View clinical trials related to Coronary Artery Disease.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using the CorPath GRX® System, versus standard PCI when treating ostial lesions. CorPath GRX System (the Device) is a robotic-like device that is cleared for the remote delivery and control of heart catheterization devices. It helps doctors insert and move heart catheters (a thin, flexible tube) and similar types of devices inside patients blood vessels to treat the blockage in their heart. The results will help to evaluate whether procedures using the CorPath GRX result in more accurate stenting (placing of a tube to keep heart vessel open) compared to standard PCI.
SUSPECT is a prospective, single-center, cohort study of 250 military aircrew at the Center for Man in Aviation, Royal Netherlands Air Force. All asymptomatic aircrew (≥40 years) are asked to undergo a coronary CT scan on a voluntary basis, following the exercise electrocardiograms performed at their routine aeromedical examination. Coronary Artery Calcium score (CACS) and CCTA findings are reported.
This is a prospective multi-center study. All clinically stable, symptomatic patients who present to the emergency department (ED) or observation unit with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) and who have at least one ≥40% lesion and no lesion >90% confirmed by CCTA (Coronary Computed Tomography Angiogram) are eligible for enrollment once their CCTA has been completed and their FFR-CT (if applicable) has been ordered. All enrolling sites will have CCTA incorporated into their standard evaluation of chest pain in the ED/observation unit. Non-control sites will have CCTA and FFR-CT analysis incorporated into their standard evaluation of chest pain in the ED/observation unit.
As part of National Institutes of Health Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) program, the goal of the RADxUP study is to develop, test, and evaluate a rapid, scalable capacity building project to enhance COVID-19 testing in three regional community health centers (CHCs) in San Diego County, California. In collaboration with CHC partners, their consortium organization, Health Quality Partners (HQP), investigators are pursuing the following Specific Aims: 1) Compare the effectiveness of automated calls vs text messaging for uptake of COVID-19 testing among asymptomatic adult patients with select medical conditions and those 65 years of age and older receiving care at participating CHCs. Secondarily, investigators will invite all study participants to receive flu vaccination and will assess feasibility and acceptability of study participants to refer adult family household members who are essential workers for COVID-19 testing. 2) Gather patient, provider, CHC leadership, and community stakeholder insights to establish best practices for future scale-up of COVID-19 testing sustainability and vaccination.
This study requires the consecutive enrollment of 60 patients following the first event of acute myocardial infarction, evaluating B-Cell Activating Factor (BAFF) and methylglyoxal (MGO) levels in the acute setting (pre-reperfusion) and 3 months after reperfusion.
To compare the impact of revascularization and Optimal Medical Treatment (OMT) on the extent of severely reduced coronary flow capacity in stable ischemic heart disease.
Randomized, single-blind, single-center, non-inferiority clinical trial to compare target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months in high bleeding risk patients undergoing elective coronary percutaneous intervention comparing limus-eluting balloon vs. limus-eluting stents.
The objective of the present study is to detail the results of robotic-assisted PCI using technIQ automated movements in real-world clinical practice.
The purpose of the study is to compare iFR-guided hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and traditional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in terms of a functional efficacy of revascularization assessed by weighted average of iFRs measured 12 month post-procedure in the qualified coronary arteries (all arteries with at least one significant lesion and diameter >1.5 mm at baseline). The true significance of coronary artery disease (CAD) is reflected by the pressure gradients in coronary arteries showing the actual drop in myocardial perfusion whereas the degree of anatomical narrowing in fact only indicates a potential for hemodynamical changes that also depend on vessel compliance, distal vascular resistance, and collateral circulation. Then, the true effect of myocardial revascularization as treatment of CAD should be likewise assessed by measuring residual pressure gradients in coronary arteries remaining after revascularization, i.e. as the functional efficacy in analogy to the functional significance of CAD.
The use of intra coronary physiological assessment with fractional flow reserve (FFR) is nowadays the standard approach to define ischemia-inducing stenosis and guide myocardial revascularization strategy in patients with coronary artery disease. Further, FFR has been shown to be a strong and independent predictor of major adverse cardiac events after stent implantation. A lower value of FFR after stent implantation is associated with a worse clinical prognosis, without a clearly defined threshold above which clinical follow up are similar for all FFR values. Among 750 patients in the Fractional Flow Reserve Post-Stent Registry, the event rate was 29.5% in patients with FFR<0.80 compared to 9 4.9% in patients with FFR>0.95 (p<0.001). However, FFR remains poorly adopted in many cathlabs, partly because of procedural time, discomfort or sides effect during hyperemia, non-uniform adenosine response and economical constraints. This leads to the validation of resting indices (instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), diastolic pressure ratio (dPR), and resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) among others). Those indices evaluate coronary physiology without the use of maximal hyperemia and have 15 slightly different threshold compared to FFR (≤0.89 vs 0.80, for iFR and RFR, and FFR 16 respectively).In the VALIDATE RFR study, a head-to-head comparison of RFR and iFR from a retrospective analysis, diagnostic accuracy of RFR was 97.4% with an area under the curve 1 (AUC) of 99.6%. In the more recent RE-VALIDATE RFR study, 431 patients with 501 lesions 2 were prospectively evaluated for the diagnostic performance of RFR in all-comers patients. Compared to iFR, RFR achieved high diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. These are the reasons why we designed a prospective, non-randomized, clinical trial, to better 18 explore the value of RFR before and after PCI in real live and after optimization by post dilation 19 in all-comers patients with coronary artery disease in the Middle East region..