Angiojet Rheolytic Thrombectomy in Case of Massive Pulmonary Embolism (ART-MPE)

August 15, 2012 updated by: Robert F Bonvini, University Hospital, Geneva

Angiojet Rheolytic Thrombectomy In Case of Massive Pulmonary Embolism A Prospective Single Center Feasibility and Safety Pilot Trial

This pilot study is mainly aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the percutaneous Angiojet Rheolytic Thrombectomy (ART) in patients presenting a MPE. Secondarily the effectiveness of this treatment modality will also be estimated.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in our society with more than 150.000 deaths every year in the US. Usually mortality occurs in the first hour after symptoms onset (up to 11%) and may further increase up to 17% at 3 months follow-up.

In case of massive PE (MPE) mortality dramatically increases up to 30% despite important improvements recently made in precocious diagnosis and aggressive medical treatments (i.e. i.v. thrombolysis).

Quite often (up to 40%) in case of PE there is at least one relative fibrinolysis contraindication, and less frequently these contraindications are absolute. In these quite rare cases, where thrombolytic therapy is absolutely contraindicated, a surgical thrombo-embolectomy is advised, however this kind of challenging surgery is not available world-wide and it still remains associated with a prohibitive high rate of mortality.

A less invasive alternative remains the percutaneous thrombectomy, which may further be divided into:

  • Aspiration thrombectomy,
  • Fragmentation thrombectomy,
  • Rheloytic thrombectomy. The first transvenous percutaneous pulmonary embolectomy was performed more than 30 years ago; however, it is only recently that, thanks to new developed technologies, phyisicians manifest an increased interest in developing this promising less invasive procedure.

The angiojet rheolytic thrombectomy (ART) catheter (Angiojet : Possis medical ; Minneapolis, MN, USA) utilizes high velocity saline jets for thrombus aspiration, maceration and evacuation through the Bernoulli principle. Nowadays this technology is successfully utilized daily in the coronary and peripheral artery fields (i.e. thrombus aspiration during coronary or arterial angioplasty).

Due to its safety and efficacy, demonstrated in randomized trials including patients with coronary artery disease, several recent reports also confirmed the usefulness of this ART also in extra-coronary domain (peripheral arterial and venous diseases).

Massive PE, as the thrombotic coronary artery occlusion, is a life threatening clinical manifestation, therefore several centers began to manage it associating mechanical (i.e.ART) clot removal and pharmacological (i.e. lysis).

The first small, retrospective non randomized series suggest the safety and efficacy of this technology, confirming its feasibility compared with the actual proposed treatment of MPE (i.e. i.v. or in-situ pulmonary thrombolysis).

The first in man utilization of the Angiojet rheolytic thrombectomy for treating acute massive PE dates 1997, however in-vitro tests also revealed that Angiojet is able to successfully remove thrombus up to 14 days old, thus enlarging its usefulness also in sub-acute cases (i.e.>14 days old thrombus).

Despite the fact that indication of an i.v. fibrinolysis is worldwide accepted in case of MPE and that established lysis protocols are nowadays available, mortality remains unacceptably high (up to 30%) and bleeding related morbidity a major concern. In fact in large PE registries, up to 20% of the patients experienced major bleedings complications, and in 3% of the cases this was intracranial.

Of interest in case of sub-massive PE (sub-MPE), which is also associated with a quite high mortality (up to 8%) some disagreement concerning the best treatment modality still persists. Several authors support an intensive treatment modality favourizing the systemic i.v. thrombolysis; however, others suggest a more conservative attitude (anticoagulation alone with fibrinolysis only in case of clinical deterioration). These cases of sub-MPE may be very challenging, because an established consensus of the definition of sub-MPE combining clinical, radiological and cardiological criteria are still lacking. Furthermore the thrombolytic regimen is not complication-free, suggesting that, before performing an i.v. thrombolysis, the physician in charge of the patient has to seriously take in consideration all the absolute and the relative contra-indications of such a treatment. (i.e.recent surgery, active peptic ulcer, intra-cerebral bleeding, pregnancy, neoplasm, see Table 1).

