Key result
Pilot RCT protocol evaluates routine invasive versus non-invasive management in post-CABG NSTE-ACS.
Why the study?
Does routine invasive management improve clinical outcomes compared to a routine non-invasive strategy in patients with NSTE-ACS and prior CABG?
RCT (n=60)
Open-label treatment with independent Clinical Event Committee blinded to treatment group assignment
Interactive voice recognition system to initial medical management or initial invasive management
Yes
Does routine invasive management improve clinical outcomes compared to a routine non-invasive strategy in patients with NSTE-ACS and prior CABG?
This pilot trial protocol will establish the feasibility and safety of randomizing patients with NSTE-ACS and prior CABG to invasive versus conservative strategies to inform a future definitive outcome trial.
INTRODUCTION: There is an evidence gap about how to best treat patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs) presenting with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) because historically, these patients were excluded from pivotal randomised trials. We aim to undertake a pilot trial of routine non-invasive management versus routine invasive management in patients with NSTE-ACS with prior CABG and optimal medical therapy during routine clinical care. Our trial is a proof-of-concept study for feasibility, safety, potential efficacy and health economic modelling. We hypothesise that a routine invasive approach in patients with NSTE-ACS with prior CABG is not superior to a non-invasive approach with optimal medical therapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 60 patients will be enrolled in a randomised clinical trial in 4 hospitals. A screening log will be prospectively completed. Patients not randomised due to lack of eligibility criteria and/or patient or physician preference and who give consent will be included in a registry. We will gather information about screening, enrolment, eligibility, randomisation, patient characteristics and adverse events (including post-discharge). The primary efficacy outcome is the composite of all-cause mortality, rehospitalisation for refractory ischaemia/angina, myocardial infarction and hospitalisation for heart failure. The primary safety outcome is the composite of bleeding, stroke, procedure-related myocardial infarction and worsening renal function. Health status will be assessed using EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) assessed at baseline and 6 monthly intervals, for at least 18 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01895751 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in Non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) with prior CABG (n=60). Routine invasive management vs. Routine non-invasive management with optimal medical therapy was evaluated on Composite of all-cause mortality, rehospitalisation for refractory ischaemia/angina, myocardial infarction and hospitalisation for heart failure. This pilot trial protocol describes the design to evaluate routine invasive management versus non-invasive management in patients with NSTE-ACS and prior CABG, with no quantitative clinical results reported yet.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: