Coronary Artery DiseaseNCT01993303
Direct Comparison of 2D Cardiac PET With 3D Cardiac PET
An observational study of Coronary Artery Disease, run by Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Lowering the per-infusion dose of Rb-82 offers advantages of lessening radiation exposure and extending useable generator life. Prior studies have not shown equivalence of 3D vs 2D Rb-82 PET. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Coronary Artery Disease
- How many people
- 19 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Jan 2004to Jun 2012
- Phase
- Observational
- 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
Study population: 19 subjects, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 30 kg/m2, 79% male.
Who may be able to join
- >18 Years of Age
- Have ability to provide informed consent
- Have a technically adequate rest/stress Rb-82 perfsion PET study within the past 60 days
Who cannot join
- Pregnant or nursing feamle
- Weight > 275 lbs
- Have contraindications to adenosine stress testing
- Unstable cardiac rhythm (atrial fibrillation, frequent PVCs
- PTCA or CABG within the last 60 days
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Direct Comparison of 2D Cardiac PET With 3D Cardiac PET Using a 3D Monte-Carlo Scatter COrrection Algorithm
Lowering the per-infusion dose of Rb-82 offers advantages of lessening radiation exposure and extending useable generator life. Prior studies have not shown equivalence of 3D vs 2D Rb-82 PET. The investigators therefore compare 3D PET after a lower Rb-82 dose (~20 mCi) processed using a Monte-Carlo driven scatter correction algorithm against conventional higher dosage (~50 mCi) 2D Rb-82 PET MPI.
Read the detailed description
This study re-examines 2D an 3D myocardial perfusion PET data from 19 subjects, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 30 kg/m2, 79% male. Rest and stress scans were acquired on a Siemens Accel™ PET scanner in 2D (septa extended) and 3D (septa retracted) modes. Rb-82 doses were rest 53+/-5 mCi and stress 53+/-6 mCi. Imaging times were 2D emission scan for 3 mins (90 sec delay post Rb-82 infusion), followed by a 3 minute, 3D gated emission scan (180 sec delay). Decay and shorter acquisition times led to a 62% reduction in the effective dosage 2D vs 3D datasets. 3D images were first pre-processed using a Monte-Carlo scatter and prompt gamma correction algorithm (Imagen3D™) then reconstructed using ImagenProTM (CVIT, Kansas City, MO). Reconstructed images were evaluated using relative, 17 segment raw scores (Cedars QPET). Studies were read by consensus of 2-blinded readers for: image quality (1-4, poor-excellent), interpretive certainty (1-3, low-high) and rest perfusion using a 17 segment model (0=normal; 1-3 = mild, moderate, or severe perfusion defects). Stress segmental scores were not evaluated due to differences in imaging start time post dipyridamole infusion.
- Conditions
- Coronary Artery Disease
- Keywords
- Myocardial Perfusion Imaging, PET, Rb-82
- Medical subject headings
- Coronary Artery Disease
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Single Cohort | Population: 19 subjects, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 30 kg/m2, 79% male. Radionuclide Dosage: Rb-82 doses were rest 53+/-5 mCi and stress 53+/-6 mCi All were stress with Dipyridamole. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Quantitative Accuracy
To establish the quantitative accuracy of reconstructed volumes using Imagen3DTM when compared to other methods.
Measured: 1 day
Visual Assessment
To establish that visual assessments of image quality and reader confidence using 3D data are equivalent to the other methods.
Measured: 1 day
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Nov 2013 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2004
- Primary completionMay 2012
- Study completionJun 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Coronary Artery DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 19 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01993303
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CVIT-01-2012
- Status last verified
- Nov 2013
- First submitted
- 1 Aug 2012
- Last updated
- 25 Nov 2013
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Nov 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Direct Comparison of 2D Cardiac PET With 3D Cardiac PET Using a 3D Monte-Carlo Scatter COrrection Algorithm
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01993303
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CVIT-01-2012
- Conditions
- Coronary Artery Disease
- Keywords
- Myocardial Perfusion Imaging, PET, Rb-82
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 19 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Cardiovascular Imaging TechnologiesIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Jan 2004
- Primary completion
- May 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jun 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 25 Nov 2013 (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.
Lowering the per-infusion dose of Rb-82 offers advantages of lessening radiation exposure and extending useable generator life. Prior studies have not shown equivalence of 3D vs 2D Rb-82 PET. The investigators therefore compare 3D PET after a lower Rb-82 dose (~20 mCi) processed using a Monte-Carlo driven scatter correction algorithm against conventional higher dosage (~50 mCi) 2D Rb-82 PET MPI.
Detailed description
This study re-examines 2D an 3D myocardial perfusion PET data from 19 subjects, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 30 kg/m2, 79% male. Rest and stress scans were acquired on a Siemens Accel™ PET scanner in 2D (septa extended) and 3D (septa retracted) modes. Rb-82 doses were rest 53+/-5 mCi and stress 53+/-6 mCi. Imaging times were 2D emission scan for 3 mins (90 sec delay post Rb-82 infusion), followed by a 3 minute, 3D gated emission scan (180 sec delay). Decay and shorter acquisition times led to a 62% reduction in the effective dosage 2D vs 3D datasets. 3D images were first pre-processed using a Monte-Carlo scatter and prompt gamma correction algorithm (Imagen3D™) then reconstructed using ImagenProTM (CVIT, Kansas City, MO). Reconstructed images were evaluated using relative, 17 segment raw scores (Cedars QPET). Studies were read by consensus of 2-blinded readers for: image quality (1-4, poor-excellent), interpretive certainty (1-3, low-high) and rest perfusion using a 17 segment model (0=normal; 1-3 = mild, moderate, or severe perfusion defects). Stress segmental scores were not evaluated due to differences in imaging start time post dipyridamole infusion.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Single Cohort | – | –Population: 19 subjects, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 30 kg/m2, 79% male. Radionuclide Dosage: Rb-82 doses were rest 53+/-5 mCi and stress 53+/-6 mCi All were stress with Dipyridamole. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- 19 subjects, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 30 kg/m2, 79% male.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- >18 Years of Age
- Have ability to provide informed consent
- Have a technically adequate rest/stress Rb-82 perfsion PET study within the past 60 days
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Pregnant or nursing feamle
- Weight > 275 lbs
- Have contraindications to adenosine stress testing
- Unstable cardiac rhythm (atrial fibrillation, frequent PVCs
- PTCA or CABG within the last 60 days
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Quantitative Accuracy
Time frame: 1 day
To establish the quantitative accuracy of reconstructed volumes using Imagen3DTM when compared to other methods.
Visual Assessment
Time frame: 1 day
To establish that visual assessments of image quality and reader confidence using 3D data are equivalent to the other methods.
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 25 Nov 2013.
Related trials for Coronary Artery Disease
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
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Roxadustat and Myocardial Injury After Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
RecruitingObservational study
Preoperative Gastric Ultrasound and Left Ventricular Function in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Coronary Artery Disease, Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction
Active, not recruiting
The OCTOBER Trial - European Trial on Optical Coherence Tomography Optimized Bifurcation Event Reduction (OCTOBER)
Ischaemic Heart Disease, Ischemic Heart Disease
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Coronary Artery Disease, run by Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies at 1 site in United States.
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 3 inclusion and 5 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 25 Nov 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. 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.
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?
Quantitative Accuracy (time frame: 1 day). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 25 Nov 2013.