AzTrials
AzTrials

Submassive Pulmonary EmbolismUltraStar sPENCT03389971

ULTRAsound-assisted Catheter vs. STAndaRd Catheter Thrombolysis for Submassive Pulmonary Embolism

A study testing catheter-directed thrombolysis in people with Submassive Pulmonary Embolism, run by Piedmont Healthcare at 1 site in United States.

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

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) accounts for 5-10% of in-hospital deaths. Systemic anticoagulation (AC) is the standard of care and thrombolysis is recommended for those at a higher mortality risk. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 80 years
Conditions the study is for
Submassive Pulmonary Embolism
What is being tested?
catheter-directed thrombolysis
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
10 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
6 Dec 2017to 1 Apr 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 18 to 80 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Patients with submassive PE (CT or echocardiographic RV strain (defined as RV/LV ratio >1) without persisting hypotension <90mmHg or drop of systolic blood pressure by at least 40mm Hg for at least 15 minutes with signs of end-organ hypoperfusion (cold extremities or low urinary output <30 mL/h or mental confusion) and without the need of catecholamine support or cardiopulmonary resuscitation)

Who cannot join

  • <18 or >80
  • pregnancy
  • index PE symptom duration >14 days
  • high bleeding risk (any prior intracranial hemorrhage, known structural intracranial cerebrovascular disease or neoplasm, ischemic stroke within 3 months, suspected aortic dissection, active bleeding or bleeding diathesis, recent spinal or cranial/brain surgery, recent closed-head or facial trauma with bony fracture or brain injury)
  • participation in any other investigational drug or device study
  • life expectancy <90 days
  • inability to comply with study assessments

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Piedmont Healthcare

    Atlanta, Georgia, 30309

Other trials in United States

About this study

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) accounts for 5-10% of in-hospital deaths. Systemic anticoagulation (AC) is the standard of care and thrombolysis is recommended for those at a higher mortality risk. Catheter-directed therapies, mainly standard infusion catheter thrombolysis (CDT) and ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis (USAT), have been introduced as new more effective and safer treatment modalities. USAT is a modification of standard catheter lysis utilizing a system of local ultrasound to dissociate the fibrin matrix of the thrombus with simultaneous acoustic streaming of the thrombolytic agent, allowing more efficient thrombolysis. However, there is limited comparative effectiveness data against standard multi-side hole catheter infusion. More rapid clearance of pulmonary thrombus by USAT compared to standard CDT may prove to be clinically beneficial and cost effective. Alternatively, if thrombus clearance is similar, the cost of USAT may exceed the cost of CDT (equipment and disposables), without realization any advantage.

Read the detailed description

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) carries a high morbidity and is the third-leading cause of cardiovascular mortality in the western world. It accounts for 5-10% of in-hospital deaths that for the United States translates to 200,000 deaths per year. Recent registries and cohort studies suggest that approximately 10% of all patients with acute PE die during the first 1 to 3 months after diagnosis. Studies that have observed survivors for >3 months have reported an incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) 1-5% within 2-3 years after PE. CTEPH is an incapacitating long-term complication of thromboembolic disease with a negative impact on the patient's quality of life and prognosis.

The management acute PE is mainly guided by the acuity and severity of clinical presentation. Initial systemic anticoagulation (AC) is the standard of care and treatment is escalated based on the clinical presentation and patient characteristics that may stratify them at a higher mortality risk. The goals of therapy are to primarily prevent mortality, and secondarily potentially prevent late onset chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) and improve quality of life.

Massive PE is defined as PE associated with sustained hemodynamic instability, whereas submassive PE (sPE) is defined as PE without hemodynamic instability but with abnormal right ventricular (RV) function and/or evidence of myocardial necrosis. It is notable that there is ongoing interest to accurately risk stratify sPE to identify the patients who are at increased risk of decompensating and/or dying. Clinical scores, imaging tests and biomarkers are under investigation, yet an ideal prognostic tool is still pending. A novel cardiac biomarker, heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (h-FABP), is emerging as a significant predictor of mortality in patients with submassive PE.

Systemic intravenous thrombolysis is universally recommended by all guideline bodies for massive pulmonary embolism, but remains controversial for submassive PE. In the most recent metaanalysis, the subgroup analysis of 8 submassive PE trials (1993-2014, n=1775) showed that thrombolytic therapy was associated with a mortality reduction (1.39% vs 2.92%) but with an increase in major bleeding (7.74% vs 2.25%).11 These results were mainly driven by the largest randomized trial (PEITHO, 1006 patients) which compared a single, weight-adapted i.v. bolus of tenecteplase with standard anticoagulation.

The recent development of catheter-directed therapies such as catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis (USAT), and pharmacomechanical or aspiration thrombectomy has introduced more tools for the treatment of acute PE. Proponents of these techniques suggest that they may provide a similar therapeutic benefit as systemic thrombolysis, while decreasing the dose of thrombolytic required and potentially decreasing the risk of adverse bleeding events. Both the American Heart Association and more recently European Society of Cardiology have acknowledged CDT as a viable treatment alternative for high risk acute sPE (echocardiographic RV dysfunction and elevated cardiac biomarkers), if appropriate expertise is available and particularly when the bleeding risk is high.

Catheter-directed thrombolysis requires placement of a multi-sidehole infusion catheter within the pulmonary arterial thrombus burden under angiographic guidance. Thrombolytic medications are slowly infused through the catheter, which is left in place for the duration of the treatment. USAT is a modification of this therapy utilizing a proprietary system of local high frequency, low-power ultrasound to dissociate the fibrin matrix of the thrombus with simultaneous acoustic streaming of the infusate, allowing deeper penetration of lytic medication.

Several observational non-controlled series have demonstrated the efficacy of catheter-directed techniques in improving clinical and hemodynamic parameters and reducing clot burden while demonstrating a favorable safety profile. The ULTIMA trial was the first randomized controlled trial to include CDIs for sPE comparing standardized fixed-dose of USAT (10mg rtPA per lung over 15 hours) and AC to AC alone. In the USAT group, but not in the heparin group, the mean RV/LV ratio was significantly reduced at 24 hours, but became comparable between the two groups at 90 days. The RV systolic function was significantly improved in the USAT group vs. the heparin group at both 24 hours and 90 days. In both study groups minor bleeding complications were rare and there were no major bleeding complications. The SEATTLE II trial, a single-arm study evaluating the effectiveness of USAT, showed also an RV/LV ratio improvement at 48 hours.

Limited data exists for comparing different catheter-directed therapies for acute PE. The majority of recent series for catheter-directed interventions utilize USAT exclusively; however there is limited comparative effectiveness data comparing this modality to standard multi-sidehole catheter infusion. Preliminary, non-controlled data are conflicting. One series by Lin and colleagues of 33 high-risk PE patients suggested benefit for USAT for angiographic clearance of thrombus burden with more bleeding events in the CDT group. Kuo and colleagues noted no difference in outcomes and treatment specifics between USAT and CDT in the recently published early results of a multicenter prospective registry. The University of Pittsburgh group's retrospective analysis of 63 patients suggests that there may be no difference between the two treatment modalities, demonstrating similar rates of outcomes such as survival, hemodynamic stabilization, and echocardiographic parameters in both groups with similar procedure length and lytic dose in the time-adjusted cohorts. Selection bias cannot be underestimated in all these studies.

The expected benefit of USAT has been dependent on the device's ability to increase penetration of lytic into thrombus using high frequency, low power ultrasound, due to its reversible effects on fibrin dissociation. This benefit has been shown to result in faster thrombus clearance in selected vascular beds in some studies, such as the recently published DUET study comparing USAT and CDT in arterial occlusions. Evidence from the venous circulation, coming from the recent BERNUTIFUL trial demonstrated no difference in time to thrombus clearance in lower extremity deep venous thrombosis.

Being tested
catheter-directed thrombolysis

What participants receive

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

  • catheter-directed thrombolysisProcedure or surgery

    catheter-directed thrombolysis with commercially available multi-sidehole catheter or USAT catheter

Study groups in NCT03389971
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
multi-sidehole catheterActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Procedure: catheter-directed thrombolysis
USAT catheterExperimentalNot described
Receives: Procedure: catheter-directed thrombolysis

What is being measured

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

  1. thrombus load reduction

    Determine differences in the percentage of thrombus load reduction from baseline to the termination of lysis between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

Secondary outcomes (12)
  1. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - echocardiographic

    Determine differences in cardiopulmonary echocardiographic parameters between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  2. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - hemodynamic

    Determine differences in cardiopulmonary hemodynamic parameters between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  3. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - respiratory

    Determine differences in cardiopulmonary respiratory parameters between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  4. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - decompensation

    Determine differences in decompensation clinical outcomes between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  5. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - mortality

    Determine differences in mortality clinical outcomes between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  6. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - complications

    Determine differences in clinical complications between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  7. cardiopulmonary and clinical outcomes - ICU stay

    Determine differences in ICU length of stay between the two techniques

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  8. San Diego Shortness of Breath questionnaire

    Determine differences in the impact of catheter directed interventions on functional capacity and health-related quality of life outcomes at 3 and 12 months using a 0 to 5 scale where zero is nota at all breathless and 5 is maximally breathless or too breathless to do the activity. Total scoring range from 0 to 120.

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  9. SF36

    Determine differences in the impact of catheter directed interventions on functional capacity and health-related quality of life outcomes at 3 and 12 months using the questionnaire noted in the title

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  10. PE QOL

    Determine differences in the impact of catheter directed interventions on functional capacity and health-related quality of life outcomes at 3 and 12 months using the questionnaire noted in the title

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  11. utilization cost

    Perform a cost utilization analysis for the two patient groups to compare differences in medical costs

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

  12. resource utilization

    Perform a resource utilization analysis, what services will be utilized by the patient

    Measured: 12 months post surgery

Timeline

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

  1. First posted4 Jan 2018
  2. Study start6 Dec 2017
  3. Primary completion1 Apr 2020
  4. Study completion1 Apr 2020

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
10 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03389971
Sponsor's protocol ID
UltraStar sPE
Acronym
UltraStar sPE
Status last verified
Sep 2021
First submitted
6 Dec 2017
Last updated
24 Sep 2021
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Publications

  • Kahn SR, Houweling AH, Granton J, Rudski L, Dennie C, Hirsch A. Long-term outcomes after pulmonary embolism: current knowledge and future research. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2014 Jul;25(5):407-15. doi: 10.1097/MBC.0000000000000070.

    PubMed 24469387
  • Avgerinos ED, Chaer RA. Catheter-directed interventions for acute pulmonary embolism. J Vasc Surg. 2015 Feb;61(2):559-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.10.036. Epub 2014 Dec 16.

    PubMed 25524824
  • Jaff MR, McMurtry MS, Archer SL, Cushman M, Goldenberg N, Goldhaber SZ, Jenkins JS, Kline JA, Michaels AD, Thistlethwaite P, Vedantham S, White RJ, Zierler BK; American Heart Association Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation; American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease; American Heart Association Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology. Management of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism, iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011 Apr 26;123(16):1788-830. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e318214914f. Epub 2011 Mar 21.

    PubMed 21422387
  • Kearon C, Akl EA, Comerota AJ, Prandoni P, Bounameaux H, Goldhaber SZ, Nelson ME, Wells PS, Gould MK, Dentali F, Crowther M, Kahn SR. Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012 Feb;141(2 Suppl):e419S-e496S. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2301.

    PubMed 22315268
  • Konstantinides SV, Torbicki A, Agnelli G, Danchin N, Fitzmaurice D, Galie N, Gibbs JS, Huisman MV, Humbert M, Kucher N, Lang I, Lankeit M, Lekakis J, Maack C, Mayer E, Meneveau N, Perrier A, Pruszczyk P, Rasmussen LH, Schindler TH, Svitil P, Vonk Noordegraaf A, Zamorano JL, Zompatori M; Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). 2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J. 2014 Nov 14;35(43):3033-69, 3069a-3069k. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu283. Epub 2014 Aug 29. No abstract available.

