Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT05292651

Optimal Stent Deployment Strategy of Contemporary Stents

The primary objective is to evaluate whether a standard pre- and postdilatation (PSP strategy) of the modern DES results in a more optimal stent implantation compared to DS as evaluated by OCT in patients with stable coronary artery disease. The secondary clinical objective is to evaluate clinical cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease treated with the PSP strategy.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

18 year–100 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Albert Schweitzer hospital

Dordrecht, Netherlands

Location status: Recruiting

About this study

Rationale: Historically, when coronary stents were initially introduced, the standard and mandatory treatment of a significant stenosis was with pre-dilation prior to stent placement. In the 2000s, several studies found no significant difference in clinical outcome between the two different stent implantation techniques: direct stenting (DS) versus the conventional stenting after pre-dilation (CS). Consequently, the stent implantation technique has become "unprotocolarised", i.e. each operator has their own, individual set of reasons for applying or avoiding pre- and post-dilation in specific conditions. However, these trials do not apply to the current/modern clinical practice of coronary stenting. The current patient population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) cannot be compared to the population that was treated in the early 2000s. The same applies for stent design. Stents have undergone several major transformations in the last 20 years. Furthermore, the events rates after PCI have significantly decreased within the last decades due to better stent design and improved background pharmacological therapy.

Imaging studies have revealed that an optimal stent result is not achieved in a high percentage of stent implantations. Post-hoc studies have demonstrated that the optimization of the implantation technique could reduce adverse cardiac events over time. As a result of these findings, the PSP concept: Pre-dilation, Sizing and Post-dilation was introduced. Whether routine pre- and postdilatation compared to DS also results in optimal stent implantation in contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES) has not been investigated and, hence is currently unknown.

Objective: The primary objective is to evaluate whether a standard pre- and postdilatation (PSP strategy) of the modern DES results in a more optimal stent implantation compared to DS as evaluated by OCT in patients with stable coronary artery disease. The secondary clinical objective is to evaluate clinical cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease treated with the PSP strategy.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Stable angina patients or acute coronary syndrome patients with bystander stable coronary artery disease
  • With one or more significant epicardial stenosis in native coronary arteries suitable for direct stenting, according to the judgement of treating operator.

The use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) or resting indices like iFR and RFR to assess lesion severity is encouraged.

  • Subject must be at least 18 years of age
  • Written consent to participate in the study

Exclusion criteria

  • Lesions not suitable for direct stenting, like (sub)-total stenosis, severely calcified lesions
  • Culprit lesions of acute coronary syndrome cannot be randomized to the trial. After successful treatment of the ACS culprit lesion, patients however can be randomized in the trial in case of remaining stable non-culprit lesions that thought to be stented directly of during a staged procedure.
  • Lesions not suitable for OCT catheter delivery and imaging, e.g. left main or ostial right coronary artery stenosis, lesions in coronary bypass grafts or tortuous anatomy
  • Treatment for in-stent restenosis
  • Bifurcation lesions in which a two-stent technique or a proximal postdilatation is planned.
  • Treatment of coronary artery bypass grafts
  • Creatine Clearance ≤ 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 (as calculated by MDRD formula for estimated GFR)
  • Known hypersensitivity or allergy for cobalt chromium
  • Known comorbidity associated with a life expectancy < 1 year
  • Unable to understand and follow study-related instructions or unable to comply with study protocol

Treatment and study plan

PCI

Procedure

percutaneous coronary intervention

Primary outcomes

  1. Suboptimal stent results which is defined as a composite of major stent underexpansion and major edge dissection measured by OCT at lesion level directly after completion of the stent implantation according to the protocol

    Time frame: During procedure

    Stent malapposition (categorical variable) is defined as:

    • Unacceptable stent expansion: The minimal stent area (MSA) of the proximal segment is <90% of the proximal lumen area, and/or the MSA of the distal segment is <90% of the distal reference lumen area on OCT OR
    • Presence of incompletely apposed stent struts on OCT more than 3mm long (defined as stent struts clearly separated from the vessel wall (lumen border/plaque border) without any tissue behind the struts with a distance from the adjacent intima of ≥0.2 mm and not associated with any side branch: i.e. the Prati criterium)

    Edge dissections (categorical variable) will be presented as:

    • Dissections on OCT of ≥60 degrees of the circumference of the vessel at the site of dissection and ≥3 mm in length

Secondary outcomes

  1. Minimal stent area (MSA) (mm^2)

    Time frame: During procedure

  2. Acute recoil (percent)

    Time frame: During procedure

    assessed on coronary angiography

  3. Stent malapposition (percent)

    Time frame: During procedure

    defined as frequency of incompletely apposed stent struts (defined as stent struts clearly separated from the vessel wall (lumen border/plaque surface) without any tissue behind the struts with a distance from the adjacent intima of ≥0.2 mm and not associated with any side branch).

  4. Mean stent expansion (percent):

    Time frame: During procedure

    mean stent area (stent volume/analysed stent length) divided by the average of proximal and distal reference lumen areas x 100

  5. Intra-stent plaque protrusion and thrombus

    Time frame: During procedure

    defined as any intraluminal mass protruding at least 0.2 mm within the luminal edge of a stent strut

  6. Post OCT stent result optimalization (percent)

    Time frame: During procedure

    composite of additional post-dilation and/or stent placements after OCT

  7. MACE

    Time frame: 1-,3- and 5-year follow-up

    a composite of time- to-first event rate of cardiac death, target vessel MI, ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR)

  8. Target Lesion Failure (TLF)

    Time frame: 1-,3- and 5-year follow-up

    defined as cardiac death, target vessel- myocardial infarction and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization)

  9. Target Vessel Failure (TVF)

    Time frame: 1-,3- and 5-year follow-up

    defined as cardiac death, target vessel- myocardial infarction and clinically indicated target vessel revascularization

  10. All cause mortality

    Time frame: 1-,3- and 5-year follow-up

  11. Stent Thrombosis

    Time frame: 1-,3- and 5-year follow-up

    definite or probable; Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definition

  12. Cost-effectiveness analysis

    Time frame: 1-,3- and 5-year follow-up

    total number of stent, balloons, wires and repeat hospitalizations due to MACE

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Selina Vlieger, MSc

CONTACT

[email protected]

0786541492

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Albert Schweitzer Hospital

Other

Registry information

Acronym: PERFECTPSP

Important dates

Study start
2022
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2029
First posted
Mar 23, 2022
Registry last updated
Feb 1, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.