Procedural Related Injuries and Complications NecNCT04604340
Radial Versus Femoral Arterial Access for Cerebral Angiography in Adolescents
A study testing transradial access for neuroangiography and transfemoral access for neuroangiography in people with Procedural Related Injuries and Complications Nec and Patient Satisfaction, run by The Hospital for Sick Children at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
This study will compare radial vs femoral access for angiography in adolescents. Neuroangiography and neurointerventions are predominantly performed via femoral access, which has several limitations and complications - pain and discomfort, arterial occlusion, retroperitoneal hemorrhage, activity limitations, and… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 8 to 18 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Procedural Related Injuries and Complications Nec, Patient Satisfaction
- What is being tested?
- transradial access for neuroangiography and transfemoral access for neuroangiography
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 12 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- 22 Sep 2020to 1 Jun 2021
- 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 8 to 18 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Age 8-18 years
- Planned cerebral or supra-aortic angiography for clinical reason
- Positive modified Allen's test using a pulse oximeter on the index finger.
- Radial artery axial maximal diameter of > 2.0 mm measured on a cross-sectional B-mode ultrasound of the distal radial artery, 2-3 cm proximal to the radial styloid, at the anticipated needle puncture site -
Who cannot join
- Age <8 years
- Radial artery internal maximal of diameter 2.0 mm or less (measured on cross-sectional ultrasound 2-3 cm proximal to the radial styloid at the planned puncture site) - these patients would be converted to femoral access without radial artery puncture but would be assessed in the radial artery group as part of an intention-to-treat analysis.
- Conversion to intervention (as opposed to diagnostic cerebral angiogram) during the procedure, as this will likely require a larger (femoral) access sheath; again such patients will still be assessed as part of the intention-to-treat analysis.
- Failed modified Allen's test with pulse oximetry
- -
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Radial Versus Femoral Arterial Access for Cerebral Angiography in Adolescents: A Randomized-controlled Study
This study will compare radial vs femoral access for angiography in adolescents. Neuroangiography and neurointerventions are predominantly performed via femoral access, which has several limitations and complications - pain and discomfort, arterial occlusion, retroperitoneal hemorrhage, activity limitations, and increased admissions. Transradial angiography has shown promise to circumvent these problems, but this has not been studied in children, whose unique anatomical and physiological aspects require that this be evaluated rigorously.
Read the detailed description
Specific Aims:
Angiography in interventional radiology is still most commonly performed through femoral arterial access, wherein patients are committed to invasive procedures through access at their groin, which entails anxiety, embarrassment, pain and discomfort, the inability to resume normal activities for a week, serious complications like retroperitoneal hemorrhage, and increased hospital admissions. Angiography through access at the wrist (transradial angiography) has been shown with some recent data to circumvent these complications and, in general, provide a more satisfactory and safe patient experience. Although transradial angiography has been rapidly accepted by some operators, especially in Cardiology, the absence of evidence for technical details and safety has resulted in much debate in the literature and in recent conferences. Specifically, there is no literature reported in children. The benefits of a method which would allow mobility immediately after the procedure in children are self-evident - this would potentially result in less rebleeds, require little or no sedation, allow sitting up and feeding, and allow parents to interact with their child and feel more comfortable. On the flip side, the feasibility and potential complications in children are unknown, and thus this technique cannot be integrated into clinical practice without interrogating this. This should be ideally performed in a high volume pediatric center with expertise in not only pediatric neuroangiography, but also for minimally invasive arterial access with interventional radiology, to minimize complications. Given the size consideration of arteries in children, we believe a good start point for this study would be with adolescent children.
The Investigator's objective is to provide the highest level of evidence (RCT data) for feasibility, safety and technique of transradial angiography in adolescents, by comparing it against the current gold standard, trans-femoral angiography. This will provide data for subsequent practice guidelines.
This study will be performed in a tertiary pediatric institution, with collaboration between interventional radiologists, neuroradiologists, pediatricians, neurosurgeons, technologists, statisticians, research co-ordinators and imaging physicists. A large number of clinical cases, established pipelines for clinical workflow and research collaborations and imaging laboratories with personnel and students would enable us to successfully complete this project in a timely manner.
Neuroangiography and neurointerventions are predominantly performed via femoral access, which has several limitations and complications - pain and discomfort, arterial occlusion, retroperitoneal hemorrhage, activity limitations, and increased admissions. Transradial angiography has shown promise to circumvent these problems, but this has not been studied in children, whose unique anatomical and physiological aspects require that this be evaluated rigorously.
Primary aim:
To evaluate procedural comfort and acceptance of transradial vs. transfemoral neuroangiography in a cohort of randomized adolescent children. This will be performed using patient self-reported pain and satisfaction scores.
Secondary aim:
- To evaluate procedural safety for transradial vs. transfemoral neuroangiography in a cohort of adolescent children. This will be performed by comparing fluoroscopy time and dose, procedural and long-term complication rates, study completeness and admission times.
Methods: Children (8-18 years) scheduled for supra-aortic angiography will be approached to participate. Inclusion cut-offs: radial artery ultrasound diameter >20mm and positive Allen test. For 95% power (primary aim), the Investigator will require a sample size of 56. Neuroangiography will be performed as clinically indicated, with collection of demographics, procedural details (screening time, radiation dose, completeness and complications) and post-procedural details (visual analog pain scale, satisfaction score, complications). A Data \& Safety Monitoring board will audit the trial.
Outcome Measures: Self-reported scores will be compared between groups for procedural acceptance; complications will be compared for procedural safety.
Significance: 1) This study will provide the highest level evidence regarding role and safety of transradial neuroangiography in children. 2) Subsequent development of practice guideline recommendations for a standardized protocol for transradial angiography in children.
- Being tested
- transradial access for neuroangiography, transfemoral access for neuroangiography
- Medical subject headings
- Patient Satisfaction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
transradial access for neuroangiographyProcedure or surgery
The choice of right vs left radial artery approach would be determined by the vessels that require the highest quality of imaging (e.g. if the left vertebral artery is key to diagnosis, a left radial approach would be chosen, otherwise a right radial approach would be likely most appropriate) - this decision is at the discretion of the interventionist.
transfemoral access for neuroangiographyProcedure or surgery
By convention, femoral access will be obtained on the right side, unless there is overlying disease or vessel abnormality detected by ultrasound/Doppler, as is usual clinical practice.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| transfemoral access | Active comparator | control Receives: Procedure: transradial access for neuroangiography; Procedure: transfemoral access for neuroangiography |
| transradial access | Active comparator | case Receives: Procedure: transradial access for neuroangiography; Procedure: transfemoral access for neuroangiography |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Procedural access-related complications
access-related complications
Measured: intraprocedural
Procedural access-related complications
access-related complications
Measured: 30 days
Procedural access-related complications
access-related
Measured: 365 days
other Procedural complications
other procedural complications
Measured: intra procedural
other Procedural complications
other procedural complications
Measured: 30 days
other Procedural complications
other procedural complications
Measured: 365 days
Procedural complications-completion rate
study completion rate
Measured: intraprocedural
Procedural complications - long term
long term complications
Measured: 30 days
pain score
visual analog scale VAS with 0=no pain, and 10 being worst pain
Measured: 3 hours post-procedure
patient/parent satisfaction score
modified Likert scale-0=unsatisfied, and 5=completely satisfied
Measured: 3 days post-procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Oct 2020
- Study start22 Sep 2020
- Primary completion1 Jun 2021
- Study completion1 Jun 2021
Why it stopped: insufficient enrolment-radial access for neuroangiography is now accepted as clinical standard.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Procedural Related Injuries and Complications NecStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by The Hospital for Sick ChildrenThe 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 12 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The Hospital for Sick Children
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Prakash Muthusami, The Hospital for Sick Children
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04604340
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1000065604
- Status last verified
- Oct 2021
- First submitted
- 1 Oct 2020
- Last updated
- 28 Oct 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Oct 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Radial Versus Femoral Arterial Access for Cerebral Angiography in Adolescents: A Randomized-controlled Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04604340
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 1000065604
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: insufficient enrolment-radial access for neuroangiography is now accepted as clinical standard.
- Enrolment
- 12 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- The Hospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 22 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jun 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Jun 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Oct 2020 (actual)
- 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.
This study will compare radial vs femoral access for angiography in adolescents. Neuroangiography and neurointerventions are predominantly performed via femoral access, which has several limitations and complications - pain and discomfort, arterial occlusion, retroperitoneal hemorrhage, activity limitations, and increased admissions. Transradial angiography has shown promise to circumvent these problems, but this has not been studied in children, whose unique anatomical and physiological aspects require that this be evaluated rigorously.
Detailed description
Specific Aims:
Angiography in interventional radiology is still most commonly performed through femoral arterial access, wherein patients are committed to invasive procedures through access at their groin, which entails anxiety, embarrassment, pain and discomfort, the inability to resume normal activities for a week, serious complications like retroperitoneal hemorrhage, and increased hospital admissions. Angiography through access at the wrist (transradial angiography) has been shown with some recent data to circumvent these complications and, in general, provide a more satisfactory and safe patient experience. Although transradial angiography has been rapidly accepted by some operators, especially in Cardiology, the absence of evidence for technical details and safety has resulted in much debate in the literature and in recent conferences. Specifically, there is no literature reported in children. The benefits of a method which would allow mobility immediately after the procedure in children are self-evident - this would potentially result in less rebleeds, require little or no sedation, allow sitting up and feeding, and allow parents to interact with their child and feel more comfortable. On the flip side, the feasibility and potential complications in children are unknown, and thus this technique cannot be integrated into clinical practice without interrogating this. This should be ideally performed in a high volume pediatric center with expertise in not only pediatric neuroangiography, but also for minimally invasive arterial access with interventional radiology, to minimize complications. Given the size consideration of arteries in children, we believe a good start point for this study would be with adolescent children.
The Investigator's objective is to provide the highest level of evidence (RCT data) for feasibility, safety and technique of transradial angiography in adolescents, by comparing it against the current gold standard, trans-femoral angiography. This will provide data for subsequent practice guidelines.
