Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT05124249
NCT05124249
Recruiting
Not Applicable

Imaging and Physiologic Evaluation of Coronary Artery Disease: a Prospective Registry Study (IP-CAD)

Chonnam National University Hospital1 site in 1 country2,000 target enrollmentNovember 1, 2021

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Intravascular imaging (IVUS or OCT) or Invasive physiologic assessment
Conditions
Ischemic Heart Disease
Sponsor
Chonnam National University Hospital
Enrollment
2000
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
MACE
Status
Recruiting
Last Updated
last month

Overview

Brief Summary

To evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA), intravascular imaging, or invasive physiologic assessment.

Detailed Description

The traditional standard method for evaluating coronary artery disease (CAD) is invasive coronary angiography (ICA). ICA enables the assessment of anatomic severity of the epicardial artery and the severity of diameter stenosis can be closely associated with myocardial ischemia. However, there remains concern that anatomical severity is not always identical with functional significance. Actually, even the patients showed positive non-invasive tests including treadmill test, stress echocardiography, coronary computed tomography angiography, or nuclear imaging, less than half of the patients showed significant stenosis on ICA. Therefore, the investigators need further investigation to overcome the limitations of ICA. In this regard, intravascular imaging, such as intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), is a useful tool for assessing the anatomical severity in more detail. Those imaging modalities produce cross-sectional images of CAD and imaging modalities are allowing to assess lesion characteristics, plaque morphology, treatment planning, and optimization of the implanted stent. Furthermore, imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown favorable outcomes, compared with angiography only-guided PCI, especially in complex lesions. Meanwhile, there has been an ample body of evidence that invasive coronary physiology assessment, such as fractional flow reserve (FFR), also can be useful for assessing the functional significance. Therefore, the current guidelines have continuously recommended intracoronary imaging and invasive physiologic assessment for guiding the treatment of CAD. The aim of the IP-CAD (Imaging and Physiologic Evaluation of Coronary Artery Disease: a Prospective Registry Study) is to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes according to the imaging-guided or physiology-guided PCI in real-world practice.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
November 1, 2021
End Date
December 31, 2030
Last Updated
last month
Study Type
Observational
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Young Joon Hong

Professor

Chonnam National University Hospital

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Subject must be at least 18 years of age
  • Subjects who suspected ischemic heart disease and underwent ICA.
  • Subjects who were performed intravascular imaging or invasive physiologic assessment

Exclusion Criteria

  • Subject with Age \<18 years
  • Pregnant women

Arms & Interventions

Invasive coronary angiography (ICA)

Patients who undergoing invasive coronary angiography with intravascular imaging or invasive physiologic assessment

Intervention: Intravascular imaging (IVUS or OCT) or Invasive physiologic assessment

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)

Patients who undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular imaging or invasive physiologic assessment

Intervention: Intravascular imaging (IVUS or OCT) or Invasive physiologic assessment

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)

Patients who undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular imaging or invasive physiologic assessment

Intervention: PCI

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

MACE

Time Frame: 3-Year after the index procedure

a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or any revascularization

Secondary Outcomes

  • MACCE(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of target lesion revascularization(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of cardiac death(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of stent thrombosis(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of all-cause death(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of myocardial infarction(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of target vessel revascularization(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of any revascularization(3-Year after the index procedure)
  • Rate of BARC type 2,3, or 5 bleeding(3-Year after the index procedure)

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials