There are about 6915 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Austria. The country of the clinical trial is determined by the location of where the clinical research is being studied. Most studies are often held in multiple locations & countries.
Patients who have survived a myocardial infarction (MI) are at increased risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) caused by ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. A severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) as a rough overall measure of impaired heart function after MI was shown to indicate a higher risk for SCD. Based on this observation, two landmark randomised trials, MADIT II and SCD-HeFT, were conducted between end of the 1990s and early 2000s. These trials compared the survival of patients with severely reduced LVEF who received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator with the survival of patients being on medical therapy alone. They reported a significantly better survival of patients in the defibrillator arm and led to international guideline recommendations for routine implantation of defibrillators in survivors of MI with severely impaired LVEF as a means for primary prevention of SCD. Since then, the management of these patients has changed dramatically with the advent of a series of novel drug classes that reduce not only mortality but specifically SCD leading to a substantial decrease of the sudden death rates as well as of the rates of appropriate defibrillator therapies implanted for primary prevention of SCD. At the same time, the complication rates associated with the defibrilllator therapy remain significant without obvious decrease. Thus, the risk-benefit of routine defibrillator implantation for primary prevention of SCD in patients with severely reduced LVEF has substantially changed since the conduction of the landmark trials that established this therapy. Due to the inherent risks and considerable costs of the defibrillator, a novel randomised adequately powered assessment of the potential benefit or harm of the defibrillator in survivors of MI with reduced LVEF under contemporary optimal medical treatment (OMT) appears imperative. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that in post-MI patients with symptomatic heart failure who receive OMT for this condition, and with reduced LVEF ≤ 35%, OMT without ICD implantation (index group) is not inferior to OMT with ICD implantation (control group) with respect to all-cause mortality.
The purpose of this study is to determine real-world patient-reported outcomes with fedratinib (FEDR) therapy for myelofibrosis (MF) in the real-world (RW) setting.
The primary objective is to confirm the clinical performance and safety of the GORE® VIATORR® TIPS (Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt) Endoprosthesis with Controlled Expansion throughout the device functional lifetime of 3 years in real world setting. The secondary objective is to collect information on quality of life after treatment with the GORE® VIATORR® TIPS Endoprosthesis with Controlled Expansion. Additionally, data will be collected on the safety and performance of the GORE TIPS Set when utilized.
The purpose of the study is to examine efficacy and safety of epcoritamab with and without lenalidomide in newly diagnosed elderly patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) who cannot tolerate anthracycline therapy. Epcoritamab (also known as EPKINLY™, GEN3013 and DuoBody®-CD3xCD20) is an antibody that has already been tested in several clinical studies. All patients will receive active treatment. There is an equal chance of receiving epcoritamab or epcoritamab plus lenalidomide.
The current anesthetic drug used as standard for ECT procedure at the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical University of Vienna, is the barbiturate methohexital (Brevital®). As far as we know, methohexital is the most common anesthetic in the procedure of ECT. Only few heterogeneous randomized controlled trials to directly compare the use of (sole) ketamine and methohexital in ECT with relatively small sample sizes have been conducted so far, showing inconclusive findings: a retrospective comparison of methohexital and switch to ketamine anesthesia in 36 patients showed that ketamine prolonged seizure duration and accelerated posttreatment orientation. Others compared both drugs in terms of recovery and reorientation time showing that reorientation time was faster in the methohexital group (total N=9). Another study showed no difference in any outcome measure (depressive symptom improvement, cognition, adverse events) between both groups (total N=16, N=9 per group). Finally, a comparative investigation (total N=37, N=20 vs. N=17) detected no differences between both anesthetics but a higher systolic blood pressure posttreatment and longer motor seizure duration in the ketamine group. A favorable profile of ketamine in regards to seizure quality has been reported, however in terms of outcome measures methohexital and ketamine were similar (total N=50, N=23 vs. N=27). The present study is designed as a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial comparing esketamine plus propofol (ratio 1:1, for better readability from now on referred to as "ketofol") to methohexital, the latter being the current standard anesthetic applied for ECT procedure at our department. Patients eligible for ECT will be randomly assigned to receive anesthesia with either ketofol or methohexital for the whole course of the individual ECT series. Group differences will be investigated both in regards to outcomes related to anesthesia, treatment-outcome and seizure quality. Further, changes in cardiac enzyme levels before and after ECT-treatment and during the entire ECT series will be evaluated and possible group differences will be explored. As stated above the sole/adjunct administration of ketamine as anesthetic agent for ECT has been associated with better seizure quality, similar antidepressant outcomes and anesthesia-associated events, while there is some evidence suggesting that the use of ketamine might present some advantages to other anesthetics in terms of cognitive side-effects accompanying ECT. Therefore, the aim of the present study will be to establish ketofol as a new standard for anesthesia at our Department.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of two different doses of ianalumab versus placebo in addition to first-line corticosteroids in maintaining platelet count ≥30 G/L in adult participants with primary ITP.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of two different doses of ianalumab added to eltrombopag to prolong Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) in adults with primary ITP who failed previous first-line treatment with steroids.
The Study objective is to measure retinal neurovascular coupling and blood flow parameters in patients previously infected with COVID-19, long COVID-19 and healthy age- and sex- matched control subjects
The primary purpose of the study is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the long-term use of TPIP in participants with PAH from studies INS1009-201 (NCT04791514), INS1009-202 (NCT05147805) and other lead-in studies of TPIP in participants with PAH.
The PRESC1SE-MI study compares two algorithms for triage of patients presenting with chest pain and symptoms of heart attack (myocardial infarction) to the emergency department. Both algorithms are recommended by the European Society of Cardiology: the 0/3-hour algorithm and the 0/1-hour algorithm. Currently, most emergency departments worldwide use the 0/3-hour troponin algorithm. Cardiac troponin (cTn) is a heart-specific biomarker which indicates damage of the heart muscle and which increases after a heart attack. In the 0/3-hour algorithm, the amount of troponin in the bloodstream is measured with a high-sensitivity assay at admission and 3 hours thereafter. Likewise, the 0/1-hour algorithm means that the blood sample in which the troponin is measured is collected at admission and 1 hour later. Since recent clinical studies suggest that the 0/1-hour algorithm is superior to the 0/3-hour algorithm, many hospitals consider switching to the 0/1-hour algorithm. The aim of this study is to assess how feasible the time-saving 0/1-hour algorithm would be in reality and whether it provides the same accuracy and safety in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction as the current practice the 0/3-hour algorithm.