Heart DiseasesPhase 1NCT00246779
A Study of the Effect of Blinding in a Trial of Blood Filtration During Heart Surgery
A Phase 1 study testing Modified ultrafiltration in people with Heart Diseases, run by Ottawa Heart Institute Research Corporation at 4 sites in Canada.
Trial summary
Cardiac surgery is a major consumer of blood products worldwide. The nature of the surgery when the heart-lung machine is used, is such that the patient's blood is significantly diluted by intravenous fluids. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Heart Diseases
- What is being tested?
- Modified ultrafiltration
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 78 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesCanada
- Study dates
- Nov 2005to Jun 2007
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult cardiac surgery patients with weight ≤ 65 kg or body surface area (BSA) < 1.7 m2
Who cannot join
- Emergency surgery
- Abciximab (Reopro™) use < 7 days
- Inability to obtain consent
- Age < 18 years
- Patients undergoing off-pump surgery
- Preoperative anemia
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country.
Canada4 sites
Kingston General Hospital
Kingston, Ontario, K7L 2V7
University Hospital
London, Ontario, N6A 5A5
Royal Victoria Hospital
Montreal, Quebec, H3A 1A1
University of Ottawa Heart Institute
Ottawa, Ontario, K1Y 4W7
About this study
Official title: Transfusion Reduction and Modified Ultrafiltration After Cardiopulmonary Bypass (TRAM Trial) - A Pilot Feasibility Trial
Cardiac surgery is a major consumer of blood products worldwide. The nature of the surgery when the heart-lung machine is used, is such that the patient's blood is significantly diluted by intravenous fluids. This dilution further compounds the blood's ability to form blood clots to seal the wound, thus increasing bleeding after surgery. The problem of this dilution is particularly severe in patients with low body weight, of whom a large percentage are women undergoing heart surgery. As a result, in this population there is an increased risk of needing a blood transfusion during and after surgery. The effects of this dilution can be potentially reversed by filtering the blood and removing the fluid after the principal part of the procedure has been completed through a process referred to as modified ultrafiltration (MUF). This procedure has been shown to be effective in several small clinical studies, however the interpretation of the results has been complicated by the fact that the studies were not "blinded". In other words, because the physicians and surgeons making the decisions about blood transfusions knew what treatment the patients received (i.e. MUF or not) it may have biased their judgement and affected the validity of the findings of the studies. The investigators believe that MUF may be a useful procedure to limit blood transfusions, particularly in patients of low body size, and weight undergoing heart surgery. This can only be demonstrated in a large clinical trial, and in the best case scenario, in a trial in which total blinding has been undertaken. However, blinding in this manner is quite difficult to achieve and it is necessary first to demonstrate that this is possible. Further, as the trial will involve several heart centers, it is essential to demonstrate that the relatively complex study interventions can be carried out in each of the centers in a reproducible manner. With this data in hand, the investigators will be able to submit for funding at a later date for a very large trial to determine if MUF decreases the need for blood transfusions in heart surgery patients. The investigators will also be able to determine the effect of this in terms of helping conserve blood as a benefit to the blood-banking agency (the Canadian Blood Service).