    PubMed 25173341
  • Becattini C, Agnelli G, Pesavento R, Silingardi M, Poggio R, Taliani MR, Ageno W. Incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension after a first episode of pulmonary embolism. Chest. 2006 Jul;130(1):172-5. doi: 10.1378/chest.130.1.172.

    PubMed 16840398
  • Meyer G, Planquette B, Sanchez O. Long-term outcome of pulmonary embolism. Curr Opin Hematol. 2008 Sep;15(5):499-503. doi: 10.1097/MOH.0b013e3283063a51.

    PubMed 18695374
  • Pengo V, Lensing AW, Prins MH, Marchiori A, Davidson BL, Tiozzo F, Albanese P, Biasiolo A, Pegoraro C, Iliceto S, Prandoni P; Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Study Group. Incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 27;350(22):2257-64. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032274.

    PubMed 15163775
  • Sanchez O, Trinquart L, Colombet I, Durieux P, Huisman MV, Chatellier G, Meyer G. Prognostic value of right ventricular dysfunction in patients with haemodynamically stable pulmonary embolism: a systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2008 Jun;29(12):1569-77. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn208. Epub 2008 May 21.

    PubMed 18495689
  • Guerin L, Couturaud F, Parent F, Revel MP, Gillaizeau F, Planquette B, Pontal D, Guegan M, Simonneau G, Meyer G, Sanchez O. Prevalence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension after acute pulmonary embolism. Prevalence of CTEPH after pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 2014 Sep 2;112(3):598-605. doi: 10.1160/TH13-07-0538. Epub 2014 Jun 5.

    PubMed 24898545
  • Chatterjee S, Chakraborty A, Weinberg I, Kadakia M, Wilensky RL, Sardar P, Kumbhani DJ, Mukherjee D, Jaff MR, Giri J. Thrombolysis for pulmonary embolism and risk of all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2014 Jun 18;311(23):2414-21. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.5990.

    PubMed 24938564
  • Fasullo S, Scalzo S, Maringhini G, Ganci F, Cannizzaro S, Basile I, Cangemi D, Terrazzino G, Parrinello G, Sarullo FM, Baglini R, Paterna S, Di Pasquale P. Six-month echocardiographic study in patients with submassive pulmonary embolism and right ventricle dysfunction: comparison of thrombolysis with heparin. Am J Med Sci. 2011 Jan;341(1):33-9. doi: 10.1097/MAJ.0b013e3181f1fc3e.

    PubMed 20890176
  • Kline JA, Steuerwald MT, Marchick MR, Hernandez-Nino J, Rose GA. Prospective evaluation of right ventricular function and functional status 6 months after acute submassive pulmonary embolism: frequency of persistent or subsequent elevation in estimated pulmonary artery pressure. Chest. 2009 Nov;136(5):1202-1210. doi: 10.1378/chest.08-2988. Epub 2009 Jun 19.

    PubMed 19542256
  • Sharifi M, Bay C, Skrocki L, Rahimi F, Mehdipour M; "MOPETT" Investigators. Moderate pulmonary embolism treated with thrombolysis (from the "MOPETT" Trial). Am J Cardiol. 2013 Jan 15;111(2):273-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.09.027. Epub 2012 Oct 24.

    PubMed 23102885
  • Ain DL, Jaff MR. Treatment of Submassive Pulmonary Embolism: Knowing When to be Aggressive and When to be Conservative. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2015 Jun;17(6):385. doi: 10.1007/s11936-015-0385-y.

    PubMed 25895738

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing catheter-directed thrombolysis in people with Submassive Pulmonary Embolism, run by Piedmont Healthcare at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 7 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 24 Sep 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

thrombus load reduction (time frame: 12 months post surgery). 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 NCT03389971, which also lists 41 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 24 Sep 2021.

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