Coronary Artery DiseaseREFINE PCINCT05491668
Physiological Assessment of Severe Coronary Stenosis for Informing Planned PCI
An observational study of Coronary Artery Disease, run by Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Traditionally, the severity of a blockage (stenosis) in a coronary artery has been determined by visual angiographic assessment of the diameter of the artery at the level of a blockage compared to a normal healthy area of the same artery. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Coronary Artery Disease
- What is being tested?
- Non-hyperemic pressure ratio assessment pre and post PCI
- How many people
- 107 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 11 Oct 2022to Jun 2027
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
Study population: Study population will consist of male and female subjects from the general interventional cardiology population who are scheduled for coronary angiogram at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Who may be able to join
- Age >/= 18 years
- Patient provides written informed consent
- Clinical presentation with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes (unstable angina, Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI), or ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI))
- Scheduled for clinically indicated cardiac catheterization
- At least one lesion with angiographic severity visually estimated to be >/= 70% diameter stenosis that is deemed suitable for PCI
- The operator plans to perform PCI on an ad hoc or planned basis
- The target lesion is not planned for assessment by invasive physiology
Who cannot join
- Failure to provide signed informed consent
- Culprit vessel of acute ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI)
- Culprit vessel of Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI)
- Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow less than grade 3 at baseline or visible thrombus
- Chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the target vessel
- Target vessel is supplied by major collaterals or supplies major collaterals to a CTO
Show all 12Show fewer
- Target lesion involves the left main coronary artery
- Prior history of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to the target vessel, except if bypass graft is occluded
- Previously known untreated severe valvular heart disease
- Previously known left ventricular ejection fraction <30%
- Sustained ventricular arrhythmias
- Patients who are currently pregnant (pregnancy testing will be performed as per standard cardiac catheterization laboratory protocol)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United States1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts, 02215
Eric Osborn, MD, PhD, 617-632-7452, eosborn@bidmc.harvard.edu
Jenifer Kaufman, DNP, ANP-BC, BCPA, 617-632-8956, jmkaufma@bidmc.harvard.edu
About this study
Official title: Physiological Assessment of Severe Coronary Stenosis for Informing Planned PCI (REFINE PCI)
Traditionally, the severity of a blockage (stenosis) in a coronary artery has been determined by visual angiographic assessment of the diameter of the artery at the level of a blockage compared to a normal healthy area of the same artery. With the advent of invasive physiological testing to assess coronary blood flow, multiple clinical trials have demonstrated a clinical benefit to a physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) approach. However, despite this and the potential for significant variation in the interpretation of coronary artery stenosis severity by visual angiography alone to guide PCI, invasive physiologic indices remain significantly under-utilized.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the physiologic significance of coronary lesions deemed angiographically severe by visual estimation that are planned for PCI. The investigators plan to perform blinded physiologic assessment pre and post PCI. The primary aim of the study is to determine whether a subset of lesions visually estimated as severe by angiography treated with stent placement/PCI may in fact not be physiologically significant when assessed invasively, and thus PCI could safely be deferred in these patients. A secondary aim is to evaluate physiologic assessment post PCI to detect residual ischemia that could be utilized to optimize stent placement.
Read the detailed description
Invasive physiological assessment via both resting and hyperemic indices has been shown to correlate with clinical outcomes in multiple controlled clinical trials. The traditional approach for the use of physiologic assessment has been in the context of angiographic intermediate lesions, defined as a stenosis between 40-70% stenosis by visual assessment, however it is plausible it could also be used in the context of coronary artery stenosis deemed severe (>70%) by visual assessment given the clear limitations to an angiography approach alone. A subgroup analysis of the Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation (FAME trial) suggested that only 80% of the lesions deemed significant (70-90% diameter stenosis) by angiography were also flow limiting by invasive physiology. Recent studies have further revealed that the role of physiologic assessments can be expanded to optimize the results after PCI by detecting residual ischemia both in the form of diffuse and focal lesions.
With advances in technology in recent years, the current generation of coronary pressure-sensing wires now exhibit performances similar to that of traditional work-horse wires. This, coupled with the advent of non-hyperemic pressure ratio (NHPR) metrics which allow rapid invasive coronary physiology measurements within seconds without the cost and potential side effects of adenosine administration associated with traditional hyperemic physiology measures, now offers the capability to routinely perform physiology guided PCI approach for visually severe lesions.