This study will be performed in a tertiary pediatric institution, with collaboration between interventional radiologists, neuroradiologists, pediatricians, neurosurgeons, technologists, statisticians, research co-ordinators and imaging physicists. A large number of clinical cases, established pipelines for clinical workflow and research collaborations and imaging laboratories with personnel and students would enable us to successfully complete this project in a timely manner.
Neuroangiography and neurointerventions are predominantly performed via femoral access, which has several limitations and complications - pain and discomfort, arterial occlusion, retroperitoneal hemorrhage, activity limitations, and increased admissions. Transradial angiography has shown promise to circumvent these problems, but this has not been studied in children, whose unique anatomical and physiological aspects require that this be evaluated rigorously.
Primary aim:
To evaluate procedural comfort and acceptance of transradial vs. transfemoral neuroangiography in a cohort of randomized adolescent children. This will be performed using patient self-reported pain and satisfaction scores.
Secondary aim:
- To evaluate procedural safety for transradial vs. transfemoral neuroangiography in a cohort of adolescent children. This will be performed by comparing fluoroscopy time and dose, procedural and long-term complication rates, study completeness and admission times.
Methods: Children (8-18 years) scheduled for supra-aortic angiography will be approached to participate. Inclusion cut-offs: radial artery ultrasound diameter >20mm and positive Allen test. For 95% power (primary aim), the Investigator will require a sample size of 56. Neuroangiography will be performed as clinically indicated, with collection of demographics, procedural details (screening time, radiation dose, completeness and complications) and post-procedural details (visual analog pain scale, satisfaction score, complications). A Data \& Safety Monitoring board will audit the trial.
Outcome Measures: Self-reported scores will be compared between groups for procedural acceptance; complications will be compared for procedural safety.
Significance: 1) This study will provide the highest level evidence regarding role and safety of transradial neuroangiography in children. 2) Subsequent development of practice guideline recommendations for a standardized protocol for transradial angiography in children.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| transfemoral access | Active comparator | Procedure: transradial access for neuroangiography, Procedure: transfemoral access for neuroangiographycontrol |
| transradial access | Active comparator | Procedure: transradial access for neuroangiography, Procedure: transfemoral access for neuroangiographycase |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 8 to 18 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age 8-18 years
- Planned cerebral or supra-aortic angiography for clinical reason
- Positive modified Allen's test using a pulse oximeter on the index finger.
- Radial artery axial maximal diameter of > 2.0 mm measured on a cross-sectional B-mode ultrasound of the distal radial artery, 2-3 cm proximal to the radial styloid, at the anticipated needle puncture site -
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age <8 years
- Radial artery internal maximal of diameter 2.0 mm or less (measured on cross-sectional ultrasound 2-3 cm proximal to the radial styloid at the planned puncture site) - these patients would be converted to femoral access without radial artery puncture but would be assessed in the radial artery group as part of an intention-to-treat analysis.
- Conversion to intervention (as opposed to diagnostic cerebral angiogram) during the procedure, as this will likely require a larger (femoral) access sheath; again such patients will still be assessed as part of the intention-to-treat analysis.
- Failed modified Allen's test with pulse oximetry
- -
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 |
|---|---|---|
| transradial access for neuroangiographyThe choice of right vs left radial artery approach would be determined by the vessels that require the highest quality of imaging (e.g. if the left vertebral artery is key to diagnosis, a left radial approach would be chosen, otherwise a right radial approach would be likely most appropriate) - this decision is at the discretion of the interventionist. | Procedure or surgery | transfemoral access, transradial access |
| transfemoral access for neuroangiographyBy convention, femoral access will be obtained on the right side, unless there is overlying disease or vessel abnormality detected by ultrasound/Doppler, as is usual clinical practice. | Procedure or surgery | transfemoral access, transradial access |
Primary outcome
Procedural access-related complications
Time frame: intraprocedural
access-related complications
Procedural access-related complications
Time frame: 30 days
access-related complications
Procedural access-related complications
Time frame: 365 days
access-related
other Procedural complications
Time frame: intra procedural
other procedural complications
other Procedural complications
Time frame: 30 days
other procedural complications
other Procedural complications
Time frame: 365 days
other procedural complications
Procedural complications-completion rate
Time frame: intraprocedural
study completion rate
Procedural complications - long term
Time frame: 30 days
long term complications
pain score
Time frame: 3 hours post-procedure
visual analog scale VAS with 0=no pain, and 10 being worst pain
patient/parent satisfaction score
Time frame: 3 days post-procedure
modified Likert scale-0=unsatisfied, and 5=completely satisfied
Results and safety
The study was stopped early (reason given: insufficient enrolment-radial access for neuroangiography is now accepted as clinical standard.). Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Oct 2021.
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing transradial access for neuroangiography and transfemoral access for neuroangiography in people with Procedural Related Injuries and Complications Nec and Patient Satisfaction, run by The Hospital for Sick Children at 1 site in Canada.
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 4 inclusion and 5 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: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Oct 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 Canada. 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 was stopped early (reason given: insufficient enrolment-radial access for neuroangiography is now accepted as clinical standard.). Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Procedural access-related complications (time frame: intraprocedural). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Oct 2021.