Read the detailed description
The demographic of the cardiac surgery population has progressively changed such that there is a greater proportion of older patients and females who by virtue of their co-morbidities and smaller average size have an increased risk of receiving blood products during and after surgery. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is the major contributing factor to this adverse event, as the technique is not only associated with coagulation and platelet abnormalities, but also by necessity, significant hemodilution as a consequence of the pump prime and the cardioplegia solution used to induce cardiac arrest. The hemodilution and the resultant decreased hematocrit (Hct) may trigger transfusion by the surgical team and there is evidence that platelet and coagulation function may be further compromised, resulting in worsening of postoperative bleeding. Modified ultrafiltration (MUF), a technique commonly utilized in pediatric cardiac surgery to reverse the effects of hemodilution after CPB, utilizes a circuit with an inflow attached to the aortic cannula, an ultrafiltration device, and outflow of the hemoconcentrated product directed back into the right atrium. Although MUF has been demonstrated to be effective at increasing the Hct, this technique has not received general acceptance as a blood conservation technology in the adult cardiac surgery population for several reasons. First, the necessary prolongation of the operative time with MUF may be perceived to be inconvenient by the operating staff and this may dissuade their use of this technique. Second, the results from the limited adult trials utilizing MUF, though positive in terms of blood conservation, have not shown changes of a magnitude that would routinely impact standard of care. It is possible that the perceived benefits of MUF in these trials have been less than impressive primarily due to the inclusion of patients at low risk of bleeding and the lack of blinding, thus contributing to the concern of treatment bias. Finally, none of these trials have been blinded and thus treatment bias may have contributed to the results. We believe that ultimately the use of MUF in this target population must be tested in a double-blind randomized controlled trial. However, the logistics of carrying out a trial of this magnitude must be established beforehand in a pilot trial that convincingly demonstrates the feasibility of blinding of this operative intervention, as well as the reproducibility of the model in several clinical centers. We are proposing to carry out a two phase multi-centre (University of Ottawa Heart Institute [OHI], Kingston General Hospital, Royal Victoria Hospital, University Hospital London) randomized controlled trial to evaluate the feasibility of an experimental model testing MUF versus a "sham" circuit in low-body weight (= 65 kg) patients at high risk to receive transfusion. In Phase I (n = 16 patients - 4 patients/center), the model will be optimized, and in Phase II (n = 64 patients - 16 patients/center) the project will be expanded and the blinding tested. The primary outcome will involve the success of blinding of the treating physicians (surgeon, anesthetist, and intensivist) in Phase II as measured by a novel Blinding Index. The information derived on the study model will be used to support a proposal in the subsequent definitive multi-center trial for which we will seek funding in the following year (n = 278/group). The primary outcome of the definitive trial will address the mean number of units of blood transfused in patients treated with or without MUF. There is also evidence in an animal model of the benefit of MUF to limit neurologic injury related to cardiac surgery. This aspect has not been assessed in a clinical model and therefore we intend to address this by evaluating the impact of MUF on early and late neurocognitive dysfunction related to CPB as a secondary outcome in the definitive trial. The proposed pilot and the definitive trial have the potential to address the role of MUF in adult cardiac surgery as a blood conservation technology. The potential application has significant implications as the procedure is inexpensive, easily teachable and physiologically sound. Further, it has very considerable relevance to women undergoing heart surgery due to their relative small body weight and increased current transfusion risk. As such, we believe that the magnitude of the findings from these trials will greatly impact current care in cardiac surgery worldwide.
- Conditions
- Heart Diseases
- Being tested
- Modified ultrafiltration
- Keywords
- transfusion, cardiac surgery, modified ultrafiltration, Cardiopulmonary bypass
- Medical subject headings
- Heart Diseases
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Modified ultrafiltrationProcedure or surgery
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Success of intraoperative blinding as determined by Blinding Index
Secondary outcomes (6)
Compliance
Screening and recruitment rates
Confirmation of safety
Establishing feasibility of multi-center approach
Collection of data for power calculation of final trial
Determination of frequency of anti-fibrinolytic use
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted31 Oct 2005 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2005
- Study completionJun 2007
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Heart DiseasesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Ottawa Heart Institute Research CorporationThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Enrolment
- 78 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ottawa Heart Institute Research Corporation
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
- Investigators
- Fraser D Rubens, MD, Principal investigator, University of OttawaHoward J. Nathan, MD, Study chair, University of OttawaThierry Mesana, MD, Study chair, University of OttawaPhil Wells, MD, Study chair, University of Ottawa
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00246779
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Grant NA 5565
- Status last verified
- Sep 2019
- First submitted
- 27 Oct 2005
- Last updated
- 27 Sep 2019
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Boodhwani M, Hamilton A, de Varennes B, Mesana T, Williams K, Wells GA, Nathan H, Dupuis JY, Babaev A, Wells P, Rubens FD. A multicenter randomized controlled trial to assess the feasibility of testing modified ultrafiltration as a blood conservation technology in cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010 Mar;139(3):701-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.11.056.