REFINE-PCI is a prospective, single-center study in which participants with coronary artery stenosis deemed severe by visual angiography and planned for PCI without physiology assessment will undergo blinded invasive physiologic measurements using a coronary-pressure sensing wire pre and post PCI (OpSens OptoWire III) to assess the physiologic significance of the stenosis. Participants will also complete a health-related quality of life survey pre and 30 days post stent placement to assess for clinical change following PCI.
- Conditions
- Coronary Artery Disease
- Being tested
- Non-hyperemic pressure ratio assessment pre and post PCI
- Keywords
- Invasive physiology, Angiography, Percutaneous coronary intervention
- 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.
Non-hyperemic pressure ratio assessment pre and post PCIDiagnostic test
Also called OpSens OptoWire III
Pre and post PCI invasive physiologic assessment
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Coronary Physiology Assessment | Patients undergoing coronary angiogram who are found to have >/= 70% coronary stenosis and planned for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)/stent placement, will undergo pre and post PCI invasive physiologic assessment with a coronary pressure-sensing wire (OpSens OptoWire III) using non-hyperemic pressure ratio (NHPR) indices (diastolic pressure ratio [dPR]). Both the patient and interventional cardiologist will be blinded to the results of the invasive physiologic assessment. Angiogram co-registration will be performed on pullback of coronary pressure-sensing wire. Receives: Diagnostic Test: Non-hyperemic pressure ratio assessment pre and post PCI |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The percentage of physiologically non-significant lesions observed
Non-significant lesions defined as a diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) </= 0.89 (range 0-1), expressed as mean, standard deviation, and percentage of total number of assessments
Measured: Time of procedure
Correlation of the operator visual angiographic assessment of stenosis severity with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and resting non-hyperemic pressure resting indices (NHPR)
Visual stenosis severity and QCA are numerical variables reported as percentages, and expressed as mean and standard deviation. NHPR is a numerical variable from 0 to 1, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Pearson correlation coefficient used to express correlation between two variables.
Measured: Within 30 days post procedure
Correlation between QCA and NHPR
QCA is a numerical variable reported as a percentage, and expressed as mean and standard deviation. NHPR is a numerical variable from 0 to 1, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Pearson correlation coefficient used to express correlation between two variables.
Measured: Within 30 days post procedure
Secondary outcomes (2)
Correlation of the post-PCI NHPR with burden of angina as assessed via the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at 30 days post PCI
NHPR is a numerical variable from 0 to 1, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Seattle Angina Questionnaire assesses patients' physical limitations caused by angina, the frequency of and recent changes in their symptoms, their satisfaction with treatment, and the degree to which they perceive their disease to affect their quality of life. Each scale is transformed to a score of 0 to 100, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Pearson correlation coefficient used to express correlation between two variables.
Measured: Day 30 post PCI
Change in angina as assessed via the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at baseline and 30 days after PCI, need for titration for anti-anginal medications, or need for repeat coronary angiography within 30 days of the procedure.
Seattle Angina Questionnaire assesses patients' physical limitations caused by angina, the frequency of and recent changes in their symptoms, their satisfaction with treatment, and the degree to which they perceive their disease to affect their quality of life. Each scale is transformed to a score of 0 to 100, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Comparison of baseline and 30 days post PCI involves comparison of numerical variables and uses the Student's paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test. Need for titration for anti-anginal medications and need for repeat coronary angiography within 30 days of the procedure are descriptive data (Yes, No)
Measured: Day 30 post PCI
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Aug 2022
- Study start11 Oct 2022
- Primary completionDec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionJun 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Coronary Artery DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Beth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterThe 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Opsens, Inc.
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Eric A Osborn, MD, PhD, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
- Investigators
- Eric Osborn, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05491668
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2022P000479
- Acronym
- REFINE PCI
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 5 Aug 2022
- Last updated
- 11 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No: Data collected is specific to this clinical trial question
Publications
Davies JE, Sen S, Dehbi HM, Al-Lamee R, Petraco R, Nijjer SS, Bhindi R, Lehman SJ, Walters D, Sapontis J, Janssens L, Vrints CJ, Khashaba A, Laine M, Van Belle E, Krackhardt F, Bojara W, Going O, Harle T, Indolfi C, Niccoli G, Ribichini F, Tanaka N, Yokoi H, Takashima H, Kikuta Y, Erglis A, Vinhas H, Canas Silva P, Baptista SB, Alghamdi A, Hellig F, Koo BK, Nam CW, Shin ES, Doh JH, Brugaletta S, Alegria-Barrero E, Meuwissen M, Piek JJ, van Royen N, Sezer M, Di Mario C, Gerber RT, Malik IS, Sharp ASP, Talwar S, Tang K, Samady H, Altman J, Seto AH, Singh J, Jeremias A, Matsuo H, Kharbanda RK, Patel MR, Serruys P, Escaned J. Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017 May 11;376(19):1824-1834. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1700445. Epub 2017 Mar 18.
PubMed 28317458Gotberg M, Christiansen EH, Gudmundsdottir IJ, Sandhall L, Danielewicz M, Jakobsen L, Olsson SE, Ohagen P, Olsson H, Omerovic E, Calais F, Lindroos P, Maeng M, Todt T, Venetsanos D, James SK, Karegren A, Nilsson M, Carlsson J, Hauer D, Jensen J, Karlsson AC, Panayi G, Erlinge D, Frobert O; iFR-SWEDEHEART Investigators. Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017 May 11;376(19):1813-1823. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1616540. Epub 2017 Mar 18.
PubMed 28317438De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PA, Piroth Z, Jagic N, Mobius-Winkler S, Rioufol G, Witt N, Kala P, MacCarthy P, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Mavromatis K, Manoharan G, Verlee P, Frobert O, Curzen N, Johnson JB, Juni P, Fearon WF; FAME 2 Trial Investigators. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012 Sep 13;367(11):991-1001. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205361. Epub 2012 Aug 27.
PubMed 22924638Jeremias A, Davies JE, Maehara A, Matsumura M, Schneider J, Tang K, Talwar S, Marques K, Shammas NW, Gruberg L, Seto A, Samady H, Sharp A, Ali ZA, Mintz G, Patel M, Stone GW. Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct 28;12(20):1991-2001. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.05.054.
PubMed 31648761Collison D, McClure JD, Berry C, Oldroyd KG. A randomized controlled trial of a physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention optimization strategy: Rationale and design of the TARGET FFR study. Clin Cardiol. 2020 May;43(5):414-422. doi: 10.1002/clc.23342. Epub 2020 Feb 10.
PubMed 32037592
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Physiological Assessment of Severe Coronary Stenosis for Informing Planned PCI (REFINE PCI)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05491668
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- REFINE PCI / 2022P000479
- Conditions
- Coronary Artery Disease
- Keywords
- Invasive physiology, Angiography, Percutaneous coronary intervention
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Opsens, Inc.
- Study start
- 11 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jun 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 8 Aug 2022 (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.
Traditionally, the severity of a blockage (stenosis) in a coronary artery has been determined by visual angiographic assessment of the diameter of the artery at the level of a blockage compared to a normal healthy area of the same artery. With the advent of invasive physiological testing to assess coronary blood flow, multiple clinical trials have demonstrated a clinical benefit to a physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) approach. However, despite this and the potential for significant variation in the interpretation of coronary artery stenosis severity by visual angiography alone to guide PCI, invasive physiologic indices remain significantly under-utilized.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the physiologic significance of coronary lesions deemed angiographically severe by visual estimation that are planned for PCI. The investigators plan to perform blinded physiologic assessment pre and post PCI. The primary aim of the study is to determine whether a subset of lesions visually estimated as severe by angiography treated with stent placement/PCI may in fact not be physiologically significant when assessed invasively, and thus PCI could safely be deferred in these patients. A secondary aim is to evaluate physiologic assessment post PCI to detect residual ischemia that could be utilized to optimize stent placement.
Detailed description
Invasive physiological assessment via both resting and hyperemic indices has been shown to correlate with clinical outcomes in multiple controlled clinical trials. The traditional approach for the use of physiologic assessment has been in the context of angiographic intermediate lesions, defined as a stenosis between 40-70% stenosis by visual assessment, however it is plausible it could also be used in the context of coronary artery stenosis deemed severe (>70%) by visual assessment given the clear limitations to an angiography approach alone. A subgroup analysis of the Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation (FAME trial) suggested that only 80% of the lesions deemed significant (70-90% diameter stenosis) by angiography were also flow limiting by invasive physiology. Recent studies have further revealed that the role of physiologic assessments can be expanded to optimize the results after PCI by detecting residual ischemia both in the form of diffuse and focal lesions.
With advances in technology in recent years, the current generation of coronary pressure-sensing wires now exhibit performances similar to that of traditional work-horse wires. This, coupled with the advent of non-hyperemic pressure ratio (NHPR) metrics which allow rapid invasive coronary physiology measurements within seconds without the cost and potential side effects of adenosine administration associated with traditional hyperemic physiology measures, now offers the capability to routinely perform physiology guided PCI approach for visually severe lesions.
REFINE-PCI is a prospective, single-center study in which participants with coronary artery stenosis deemed severe by visual angiography and planned for PCI without physiology assessment will undergo blinded invasive physiologic measurements using a coronary-pressure sensing wire pre and post PCI (OpSens OptoWire III) to assess the physiologic significance of the stenosis. Participants will also complete a health-related quality of life survey pre and 30 days post stent placement to assess for clinical change following PCI.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Coronary Physiology Assessment | – | Diagnostic Test: Non-hyperemic pressure ratio assessment pre and post PCIPatients undergoing coronary angiogram who are found to have >/= 70% coronary stenosis and planned for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)/stent placement, will undergo pre and post PCI invasive physiologic assessment with a coronary pressure-sensing wire (OpSens OptoWire III) using non-hyperemic pressure ratio (NHPR) indices (diastolic pressure ratio [dPR]). Both the patient and interventional cardiologist will be blinded to the results of the invasive physiologic assessment. Angiogram co-registration will be performed on pullback of coronary pressure-sensing wire. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Study population will consist of male and female subjects from the general interventional cardiology population who are scheduled for coronary angiogram at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Age >/= 18 years
- Patient provides written informed consent
- Clinical presentation with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes (unstable angina, Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI), or ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI))
- Scheduled for clinically indicated cardiac catheterization
- At least one lesion with angiographic severity visually estimated to be >/= 70% diameter stenosis that is deemed suitable for PCI
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- Failure to provide signed informed consent
- Culprit vessel of acute ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI)
- Culprit vessel of Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI)
- Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow less than grade 3 at baseline or visible thrombus
- Chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the target vessel
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Non-hyperemic pressure ratio assessment pre and post PCIAlso: OpSens OptoWire IIIPre and post PCI invasive physiologic assessment | Diagnostic test | Coronary Physiology Assessment |
Primary outcome
The percentage of physiologically non-significant lesions observed
Time frame: Time of procedure
Non-significant lesions defined as a diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) </= 0.89 (range 0-1), expressed as mean, standard deviation, and percentage of total number of assessments
Correlation of the operator visual angiographic assessment of stenosis severity with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and resting non-hyperemic pressure resting indices (NHPR)
Time frame: Within 30 days post procedure
Visual stenosis severity and QCA are numerical variables reported as percentages, and expressed as mean and standard deviation. NHPR is a numerical variable from 0 to 1, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Pearson correlation coefficient used to express correlation between two variables.
Correlation between QCA and NHPR
Time frame: Within 30 days post procedure
QCA is a numerical variable reported as a percentage, and expressed as mean and standard deviation. NHPR is a numerical variable from 0 to 1, expressed as mean and standard deviation. Pearson correlation coefficient used to express correlation between two variables.
2 secondary outcomes
Correlation of the post-PCI NHPR with burden of angina as assessed via the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at 30 days post PCI
Time frame: Day 30 post PCI
Change in angina as assessed via the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at baseline and 30 days after PCI, need for titration for anti-anginal medications, or need for repeat coronary angiography within 30 days of the procedure.
Time frame: Day 30 post PCI
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Jun 2026.
- Background: PubMed 28317458Davies JE, Sen S, Dehbi HM, Al-Lamee R, Petraco R, Nijjer SS, Bhindi R, Lehman SJ, Walters D, Sapontis J, Janssens L, Vrints CJ, Khashaba A, Laine M, Van Belle E, Krackhardt F, Bojara W, Going O, Harle T, Indolfi C, Niccoli G, Ribichini F, Tanaka N, Yokoi H, Takashima H, Kikuta Y, Erglis A, Vinhas H, Canas Silva P, Baptista SB, Alghamdi A, Hellig F, Koo BK, Nam CW, Shin ES, Doh JH, Brugaletta S, Alegria-Barrero E, Meuwissen M, Piek JJ, van Royen N, Sezer M, Di Mario C, Gerber RT, Malik IS, Sharp ASP, Talwar S, Tang K, Samady H, Altman J, Seto AH, Singh J, Jeremias A, Matsuo H, Kharbanda RK, Patel MR, Serruys P, Escaned J. Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017 May 11;376(19):1824-1834. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1700445. Epub 2017 Mar 18.
- Background: PubMed 28317438Gotberg M, Christiansen EH, Gudmundsdottir IJ, Sandhall L, Danielewicz M, Jakobsen L, Olsson SE, Ohagen P, Olsson H, Omerovic E, Calais F, Lindroos P, Maeng M, Todt T, Venetsanos D, James SK, Karegren A, Nilsson M, Carlsson J, Hauer D, Jensen J, Karlsson AC, Panayi G, Erlinge D, Frobert O; iFR-SWEDEHEART Investigators. Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017 May 11;376(19):1813-1823. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1616540. Epub 2017 Mar 18.
- Background: PubMed 22924638De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PA, Piroth Z, Jagic N, Mobius-Winkler S, Rioufol G, Witt N, Kala P, MacCarthy P, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Mavromatis K, Manoharan G, Verlee P, Frobert O, Curzen N, Johnson JB, Juni P, Fearon WF; FAME 2 Trial Investigators. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012 Sep 13;367(11):991-1001. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205361. Epub 2012 Aug 27.
- Background: PubMed 31648761Jeremias A, Davies JE, Maehara A, Matsumura M, Schneider J, Tang K, Talwar S, Marques K, Shammas NW, Gruberg L, Seto A, Samady H, Sharp A, Ali ZA, Mintz G, Patel M, Stone GW. Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct 28;12(20):1991-2001. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.05.054.
- Background: PubMed 32037592Collison D, McClure JD, Berry C, Oldroyd KG. A randomized controlled trial of a physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention optimization strategy: Rationale and design of the TARGET FFR study. Clin Cardiol. 2020 May;43(5):414-422. doi: 10.1002/clc.23342. Epub 2020 Feb 10.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Data collected is specific to this clinical trial question
Related trials for Coronary Artery Disease
Active, not recruiting
The OCTOBER Trial - European Trial on Optical Coherence Tomography Optimized Bifurcation Event Reduction (OCTOBER)
Ischaemic Heart Disease, Ischemic Heart Disease
RecruitingEarly Phase 1
Thiamine Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Coronary Heart Disease, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
RecruitingPhase 4
The Bridging Antiplatelet Therapy With Cangrelor 2 Study
Coronary Arterial Disease (CAD)
Recruiting
Randomized Prospective Trial on the Cost-Effectiveness of Photon-Counting CT Versus Energy-Integrating Detector CT in Suspected Chronic Coronary Syndrome
Computed Tomography Angiography, Coronary Artery Disease
RecruitingObservational study
Preoperative Gastric Ultrasound and Left Ventricular Function in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Coronary Artery Disease, Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction
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.
Eric Osborn, MD, PhD principal investigator
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Coronary Artery Disease, run by Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center 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 7 inclusion and 12 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Jun 2026. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Eric Osborn, MD, PhD (617-632-7452, eosborn@bidmc.harvard.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The percentage of physiologically non-significant lesions observed (time frame: Time of procedure). The study lists 3 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 NCT05491668, which also lists 5 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 11 Jun 2026.