View clinical trials related to Pulmonary Embolism.
Filter by:This is a Phase 1b, double-blind (participants and Investigators), placebo-controlled, randomized, single-ascending dose, multi-center study to assess the safety, efficacy, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of DS-1040b in participants with acute submassive pulmonary embolism.
Comparing two techniques (Subtraction and Dual Energy CT) for functional Chest CT for patients with suspected with pulmonary embolism.
The overall goal of this clinical research study is to prospectively assess primary outcomes related to pulmonary embolism (PE) that occur immediately (within 5 days) and within 30 days. The secondary goal is to compare validated prediction models and a modified European Society of Cardiology (ESC) approach that is primarily right ventricle dysfunction (RVD) driven with clinical risk assessment being secondary, and with primary outcomes of clinical deterioration within 5 days.
Several studies have demonstrated the possibility of outpatient management or early discharge for certain patients presenting acute pulmonary embolism (PE), providing a suitable structure is in place. The approach featured in the most recent guidelines on acute PE of the European Society of Cardiology, refers to an all-cause mortality risk assessment using the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) score or the simplified PESI score (sPESI). The sPESI takes into account demographics (age), patient history (cancer, cardiac or respiratory disease), and clinical data (systolic blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation). Outpatient care is offered to low-risk patients, providing that all the conditions pertaining to start anticoagulant treatment and follow-up at home are met. An alternative approach based on a list of simple criteria has been developed as the one used in HESTIA study. The main criteria included in the HESTIA rule consist of absence of the following: hemodynamic instability, need for oxygen therapy, high-risk of hemorrhage, renal or liver failure, or other medical or social conditions requiring hospitalization. The investigators hereby propose comparing these two approaches in an open-label, controlled randomized international trial with blinded adjudication of endpoints. The main objective is to demonstrate, in normotensive PE patients, that a strategy based on the HESTIA rule compared to a strategy based on the simplified PESI score is at least as safe as regards the 30-day-rate of adverse events (recurrent VTE, major bleeding or death). The major secondary objectives are to demonstrate, in normotensive PE patients, that a strategy based on the HESTIA rule compared to a strategy based on the simplified PESI score is more effective : - As regards the rate of patients eventually managed as outpatients. - As regards the rate of patients, in theory, eligible for outpatient care,
This is an event driven Phase 3, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint evaluation (PROBE) parallel group study in subjects with confirmed VTE. This study is designed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of edoxaban and to compare the efficacy and safety of edoxaban against standard of care in pediatric subjects with confirmed VTE.
The purpose of this study is to perform a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to compare the use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH, lovenox, enoxaparin) versus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients with high-risk lower extremity fractures.
The study will compare standard catheter directed thrombolysis to ultrasound accelerated thrombolysis for the treatment of acute submassive pulmonary embolism (PE). The study population will include patients eligible for catheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) for submassive PE. Subjects will be randomized to, either, standard catheter-directed thrombolysis or ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis (USAT).
The overarching objective of the study is to determine the effectiveness of LMWH/ warfarin vs. DOAC anticoagulation for preventing recurrent VTE in cancer patients. The intervention strategy is Direct Oral AntiCoagulants (DOAC) therapy with edoxaban, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran. The comparator is low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) alone or with warfarin. The information gained will empower cancer patients and physicians to make more informed choices about anticoagulation strategies to manage VTE.
This study aims to collect patient reported outcomes and assess treatment satisfaction in active cancer patients treated with rivaroxaban for VTE (venous thromboembolism).
To evaluate the effect of a prognosis-guided vs standard medical therapy in the: 1) duration of hospital stay; 2) cost-effectiveness; 3) satisfaction and quality of life; 4) in-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality; and 5) 30-day readmissions in normotensive patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE). Design: Prospective, randomized, controlled, single blind trial. Normotensive patients with acute symptomatic PE will be randomly assigned to follow a prognosis-guided treatment, or to receive usual care. Setting: Respiratory, Medicine and Emergency Departments in 15 Spanish hospitals. Analyses: Data for the primary and secondary end points will be analyzed according to the intention-to -treat principle. The intention-to-treat analysis will include all randomly assigned patients. For the efficacy end points, investigators will use the Mann-Whitney U test. We will also use competing risk regression models according to Fine and Gray. For the safety end points, comparisons will be made with the use of the chi-square test. Separate analyses will be done in key prespecified subgroups of patients, according to age and hospital size.