Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/26430
Title: Defining Staged Procedures for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Trials A Guidance Document
Authors: Spitzer, Ernest
McFadden, Eugene
VRANCKX, Pascal 
de Vries, Ton
Ren, Ben
Collet, Carlos
Onuma, Yoshinobu
Garcia-Garcia, Hector M.
Lopes, Renato D.
Stone, Gregg W.
Cutlip, Donald E.
Serruys, Patrick W.
Issue Date: 2018
Source: JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 11(9), p. 823-832
Abstract: Patients in coronary intervention trials may require more than 1 procedure to complete the intended revascularization strategy. However, these staged interventions are not consistently defined. Standardized definitions are needed to allow meaningful comparisons of this outcome among trials. This document provides guidance on relevant parameters involving staged procedures, including minimum data collection and consistent classification of coronary procedures initially identified as staged; the aim is to achieve consistency among clinical trialists, sponsors, health authorities, and regulators. Definitions were developed jointly among representatives of academic institutions and clinical research organizations based on clinical trial experience and published literature. Reasons for staged procedures were identified and include baseline kidney function, contrast load and radiation exposure, lesion complexity, and patient or operator fatigue. Moreover, nonclinical reasons include procedure scheduling and reimbursement. Management of staged procedures should be a standalone section in clinical trial protocols and clinical events committee charters. These documents should clearly define a time window for staged procedures that allows latitude for local policies, while respecting accepted clinical guidelines, and consistency with study objectives. Investigators should document in the case report form the intent to stage a procedure, the lesions to be treated, and the reasons for staging, preferably before randomization. Ideally, all reinterventions, or at least all procedures performed after the recommended time window, those in which data suggest an anticipated procedure due to a worsening condition and those where a revascularization is attempted in the target vessel, should be reviewed by an independent clinical events committee. (c) 2018 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
Notes: Serruys, PW (reprint author), Imperial Coll London, NHLI, Int Ctr Circulatory Hlth, 59 North Wharf Rd, London W2 1LA, England. patrick.w.j.c.serruys@gmail.com
Keywords: clinical endpoint adjudication; clinical trial; coronary revascularization; staged procedure
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/26430
ISSN: 1936-8798
e-ISSN: 1876-7605
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.044
ISI #: 000432439600004
Rights: (C) 2018 BY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY FOUNDATION
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Validations: ecoom 2019
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
spitzer2018.pdf
  Restricted Access
Published version2.1 MBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

3
checked on Sep 3, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

15
checked on May 10, 2024

Page view(s)

22
checked on May 19, 2022

Download(s)

6
checked on May 19, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.