Severe Aortic StenosisVARC-TAVINCT06177392
VARC-TAVI VALVE IMPLANTATION)
A study testing Secondary TAVI access in people with Severe Aortic Stenosis and TAVI\(Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation\), run by Hospital Universitario La Paz.
Trial summary
SUMMARY: The investigators are planning a clinical study to compare two methods of performing a procedure called TAVI, used in patients with severe aortic stenosis. In this procedure, the aortic valve is replaced in a less invasive way. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Severe Aortic Stenosis, TAVI\(Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation\), Vascular Complications
- What is being tested?
- Secondary TAVI access
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 600 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 8 Jan 2024to 1 Dec 2025
- 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
- Adult patients with severe aortic stenosis and candidates for transfemoral TAVI.
- Secondary access possible through both radial and femoral routes.
- Capacity to provide informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Specific contraindications for radial or femoral access.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: VARC-TAVI (VASCULAR CONTROL in TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION)
SUMMARY:
The investigators are planning a clinical study to compare two methods of performing a procedure called TAVI, used in patients with severe aortic stenosis. In this procedure, the aortic valve is replaced in a less invasive way. Traditionally, access through the groin (femoral) is used, but now radial access (through the wrist) is being considered as an alternative.
Read more
Reasons for the Study:
- Currently, there is not enough solid evidence to support the choice between these two accesses.
- The investigators want to understand if radial access could be safer and have fewer complications compared to femoral access.
What the Investigators Will Measure:
- Major complications, such as bleeding or vascular injuries.
- Other important outcomes, such as functional recovery and quality of life.
How the Investigators Will Do It:
- The investigators will randomize patients to receive radial or femoral access.
- The investigators will record which type of access is used and assess complications and outcomes.
- The investigators will compare the results to understand if there are significant differences between the two groups.
Ultimate Goal:
- The investigators aim to improve the safety and efficacy of this procedure for patients.
- The results of this study will help doctors make informed decisions on how to perform TAVI.
Conclusion:
- This study is crucial for enhancing care for patients with aortic stenosis and ensuring the procedure is performed in the safest and most effective manner. The results will benefit patients and guide doctors in choosing the best approach for each individual.
Read the detailed description
INTRODUCTION:
The TAVI procedure has been established as a safe and effective alternative for aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Vascular access plays a crucial role during the TAVI procedure, allowing the introduction of necessary devices for valve implantation, as well as protection and resolution of potential complications. Traditionally, femoral access has been the preferred approach for both main access (through which the valve navigates) and secondary access (serving as a guide during implantation and protection of the main access) due to its familiarity and technical ease. However, in recent years, radial access has gained popularity due to its theoretical potential to reduce vascular complications and improve participant recovery and quality of life. In this study, the investigators aim to demonstrate if there are differences between radial and femoral secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation.
JUSTIFICATION:
Conducting a clinical trial comparing radial and femoral secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation is crucial for several fundamental reasons. The main aspects supporting the need for such a clinical trial are outlined below.
- Limited and Heterogeneous Evidence:
- Observational studies and retrospective data supporting radial access as contralateral access during TAVI implantation exist, but they are non-randomized and subject to biases and methodological limitations. Prospective and controlled clinical trials are required to generate solid and reliable evidence.
- Differences in Complication Rates:
- Multiple clinical trials have shown a reduction in both vascular and non-vascular complications, major and minor, with radial access compared to femoral access in coronary catheterizations, even demonstrating a reduction in mortality. Similarly, observational studies suggest a similar trend for femoral and radial access as secondary access in TAVI, but these studies have multiple biases. A clinical trial would provide higher-level evidence regarding the existence of differences in vascular complications associated with the procedure.
- Bleeding and Transfusions: Bleeding is a common complication after TAVI and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Several studies have demonstrated a reduction in bleeding and the need for transfusions in TAVI participants with radial access compared to femoral access.
- Other Complications: Meta-analyses of observational studies have also observed a reduction in peri-procedural renal failure and stroke in participants with radial access. However, due to study limitations, other variables may influence these observations, requiring evaluation in a clinical trial.
- Given that participants undergoing aortic valve replacement are often elderly, multimorbid, and somewhat frail, achieving total and early functional recovery is crucial. Studies in coronary catheterizations have shown better functional recovery and higher quality of life parameters with radial access. No studies have evaluated this in TAVI procedures, and a clinical trial would allow studying this outcome.
- In conclusion, radial access has emerged as a potentially favorable alternative to femoral access as secondary access in TAVI. Current evidence suggests that radial access may be associated with a lower rate of vascular complications, bleeding, and the need for transfusions, as well as other complications not directly related to access. However, prospective and controlled clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings and establish clear guidelines for choosing secondary access in TAVI. These studies will provide a more accurate and informed understanding of the differences between radial and femoral access in terms of safety and efficacy in the context of TAVI implantation.
EVALUATION OF RELEVANT CLINICAL OUTCOMES:
In addition to vascular complications and other complications, a comparative clinical trial would allow for less biased evaluation of other relevant aspects of the chosen access type, such as radial access feasibility, crossover percentage, procedure success, etc. These results would provide essential information to guide clinical decision-making.
IDENTIFICATION OF BENEFITED PATIENT SUBGROUPS:
A comparative clinical trial could help identify participant subgroups that would benefit more from one type of access over another in terms of clinical outcomes and safety. There are indications of specific predictors of femoral vascular complications, such as peripheral arterial disease, angiographically visualized calcification of the femoral access, chronic kidney disease, etc. These could be verified in such a study, allowing for more personalized care for each participant, optimizing outcomes.
CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES:
Since evidence in this specific field is scarce and of low quality, the results of a clinical trial would have a significant impact on the development of guidelines and recommendations for clinical practice. Current guidelines provide limited guidance on the choice of secondary access in TAVI. Evidence generated through a clinical trial would help establish more robust and scientifically based recommendations.
In summary, conducting a clinical trial comparing radial and femoral access as secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation is essential to fill gaps in existing evidence and provide solid data to support clinical decision-making. This type of trial would allow a systematic assessment of complications, relevant clinical outcomes, and the identification of potentially more benefited participants.
METHODS:
Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: radial access or femoral access. Comprehensive preoperative evaluations will be conducted, including medical history, physical examination, imaging tests, and cardiological assessments. During the TAVI procedure, data on the access used, success, procedure duration, intra-procedural complications, and valve implantation outcomes will be recorded. Results at discharge and 30 days will also be documented.
- Study Design:
- A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial will be conducted to evaluate radial versus femoral secondary access in percutaneous aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to receive radial or femoral access as secondary access in transfemoral TAVI. Data on the access used, success, procedure duration, intra-procedural complications, and valve implantation outcomes will be recorded during the TAVI procedure.
- Primary Objectives:
- Compare the overall incidence of major access complications (both vascular and non-vascular) between radial and femoral access at discharge. Major access complications are defined as:
- Major Vascular Complication:
- Aortic dissection or rupture.
- Arterial or venous vascular injury resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage. This includes perforation, dissection, stenosis, ischemia, arterial or venous thrombosis (including pulmonary embolism), arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, hematoma, retroperitoneal hematoma, infection, or compartment syndrome.
- Distal (non-cerebral) embolization from a vascular source resulting in death, amputation, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible damage to end organs.
- Unplanned endovascular or surgical intervention resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Device closure failure resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Major Non-Vascular Complication:
- Non-vascular or non-cardiac structure perforation, injury, or infection resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, irreversible nerve injury, or requiring unplanned intervention or surgical intervention.
- Device migration, embolization, or malposition resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Air or gas embolism resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Valve-related infectious endocarditis resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Cardiac injury resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Valve embolization resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Secondary Objectives:
- Compare secondary endpoints between radial and femoral access at discharge and 30 days post-TAVI, including:
- Individual components of major access complications.
- Bleeding complications.
- Transfusions.
- Peri-procedural renal failure.
- Stroke.
- Functional recovery.
- Quality of life parameters.
- Study Population:
- Eligible participants will include adult participants diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis scheduled for elective transfemoral TAVI.
- Sample Size Calculation:
- The sample size will be calculated based on the primary endpoint, considering a two-sided significance level of 0.05 and a power of 80%. A presumed major access complication rate of 10% in the femoral group and a hypothesized reduction to 5% in the radial group will be used for the calculation.
- Statistical Analysis:
- Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize baseline characteristics. Categorical variables will be compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test, and continuous variables will be compared using t-tests or non-parametric tests, as appropriate. The primary endpoint will be analyzed using logistic regression, adjusting for relevant covariates. Secondary endpoints will be analyzed similarly. Subgroup analyses will be conducted to explore potential differences in treatment effects across subgroups defined by relevant baseline characteristics.
- Ethical Considerations:
- The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Ethical approval will be obtained from the relevant institutional review board. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants before enrollment.
- Data Collection and Monitoring:
- Data will be collected by trained study personnel using standardized case report forms. Data monitoring will be conducted regularly to ensure data quality and participant safety.
- Trial Oversight:
- An independent data and safety monitoring board will be established to oversee the progress and safety of the trial. Periodic reviews will be conducted to assess the accumulating data and make recommendations regarding continuation, modification, or termination of the trial.
- Dissemination of Results:
- The results of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at relevant scientific conferences. The data will be shared with the wider scientific community to contribute to the evidence base in the field of TAVI.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES:
This clinical trial aims to provide high-quality evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of radial versus femoral secondary access in transfemoral TAVI. The primary outcome measure, major access complications, will be rigorously assessed, and secondary outcomes will provide a comprehensive understanding of potential differences between the two access types. The results will contribute to the development of evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for clinical practice, ultimately improving participant outcomes and optimizing the delivery of TAVI procedures.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed clinical trial is designed to address the existing gaps in evidence regarding the choice of secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation. By conducting a randomized, controlled trial, the investigators aim to provide robust data on the safety and efficacy of radial versus femoral access, informing clinical decision-making and contributing to the development of guidelines in the field of TAVI. This research has the potential to enhance participant care, improve procedural outcomes, and guide future research in the dynamic field of transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
- Conditions
- Severe Aortic Stenosis, TAVI\(Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation\), Vascular Complications
- Being tested
- Secondary TAVI access
- Keywords
- RADIAL ACCESS, RADIAL SECONDARY ACCESS, TAVI, SEVERE AORTIC STENOSIS, VASCULAR COMPLICATIONS, VARC-3
- Medical subject headings
- Aortic Valve Stenosis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Secondary TAVI accessProcedure or surgery
The randomization will determine whether radial or femoral artery puncture will be employed as the secondary access in the TAVI procedure.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| RADIAL | Experimental | RADIAL ARTERY ACCESS AS SECONDARY ACCESS IN TAVI PROCEDURE Receives: Procedure: Secondary TAVI access |
| FEMORAL | Active comparator | FEMORAL ARTERY ACCESS AS SECONDARY ACCESS IN TAVI PROCEDURE Receives: Procedure: Secondary TAVI access |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
ACCESS RELATED OR BLEEDING COMPLICATIONS
Major and minor access-related complications (VARC-3) and major or greater (VARC ≥2) bleeding complications (BARC)
Measured: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
Secondary outcomes (4)
MACE
Cardiovascular death, stroke or Myocardial infarction requiring revascularization.
Measured: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
bleeding
All bleeding complications and need for red blood transfusions
Measured: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
Quality of life scale
Quality of life measured by EQ-5D-3L test
Measured: 4 weeks after the procedure
Complications not directly TAVI procedure-related
Ex: acute renal failure
Measured: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Dec 2023
- Study start8 Jan 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Dec 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Severe Aortic StenosisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 600 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Universitario La Paz
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Daniel Tébar Márquez, Hospital Universitario La Paz
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06177392
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- VARC-TAVI 6571-2023.735
- Acronym
- VARC-TAVI
- Status last verified
- Jan 2024
- First submitted
- 11 Dec 2023
- Last updated
- 5 Jan 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Jan 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- VARC-TAVI (VASCULAR CONTROL in TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06177392
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- VARC-TAVI / VARC-TAVI 6571-2023.735
- Conditions
- Severe Aortic Stenosis, TAVI\(Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation\), Vascular Complications
- Keywords
- RADIAL ACCESS, RADIAL SECONDARY ACCESS, TAVI, SEVERE AORTIC STENOSIS, VASCULAR COMPLICATIONS, VARC-3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 600 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Universitario La PazUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 8 Jan 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Dec 2023 (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.
SUMMARY:
The investigators are planning a clinical study to compare two methods of performing a procedure called TAVI, used in patients with severe aortic stenosis. In this procedure, the aortic valve is replaced in a less invasive way. Traditionally, access through the groin (femoral) is used, but now radial access (through the wrist) is being considered as an alternative.
Reasons for the Study:
- Currently, there is not enough solid evidence to support the choice between these two accesses.
- The investigators want to understand if radial access could be safer and have fewer complications compared to femoral access.
What the Investigators Will Measure:
- Major complications, such as bleeding or vascular injuries.
- Other important outcomes, such as functional recovery and quality of life.
How the Investigators Will Do It:
- The investigators will randomize patients to receive radial or femoral access.
- The investigators will record which type of access is used and assess complications and outcomes.
- The investigators will compare the results to understand if there are significant differences between the two groups.
Ultimate Goal:
- The investigators aim to improve the safety and efficacy of this procedure for patients.
- The results of this study will help doctors make informed decisions on how to perform TAVI.
Conclusion:
- This study is crucial for enhancing care for patients with aortic stenosis and ensuring the procedure is performed in the safest and most effective manner. The results will benefit patients and guide doctors in choosing the best approach for each individual.
Detailed description
INTRODUCTION:
The TAVI procedure has been established as a safe and effective alternative for aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Vascular access plays a crucial role during the TAVI procedure, allowing the introduction of necessary devices for valve implantation, as well as protection and resolution of potential complications. Traditionally, femoral access has been the preferred approach for both main access (through which the valve navigates) and secondary access (serving as a guide during implantation and protection of the main access) due to its familiarity and technical ease. However, in recent years, radial access has gained popularity due to its theoretical potential to reduce vascular complications and improve participant recovery and quality of life. In this study, the investigators aim to demonstrate if there are differences between radial and femoral secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation.
JUSTIFICATION:
Conducting a clinical trial comparing radial and femoral secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation is crucial for several fundamental reasons. The main aspects supporting the need for such a clinical trial are outlined below.
- Limited and Heterogeneous Evidence:
- Observational studies and retrospective data supporting radial access as contralateral access during TAVI implantation exist, but they are non-randomized and subject to biases and methodological limitations. Prospective and controlled clinical trials are required to generate solid and reliable evidence.
- Differences in Complication Rates:
- Multiple clinical trials have shown a reduction in both vascular and non-vascular complications, major and minor, with radial access compared to femoral access in coronary catheterizations, even demonstrating a reduction in mortality. Similarly, observational studies suggest a similar trend for femoral and radial access as secondary access in TAVI, but these studies have multiple biases. A clinical trial would provide higher-level evidence regarding the existence of differences in vascular complications associated with the procedure.
- Bleeding and Transfusions: Bleeding is a common complication after TAVI and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Several studies have demonstrated a reduction in bleeding and the need for transfusions in TAVI participants with radial access compared to femoral access.
- Other Complications: Meta-analyses of observational studies have also observed a reduction in peri-procedural renal failure and stroke in participants with radial access. However, due to study limitations, other variables may influence these observations, requiring evaluation in a clinical trial.
- Given that participants undergoing aortic valve replacement are often elderly, multimorbid, and somewhat frail, achieving total and early functional recovery is crucial. Studies in coronary catheterizations have shown better functional recovery and higher quality of life parameters with radial access. No studies have evaluated this in TAVI procedures, and a clinical trial would allow studying this outcome.
- In conclusion, radial access has emerged as a potentially favorable alternative to femoral access as secondary access in TAVI. Current evidence suggests that radial access may be associated with a lower rate of vascular complications, bleeding, and the need for transfusions, as well as other complications not directly related to access. However, prospective and controlled clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings and establish clear guidelines for choosing secondary access in TAVI. These studies will provide a more accurate and informed understanding of the differences between radial and femoral access in terms of safety and efficacy in the context of TAVI implantation.
EVALUATION OF RELEVANT CLINICAL OUTCOMES:
In addition to vascular complications and other complications, a comparative clinical trial would allow for less biased evaluation of other relevant aspects of the chosen access type, such as radial access feasibility, crossover percentage, procedure success, etc. These results would provide essential information to guide clinical decision-making.
IDENTIFICATION OF BENEFITED PATIENT SUBGROUPS:
A comparative clinical trial could help identify participant subgroups that would benefit more from one type of access over another in terms of clinical outcomes and safety. There are indications of specific predictors of femoral vascular complications, such as peripheral arterial disease, angiographically visualized calcification of the femoral access, chronic kidney disease, etc. These could be verified in such a study, allowing for more personalized care for each participant, optimizing outcomes.
CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES:
Since evidence in this specific field is scarce and of low quality, the results of a clinical trial would have a significant impact on the development of guidelines and recommendations for clinical practice. Current guidelines provide limited guidance on the choice of secondary access in TAVI. Evidence generated through a clinical trial would help establish more robust and scientifically based recommendations.
In summary, conducting a clinical trial comparing radial and femoral access as secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation is essential to fill gaps in existing evidence and provide solid data to support clinical decision-making. This type of trial would allow a systematic assessment of complications, relevant clinical outcomes, and the identification of potentially more benefited participants.
METHODS:
Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: radial access or femoral access. Comprehensive preoperative evaluations will be conducted, including medical history, physical examination, imaging tests, and cardiological assessments. During the TAVI procedure, data on the access used, success, procedure duration, intra-procedural complications, and valve implantation outcomes will be recorded. Results at discharge and 30 days will also be documented.
- Study Design:
- A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial will be conducted to evaluate radial versus femoral secondary access in percutaneous aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to receive radial or femoral access as secondary access in transfemoral TAVI. Data on the access used, success, procedure duration, intra-procedural complications, and valve implantation outcomes will be recorded during the TAVI procedure.
- Primary Objectives:
- Compare the overall incidence of major access complications (both vascular and non-vascular) between radial and femoral access at discharge. Major access complications are defined as:
- Major Vascular Complication:
- Aortic dissection or rupture.
- Arterial or venous vascular injury resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage. This includes perforation, dissection, stenosis, ischemia, arterial or venous thrombosis (including pulmonary embolism), arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, hematoma, retroperitoneal hematoma, infection, or compartment syndrome.
- Distal (non-cerebral) embolization from a vascular source resulting in death, amputation, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible damage to end organs.
- Unplanned endovascular or surgical intervention resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Device closure failure resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Major Non-Vascular Complication:
- Non-vascular or non-cardiac structure perforation, injury, or infection resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, irreversible nerve injury, or requiring unplanned intervention or surgical intervention.
- Device migration, embolization, or malposition resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Air or gas embolism resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Valve-related infectious endocarditis resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Cardiac injury resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Valve embolization resulting in death, bleeding ≥2 VARC*, limb or visceral ischemia, or irreversible neurological damage.
- Secondary Objectives:
- Compare secondary endpoints between radial and femoral access at discharge and 30 days post-TAVI, including:
- Individual components of major access complications.
- Bleeding complications.
- Transfusions.
- Peri-procedural renal failure.
- Stroke.
- Functional recovery.
- Quality of life parameters.
- Study Population:
- Eligible participants will include adult participants diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis scheduled for elective transfemoral TAVI.
- Sample Size Calculation:
- The sample size will be calculated based on the primary endpoint, considering a two-sided significance level of 0.05 and a power of 80%. A presumed major access complication rate of 10% in the femoral group and a hypothesized reduction to 5% in the radial group will be used for the calculation.
- Statistical Analysis:
- Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize baseline characteristics. Categorical variables will be compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test, and continuous variables will be compared using t-tests or non-parametric tests, as appropriate. The primary endpoint will be analyzed using logistic regression, adjusting for relevant covariates. Secondary endpoints will be analyzed similarly. Subgroup analyses will be conducted to explore potential differences in treatment effects across subgroups defined by relevant baseline characteristics.
- Ethical Considerations:
- The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Ethical approval will be obtained from the relevant institutional review board. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants before enrollment.
- Data Collection and Monitoring:
- Data will be collected by trained study personnel using standardized case report forms. Data monitoring will be conducted regularly to ensure data quality and participant safety.
- Trial Oversight:
- An independent data and safety monitoring board will be established to oversee the progress and safety of the trial. Periodic reviews will be conducted to assess the accumulating data and make recommendations regarding continuation, modification, or termination of the trial.
- Dissemination of Results:
- The results of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at relevant scientific conferences. The data will be shared with the wider scientific community to contribute to the evidence base in the field of TAVI.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES:
This clinical trial aims to provide high-quality evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of radial versus femoral secondary access in transfemoral TAVI. The primary outcome measure, major access complications, will be rigorously assessed, and secondary outcomes will provide a comprehensive understanding of potential differences between the two access types. The results will contribute to the development of evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for clinical practice, ultimately improving participant outcomes and optimizing the delivery of TAVI procedures.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed clinical trial is designed to address the existing gaps in evidence regarding the choice of secondary access in transfemoral TAVI implantation. By conducting a randomized, controlled trial, the investigators aim to provide robust data on the safety and efficacy of radial versus femoral access, informing clinical decision-making and contributing to the development of guidelines in the field of TAVI. This research has the potential to enhance participant care, improve procedural outcomes, and guide future research in the dynamic field of transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| RADIAL | Experimental | Procedure: Secondary TAVI accessRADIAL ARTERY ACCESS AS SECONDARY ACCESS IN TAVI PROCEDURE |
| FEMORAL | Active comparator | Procedure: Secondary TAVI accessFEMORAL ARTERY ACCESS AS SECONDARY ACCESS IN TAVI PROCEDURE |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Adult patients with severe aortic stenosis and candidates for transfemoral TAVI.
- Secondary access possible through both radial and femoral routes.
- Capacity to provide informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Specific contraindications for radial or femoral access.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Secondary TAVI accessThe randomization will determine whether radial or femoral artery puncture will be employed as the secondary access in the TAVI procedure. | Procedure or surgery | FEMORAL, RADIAL |
Primary outcome
ACCESS RELATED OR BLEEDING COMPLICATIONS
Time frame: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
Major and minor access-related complications (VARC-3) and major or greater (VARC ≥2) bleeding complications (BARC)
4 secondary outcomes
MACE
Time frame: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
bleeding
Time frame: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
Quality of life scale
Time frame: 4 weeks after the procedure
Complications not directly TAVI procedure-related
Time frame: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Jan 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Severe Aortic Stenosis
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Application of TAVI at Experienced Interventional Cardiac Centers Without On-site Cardiac Surgery (ATLAS Study)
Aortic Stenosis, Severe Aortic Stenosis
RecruitingObservational study
Spanish Prospective Registry of Hydra THV for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis, Valvular Heart Disease
RecruitingObservational study
PERFECT - Portuguese Evolut Registry Studying the Outcomes of Medtronic Evolut™ FX+ TAVI System by Evaluating an Optimal Care Pathway for TAVI
Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis (Defined as New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class ≥ II)
Recruiting
A Study to Obtain Imaging Data in 40 Patients Having Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI)
Aortic Stenosis, Severe, Aortic Valve Stenosis
Recruiting
ALLIANCE: Safety and Effectiveness of the SAPIEN X4 Transcatheter Heart Valve
Aortic Stenosis, Severe
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.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Secondary TAVI access in people with Severe Aortic Stenosis and TAVI\(Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation\), run by Hospital Universitario La Paz.
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 3 inclusion and 1 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Jan 2024. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Daniel Tébar Márquez DTM Daniel Tébar Márquez, MD (+034 695-86-03-09, daniel.tebar.m@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
ACCESS RELATED OR BLEEDING COMPLICATIONS (time frame: From the enrollment to 4 weeks after the procedure.). 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 5 Jan 2024; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 29 Oct 2026.