRA) verses Transfemoral approach (TFA) for diagnostic and therapeutic coronary angiography and coronary interventions, in terms of procedural time, access time, fluoroscopy time, procedural failure, , length of hospital stay in terms of days in hospital, Complications in terms of thrombophlebitis, hematoma, ecchymosis, infections thrombosis of vessel, MACE, Stroke and others.

Read the detailed description

Background: PCI has been done traditionally through transfemoral route. But now transradial and transbrachial routes are also coming up in practice. We compared transradial versus transfemoral routes for ease of operability, time for procedure, complications, and failure rates through a prospective study. Methods: 400 Patients admitted in department of cardiology for percutaneous interventions were enrolled in the study. 200 patients were assigned to each group randomly. A single team did all the procedures. Pre procedure, intra procedure and post procedure data of all the patients was collected, tabulated and analysed properly.

The variables studied include Access time ,Fluoroscopy time and overall procedure time, post procedure complications( ecchymosis ,Thrombophelibites, Hematoma, procedure access bleed), Failure rates,post procedure myocardial infarction, stroke, acute renal failure and infections.

Being tested
transradial, Transfemoral
Medical subject headings
Coronary Artery Disease

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • transradialProcedure or surgery

    transradial route for coronary angiography and PCI

  • TransfemoralProcedure or surgery

    transfemoral route for coronary angiography and PCI

Study groups in NCT02983721
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
TransfemoralActive comparatorin case of transfemoral approach our preference was to use right femoral route. The groin was prepared and draped and the site was punctured for femoral access after anesthetizing the skin with 2-4 ml of 1% lignocaine. Once the femoral puncture was done 6F sheath of Cordis variety was introduced and 6F Judkins, catheter was introduced and it was guided under fluoroscopic guidance through the aortic route.
Receives: Procedure: transradial; Procedure: Transfemoral
TransradialActive comparatorOur preference was to use the right radial and right femoral routes as they are nearest to operator while facing cardiac monitors, in our hospital. For the radial approach, the wrist was sterilized and draped in usual fashion. Hyperextension over an arm board was done and skin over the puncture site was anesthetized with 2 - 3 ml of 1% lignocaine. A small scaled incision was performed 1 cm proximal to styloid process of radius where arterial pulse was best felt. The radial artery was punctured with a 21 G needle and 6 F sheath (Cardis, Terumo) were introduced into the artery, using Seldinger technique. All patients received verapamil (5mg) to reduce radial artery spasm. Heparin (weight adjusted) was used only in PCIs to prevent artery occlusion and not in elective diagnostic coronary studies. Long 0.038 Terumo guide wire was used under fluoroscopic guidance.
Receives: Procedure: transradial; Procedure: Transfemoral

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Access time

    Access time for the procedures

    Measured: 4 years

  2. Fluoroscopy time

    measure of radiation exposure

    Measured: 4 years

  3. Procedure time

    time taken to do the full procedure

    Measured: 4 years

  4. hospital stay

    time period the patient stayed in the hospital

    Measured: 4 years

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. hematoma

    hematoma development at the site of puncture

    Measured: 4 years

  2. pseudoaneurysm

    local complication at the access site

    Measured: 4 years

  3. bleeding

    at the access site

    Measured: 4 years

  4. Access site failure

    failure to gain access for the procedure

    Measured: 4 years

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted6 Dec 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study startAug 2011
  3. Primary completionAug 2015
  4. Study completionAug 2015

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
400 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02983721
Sponsor's protocol ID
car003421
Other IDs
PG thesis 003421
Status last verified
Dec 2016
First submitted
1 Dec 2016
Last updated
6 Dec 2016
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
Individual data sharing
Yes: can be shared by email

Publications

  • Bhat FA, Changal KH, Raina H, Tramboo NA, Rather HA. Transradial versus transfemoral approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty - A prospective, randomized comparison. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017 Jan 11;17(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s12872-016-0457-2.

    PubMed 28077091

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing transradial and Transfemoral in people with Coronary Artery Disease, run by Sheri Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences.

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 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Dec 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

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?

Access time (time frame: 4 years). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT02983721, which also lists 1 linked publication.

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 6 Dec 2016.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in