Isovue in Peripheral Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA)

May 23, 2013 updated by: Bracco Diagnostics, Inc

A Phase IV Multi-Center Study to Compare ISOVUE -250 and VISIPAQUE 270 for Motion Artifact and Pain in Peripheral Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA)

No significant differences is expected in observed motion artifacts, heat or pain reported during peripheral DSA performed for diagnostic and/or endovascular therapeutic purposes.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
174

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • New Jersey
      • Princeton, New Jersey, United States
        • Bracco Diagnostics

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • provides written informed consent;
  • at least 18 years of age;
  • scheduled to undergo peripheral DSA for the diagnosis and/or treatment of PAOD

Exclusion Criteria:

  • pregnant or lactating female;
  • known allergies to one more more ingredients in wither product;
  • history of severe congestive heart failure (Class IV);
  • previously enrolled or received an investigational compound within 30 days;
  • history of hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast agents;
  • renal impairment eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m2, calculated using the MDRD study equation
  • any other medical condition decreasing chances of obtaining reliable data

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Isovue 250 (iopamidol)
Drug: iopamidol
Participants received at least one intraarterial injection in one of the following 3 locations: aortic bifurcation (total volume 15-20 mL), iliac arteries (total volume 10-12 mL), or superficial femoral artery (total volume 8-12 mL to view only thigh, 10-15 mL to view calf as well, 20 mL for full runoff to foot).
Other Names:
  • Other name: Isovue 250
Active Comparator: Visipaque 270 (iodixanol)
Drug: iodixanol
Participants received at least one intraarterial injection in one of the following 3 locations: aortic bifurcation (total volume 15-20 mL), iliac arteries (total volume 10-12 mL), or superficial femoral artery (total volume 8-12 mL to view only thigh, 10-15 mL to view calf as well, 20 mL for full runoff to foot).
Other Names:
  • Other name: Visipaque 270

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Level of Pain/Heat in the Lower Extremities Scored by the Participants on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Following Intra-arterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA
Time Frame: immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration

The 10-centimeter Pain VAS was completed by the Group 1 patients to assess his/her pain level (not scoring heat separately from pain) in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no pain and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst pain.

The 10-centimeter Pain VAS (excluding Heat assessment, which was separately assessed) was completed by the Group 2 patients to assess his/her pain level in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no pain and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst pain.

Group 1 completed the Pain VAS (heat not separate from pain). Group 2 completed the Pain VAS for pain only and, separately, the Heat VAS for heat only.
immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Level of Heat in the Lower Extremities Scored by Group 2 as Assessed on the Heat VAS Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA
Time Frame: Immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration

The 10-centimeter Heat VAS was completed by the Group 2 patients to assess his/her heat level (separately from pain) in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no heat and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst heat.

The Heat VAS was completed by the patient before completing the Pain VAS to assess pain.
Immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration
The Number of Participants With Significant Motion Artifacts (Scores of 3 or 4) Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA.
Time Frame: Immediately postdose
Using the following 5-point scale, the Investigator reviewed the images for motion artifact in vessels distal to the knee: 0 = None; 1 = Mild, not significant; 2 = Significant, but correctable; 3 = Degrades image quality; 4 = Images uninterpretable. Scores of 3 and 4 were counted as significant motion artifacts.
Immediately postdose
The Number of Participants Requiring Repeat Injection(s) Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA.
Time Frame: Immediately postdose
The Investigator assessed the images and recorded the number of repeat power injections required due to motion artifacts for each participant.
Immediately postdose
The Number of Participants With Adequate Quality of Opacification Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA
Time Frame: Immediately postdose

The Investigator assessed all study images obtained for each patient using a 2-point scale (1 = adequate quality; 2 = inadequate quality); assessment was independent of factors or problems relating to the underlying patient condition or the imaging parameters selected.

Results are provided for patients with adequate quality.
Immediately postdose

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Bracco Diagnostics, Inc

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Director: Martin Krix, M.D., Bracco Diagnostics, Inc

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
April 1, 2010

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
December 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 23, 2010

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 24, 2010

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 25, 2010

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
May 30, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
May 23, 2013

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
April 1, 2012

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • IOP 119

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease

Clinical Trials on iopamidol

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings