Prior CABG Patients Evaluated for Saphenous VeIn grAft DysfUnction and Progression of Coronary arTery Disease (VIADUCT)

May 30, 2023 updated by: Paul Knaapen, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc

Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Evaluated for Saphenous VeIn grAft DysfUnction and Progression of Coronary arTery Disease

This is a multi-center, observational cohort study including patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and ≥1 saphenous vein grafts (SVG) presenting with recurrent ischemic symptoms. Objective: to investigate the clinical outcomes in patients with prior CABG evaluated for bypass graft failure and progression of native coronary artery disease (CAD). Follow-up will be collected through national registry databases, electronic medical patient records and standardized telephonic assessment at 3 and 5 years follow-up.

Study Overview

Status

Status

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

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.

Detailed Description

Despite advances in secondary prevention, a wide variety of vascular grafts available, and evolving surgical techniques, long-term efficacy of CABG is hampered by bypass graft failure and native CAD progression. Therefore, patients with prior CABG often present with recurrent ischemic symptoms. Indeed, many prior CABG patients undergo repeat cardiac catheterization and require subsequent revascularization therapy. The clinical evaluation and diagnostic work-up of patients with recurrent angina after CABG is challenging. Patients with previous CABG are generally older, have a higher prevalence of cardiac risk factors and comorbidities, more extensive CAD, and complex atherosclerotic lesion morphology. Furthermore, current guideline recommendations on patient management are limited since post-CABG patients have often been underrepresented or excluded in large diagnostic and revascularization trials. This registry will include patients presenting with recurrent ischemic symptoms with a history of CABG and ≥1 SVGs that are referred to the Amsterdam University Medical Centers. Patients will be eligible for inclusion in the VIADUCT registry after consideration of in- and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, patients will be approached for study participation. Patients are free to refuse or to withdraw from participation in the registry at any moment. The primary objective is to investigate clinical outcomes in patients with recurrent symptoms who are evaluated for bypass graft failure and native CAD progression. In addition, results from non-invasive and invasive diagnostic tools that are used during clinical work-up to assess graft patency, the hemodynamic significance of native CAD progression, left ventricular function, and myocardial viability will be collected. We aim to evaluate the value of such tools to guide optimal repeat revascularization strategy.

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.
Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

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.
500

Contacts and Locations

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

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

  • Netherlands
      • Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1081 HV
        • Recruiting
        • Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Department of Cardiology
        • Contact:

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 to 90 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients with recurrent angina symptoms and a cardiac history of CABG with one or more saphenous vein grafts evaluated for saphenous vein graft dysfunction and progression of coronary artery disease in the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Department of Cardiology

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Prior coronary artery bypass grafting
  • One or more saphenous vein grafts
  • Recurrent angina symptoms

Exclusion Criteria:

  • <18 years of age
  • ≥ 90 years of age
  • Cardiogenic shock
  • Pregnancy
  • Failure to provide informed consent

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

  • Observational Models: Cohort
  • Time Perspectives: Prospective

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
Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)
Time Frame: 3 year follow-up
The total number and specification of major adverse cardiac events (all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or clinically driven repeat revascularization)
3 year follow-up
Saphenous vein graft failure
Time Frame: At the time of referral and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Failure rate and duration of graft patency following prior CABG procedure
At the time of referral and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up

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
Major Adverse Cardiac Events
Time Frame: 3 and 5 years follow-up
Components of MACE (all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or clinically driven repeat revascularization)
3 and 5 years follow-up
Procedural success and mortality in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention of a saphenous vein graft
Time Frame: In hospital and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Procedural success defined by technical success and no major in-hospital complications (mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, tamponade requiring centesis, emergency CABG/PCI, acute kidney failure requiring dialysis, vascular access site complication or major bleeding requiring transfusion or surgery)
In hospital and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Procedural success and mortality in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention of a (bypassed) native coronary artery
Time Frame: In hospital and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Procedural success defined by technical success and no major in-hospital complications (mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, tamponade requiring centesis, emergency CABG/PCI, acute kidney failure requiring dialysis, vascular access site complication or major bleeding requiring transfusion or surgery)
In hospital and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Quality of life assessed by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Grading Scale
Time Frame: At baseline and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Grading Scale measures whether patient have angina pectoris complaints, and to what extent patients experienced this. It uses a scale of 1-4 where 1 means angina pectoris (chest pain) only occurs with strenuous, rapid or prolonged exertion, and 4 means angina is present during little physical effort or even during rest.
At baseline and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Quality of life assessed by Rose dyspnea scale questionnaire (RDS)
Time Frame: At baseline and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Rose dyspnea scale questionnaire (RDS) measures dyspnea complaints, or shortness of breath. It consists of 4 questions about dyspnea complaints in the everyday life of patients. For every patient, a score is compiled of the highest limitation in daily life, resulting in a score of 0-4, where 0 means no dyspnea complaints and 4 means the patient has complaints during no or minimal physical effort.
At baseline and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Composite score of quality of life
Time Frame: At baseline and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up
Composite of all quality of life questionnaires, where all outcomes are summed to provide a total score
At baseline and during subsequent 3 and 5 years follow-up

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.
Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc

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.
  • Principal Investigator: Paul Knaapen, Professor, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Department of Cardiology

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 (Actual)

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.
August 23, 2019

Primary Completion (Estimated)

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.
July 23, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

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.
July 23, 2029

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 22, 2021

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 22, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

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 26, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

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.
June 2, 2023

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 30, 2023

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.
May 1, 2023

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.
  • Amsterdam UMC 2019.457

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

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