View clinical trials related to Heart Transplant Patients.
Filter by:Establishing personalized dose prediction and related adverse drug reaction prediction models for immunosuppressive drugs after heart transplantation using multiple methods to construct a precise pharmaceutical service system for heart transplant patients has important research value and clinical significance in improving the safety and effectiveness of medication for patients.
Coronary vasculopathy remains the leading cause of decreased survival after the first year post-transplantation. It is mainly asymptomatic because of the denervation of the heart transplant. Currently, annual invasive coronary angiogram is performed to ensure the lack of coronary narrowing. But invasive coronary angiography caries risks of serious adverse events and some concern rise from its repetition in that population. Recent advance in coronary multidetector computed tomography (CT) may allow non invasive visualization of the coronary tree. But, it remains unknown if the encouraging data observed in native coronary artery analysis can be extrapolated to transplant heart recipients. Indeed, only very small sample size studies (20 patients) have been conducted in this particular setting. Thus, the investigators decide to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the 64-row CT and 256-row CT compared to the gold standard coronary angiogram in a larger sample size study. The practice aim of this study is to determine if the conventional invasive coronarography can be switched by the 64-row CT or the 256-row CT to assess coronary anatomy especially for the patient without any coronary artery disease (CAD) or those with CAD not suitable for percutaneous coronary intervention.
Stable heart transplant patients on Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) will sign a screening consent form in order to be evaluated with the gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS) questionnaire. Those who score three or more on at least two questions are eligible for the study. Once they sign a study consent they are randomized to one of two arms. It is thought that the severity of GI side effects will be reduced over time in patients who are in the Myfortic arm versus the severity of GI side effects over time in patients who remain on MMF treatment. Patients are evaluated by GSRS, The Psychological Well-Being Schedule, and the IT01/02 Checklist for the evaluation of GI symptoms and followed for one year (visits 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months).