The ongoing debate on how to improve mortality in patients with MPE and concerning the correct managing of patients with sub-MPE suggests that in both cases, there is an urgent need of improving the actual treatment modalities.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

10

Phase

  • Phase 2

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

    • GE
      • Geneva, GE, Switzerland, 1211
        • Univesity hospital of geneva

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

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients aged >18 years old
  2. Patients presenting a MPE (i.e. hemodynamically unstable at moment of the inclusion (i.e. shock index (SI) >1).
  3. Patients where a hemodynamic stability (SI=1) is hardly obtained despite increasing dose of drug support.

    • If after 2 hours from the first medical contact where an intensive fluid substitution and cathecolamine support is begun the patient remains with a SI = 1, he/she could be included in the ART protocol.
    • If after an initial successful drug support (fluid + catecholamine) the patient represents a second episode of hemodynamic instability, he/she could be included in the ART protocol.
    • If the patient is under chronic negative chronotrope medication (e.g.beta-blockers) a SI = 1 will be sufficient to include the patient in the study
  4. The MPE have to be confirmed by thorax CT-scan or suspected by echocardiography (i.e.visualized thrombus on the RV or main pulmonary trunk or RV overload with a high clinical suspicion of MPE).

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Very unstable patients with life threatening MPE where the time delays to transport them in the cathterization laboratory (i.e. <30 minutes) to perform the ART procedure is not acceptable because the systemic i.v. thrombolysis have to be immediately initiated in the emergency department.
  2. Patients where a percutaneous right heart catheterization via the common femoral vein is contraindicated (e.g.vascular malformation, inferior cava vein occlusion, presence of bilateral ilio-femoral thrombosis, RV or pulmonary trunk malformation).
  3. Patients with sub-MPE without any other clinical or para-clinical sign of severity (e.g. haemodynamically stable = SI<1).
  4. Patients where the clinical evaluation estimated that the observed episode of MPE is older than 14 days (i.e. sub-acute phase with organized thrombus = ART less efficacious).
  5. Patient with an estimated clearance to creatinine less than 30 ml/min.
  6. Patients or members of their family who refused to give their signed informed consenstement.
  7. Patient haemodynamically very unstable where the first clinical evaluation concludes that every therapeutic effort including the ART procedure or a systemic fibrinolysis will not change the short-term prognosis of the patient (i.e. imminent death).
  8. Patients with a life expectancy of <3months for other medical pre-existing conditions.

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: Treatment
  • Allocation: Non-Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Thrombectomy arm
The Angiojet catheter is a double lumen catheter percutaneously introduced via the common femoral vein into the main pulmonary trunk or the affected pulmonary artery respectively. One lumen serves to deliver high pressure saline jets into the thrombus and the other effluent lumen serves for clot removal utilizing a localized pressure region (Venturi effect) that attracts the thrombus for fragmentation into small particles. The fragmented debris are then pushed out through the evacuation line as a result of the retrograde high pressure saline jets, finally transporting them into a collection bag.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Successfully perform an ART in all patients presenting a MPE = technical feasibility of ART
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month
No major device-related complications, no major procedure-related complications = safety of ART
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Improve the clinical, haemodynamic and the radiological issues of the treated patients
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month
Evaluate the clinical status, and the echocardiographic parameters at 3 months
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month
Analyze the technical aspect of the ART procedure
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

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

September 1, 2008

Primary Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 27, 2008

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 27, 2008

First Posted (Estimate)

October 28, 2008

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

August 16, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 15, 2012

Last Verified

October 1, 2008

More Information

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 Pulmonary Embolism

Clinical Trials on ANGIOJET RHEOLYTIC THROMBECTOMY

Subscribe