PubMed 20176212
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Sep 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Transfusion Reduction and Modified Ultrafiltration After Cardiopulmonary Bypass (TRAM Trial) - A Pilot Feasibility Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00246779
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Grant NA 5565
- Conditions
- Heart Diseases
- Keywords
- transfusion, cardiac surgery, modified ultrafiltration, Cardiopulmonary bypass
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 78 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Ottawa Heart Institute Research CorporationUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
- Study start
- Nov 2005
- Study completion
- Jun 2007 (actual)
- First posted
- 31 Oct 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Cardiac surgery is a major consumer of blood products worldwide. The nature of the surgery when the heart-lung machine is used, is such that the patient's blood is significantly diluted by intravenous fluids. This dilution further compounds the blood's ability to form blood clots to seal the wound, thus increasing bleeding after surgery. The problem of this dilution is particularly severe in patients with low body weight, of whom a large percentage are women undergoing heart surgery. As a result, in this population there is an increased risk of needing a blood transfusion during and after surgery. The effects of this dilution can be potentially reversed by filtering the blood and removing the fluid after the principal part of the procedure has been completed through a process referred to as modified ultrafiltration (MUF). This procedure has been shown to be effective in several small clinical studies, however the interpretation of the results has been complicated by the fact that the studies were not "blinded". In other words, because the physicians and surgeons making the decisions about blood transfusions knew what treatment the patients received (i.e. MUF or not) it may have biased their judgement and affected the validity of the findings of the studies. The investigators believe that MUF may be a useful procedure to limit blood transfusions, particularly in patients of low body size, and weight undergoing heart surgery. This can only be demonstrated in a large clinical trial, and in the best case scenario, in a trial in which total blinding has been undertaken. However, blinding in this manner is quite difficult to achieve and it is necessary first to demonstrate that this is possible. Further, as the trial will involve several heart centers, it is essential to demonstrate that the relatively complex study interventions can be carried out in each of the centers in a reproducible manner. With this data in hand, the investigators will be able to submit for funding at a later date for a very large trial to determine if MUF decreases the need for blood transfusions in heart surgery patients. The investigators will also be able to determine the effect of this in terms of helping conserve blood as a benefit to the blood-banking agency (the Canadian Blood Service).
Detailed description
The demographic of the cardiac surgery population has progressively changed such that there is a greater proportion of older patients and females who by virtue of their co-morbidities and smaller average size have an increased risk of receiving blood products during and after surgery. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is the major contributing factor to this adverse event, as the technique is not only associated with coagulation and platelet abnormalities, but also by necessity, significant hemodilution as a consequence of the pump prime and the cardioplegia solution used to induce cardiac arrest. The hemodilution and the resultant decreased hematocrit (Hct) may trigger transfusion by the surgical team and there is evidence that platelet and coagulation function may be further compromised, resulting in worsening of postoperative bleeding. Modified ultrafiltration (MUF), a technique commonly utilized in pediatric cardiac surgery to reverse the effects of hemodilution after CPB, utilizes a circuit with an inflow attached to the aortic cannula, an ultrafiltration device, and outflow of the hemoconcentrated product directed back into the right atrium. Although MUF has been demonstrated to be effective at increasing the Hct, this technique has not received general acceptance as a blood conservation technology in the adult cardiac surgery population for several reasons. First, the necessary prolongation of the operative time with MUF may be perceived to be inconvenient by the operating staff and this may dissuade their use of this technique. Second, the results from the limited adult trials utilizing MUF, though positive in terms of blood conservation, have not shown changes of a magnitude that would routinely impact standard of care. It is possible that the perceived benefits of MUF in these trials have been less than impressive primarily due to the inclusion of patients at low risk of bleeding and the lack of blinding, thus contributing to the concern of treatment bias. Finally, none of these trials have been blinded and thus treatment bias may have contributed to the results. We believe that ultimately the use of MUF in this target population must be tested in a double-blind randomized controlled trial. However, the logistics of carrying out a trial of this magnitude must be established beforehand in a pilot trial that convincingly demonstrates the feasibility of blinding of this operative intervention, as well as the reproducibility of the model in several clinical centers. We are proposing to carry out a two phase multi-centre (University of Ottawa Heart Institute [OHI], Kingston General Hospital, Royal Victoria Hospital, University Hospital London) randomized controlled trial to evaluate the feasibility of an experimental model testing MUF versus a "sham" circuit in low-body weight (= 65 kg) patients at high risk to receive transfusion. In Phase I (n = 16 patients - 4 patients/center), the model will be optimized, and in Phase II (n = 64 patients - 16 patients/center) the project will be expanded and the blinding tested. The primary outcome will involve the success of blinding of the treating physicians (surgeon, anesthetist, and intensivist) in Phase II as measured by a novel Blinding Index. The information derived on the study model will be used to support a proposal in the subsequent definitive multi-center trial for which we will seek funding in the following year (n = 278/group). The primary outcome of the definitive trial will address the mean number of units of blood transfused in patients treated with or without MUF. There is also evidence in an animal model of the benefit of MUF to limit neurologic injury related to cardiac surgery. This aspect has not been assessed in a clinical model and therefore we intend to address this by evaluating the impact of MUF on early and late neurocognitive dysfunction related to CPB as a secondary outcome in the definitive trial. The proposed pilot and the definitive trial have the potential to address the role of MUF in adult cardiac surgery as a blood conservation technology. The potential application has significant implications as the procedure is inexpensive, easily teachable and physiologically sound. Further, it has very considerable relevance to women undergoing heart surgery due to their relative small body weight and increased current transfusion risk. As such, we believe that the magnitude of the findings from these trials will greatly impact current care in cardiac surgery worldwide.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Adult cardiac surgery patients with weight ≤ 65 kg or body surface area (BSA) < 1.7 m2
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Emergency surgery
- Abciximab (Reopro™) use < 7 days
- Inability to obtain consent
- Age < 18 years
- Patients undergoing off-pump surgery
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Modified ultrafiltration | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
Success of intraoperative blinding as determined by Blinding Index
6 secondary outcomes
Compliance
Screening and recruitment rates
Confirmation of safety
Establishing feasibility of multi-center approach
Collection of data for power calculation of final trial
Determination of frequency of anti-fibrinolytic use
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Sep 2019.
- Results publication: PubMed 20176212Boodhwani M, Hamilton A, de Varennes B, Mesana T, Williams K, Wells GA, Nathan H, Dupuis JY, Babaev A, Wells P, Rubens FD. A multicenter randomized controlled trial to assess the feasibility of testing modified ultrafiltration as a blood conservation technology in cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010 Mar;139(3):701-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.11.056.
- Pubmed.gov linkLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Heart Diseases
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use During Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal After Coronary Angiography
Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal, Stress Ball
Active, not recruiting
Shockwave™ vs Surgical Endarterectomy for Calcified Severe Common Femoral Artery Stenosis: Comparison of Efficacy, Safety and Long-Term Outcomes
Common Femoral Artery Stenosis, Calcification; Heart
RecruitingObservational study
AI-powered ECG Analysis Using Willem™ Software in High-risk Cardiac Patients (WILLEM)
Cardiomyopathies, Cardiac Arrest
RecruitingPhase 4
The Effects of Ferric Derisomaltose in Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Iron Deficiency on Exercise Capacity and Quality of Life(COREVIVE-HFrEF)
Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction, Iron Deficiency
Recruiting
Trial of the F2 Filter and Delivery System for Embolic Protection During TAVR
Aortic Stenosis Treated With TAVI, Aortic Diseases
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Fraser D Rubens, MD principal investigator
University of Ottawa
Howard J. Nathan, MD study chair
University of Ottawa
Thierry Mesana, MD study chair
University of Ottawa
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 1 study testing Modified ultrafiltration in people with Heart Diseases, run by Ottawa Heart Institute Research Corporation at 4 sites in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Sep 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Success of intraoperative blinding as determined by Blinding Index. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00246779, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Sep 2019.