Key result
RCT tests whether MRA fusion fluoroscopy reduces iodinated contrast use in iliac interventions.
Why the study?
Endovascular iliac artery interventions rely on iodinated contrast agents that should be limited due to nephrotoxicity, and the added value of 3D image fusion guidance on contrast amount is unknown.
Does 3D image fusion guidance reduce the amount of administered iodinated contrast agent in patients undergoing endovascular iliac artery interventions?
RCT (n=106)
Open-label
1:1 minimization
Yes
Does 3D image fusion guidance reduce the amount of administered iodinated contrast agent in patients undergoing endovascular iliac artery interventions?
This study protocol outlines a randomized trial to determine if 3D image fusion guidance reduces contrast volume during iliac artery interventions.
Upcoming RCT will test contrast reduction with 3D fusion in iliac interventions; leaves open current evidence for adoption.
Endovascular iliac artery interventions rely on the use of two-dimensional digital subtraction angiographies with an iodinated contrast agent and ionizing radiation. The amount of iodinated contrast agent should be limited because of its potentially nephrotoxic effects. Three-dimensional (3D) image fusion requires registration of a preprocedural magnetic resonance angiogram (MRA) or computed tomography (CT) angiogram to a perprocedurally acquired cone-beam CT or two fluoroscopic orthogonal projections. After registration, the 3D angiography images can be overlaid on the fluoroscopy screen and will follow table and C-arm movements. This study will assess the added value of the 3D image fusion technique in iliac artery interventions regarding the amount of the iodinated contrast agent administered. The study cohort will comprise 106 patients (> 18 years) with symptomatic common and/or external iliac artery stenoses or occlusions and a recent (< 6 months) diagnostic MRA from the pelvis through the lower extremities, for which an endovascular intervention is indicated. Patients will be randomized into the control or study group (i.e. treatment without or with 3D image fusion guidance). The primary endpoint is the amount of administered iodinated contrast agent (mL). Secondary outcomes are technical success of the procedure, defined as < 30% residual stenosis over the treated lesion, fluoroscopy time, and radiation dose as dose area product (mGycm2). Patient participation in the study will be completed after hospital discharge. This study is a randomized controlled multicenter trial to provide evidence on the effect of the 3D image fusion technique on the amount of administered iodinated contrast during endovascular common and/or external iliac artery interventions. Nederlands Trial Register, NTR5008 . Registered on 16 December 2014.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goudeketting et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Peripheral artery disease (iliac artery stenoses or occlusions) (n=106). Fluoroscopy with MRA fusion image guidance vs. Standard endovascular intervention without 3D image fusion guidance was evaluated on Amount of administered iodinated contrast agent (mL). Fluoroscopy with MRA fusion image guidance is being investigated in a randomized controlled trial to determine if it reduces the amount of administered iodinated contrast agent during endovascular iliac artery interventions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: