AzTrials
AzTrials

Coronary CatheterizationALPHA&OMEGANCT06835829

Comparing Advanced Hemostasis and Ultrasound-Guided Puncture to Conventional Approaches in Distal Radial Access

A study testing Transradial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch, Distal radial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch and Ultrasound-guidance in people with Coronary Catheterization, run by Associazione per lo Studio delle Malattie Cardiovascolari Cardiva ONLUS at 6 sites in 2 countries.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Meta-analysis results show that distal radial access (DRA) is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of radial artery occlusion compared to conventional transradial access (TRA). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Coronary Catheterization
What is being tested?
Transradial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch, Distal radial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch and Ultrasound-guidance
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
480 participants
Where
6 sitesin 2 countries
Study dates
31 Dec 2025to 7 Jul 2026
Phase
Interventional
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

  • Age ≥18 years.
  • Patients presenting with CCS or ACS, including unstable angina or NSTEMI.
  • Patients planned for coronary angiography or PCI.
  • Patients able to provide written informed consent.
  • Patient is willing to comply with all study protocol required evaluations.
  • Palpable radial pulse both at conventional and distal puncture site.
  • Reverse modified Barbeau test confirming radial artery patency in patients with a history of previous radial artery catheterization.

Who cannot join

  • Acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
  • Cardiogenic shock.
  • Chronic hemodialysis.
  • Contraindications to radial access, such as occlusive upper arm peripheral artery disease, or known anatomic variants prohibiting TRA on both sides.
  • Medical conditions that may cause non-compliance with the study protocol and/or may confound the data interpretation.
  • Patients unable to provide written informed consent.

Trial locations and contacts

6 sites in 2 countries.

6 sites in 2 countries

Belgium3 sites
  • Groupe Vivalia, Clinique Saint-Joseph

    Arlon, 6700

  • CHU Charleroi-Chimay, Marie Curie Hospital

    Charleroi, 6042

  • CHU Helora, Jolimont Hospital

    La Louvière, 7100

Other trials in Belgium

Italy3 sites
  • Mater Salutis Hospital

    Legnago, VR, 37045

  • Sant'Eugenio Hospital

    Roma, RM, 00144

  • Sandro Pertini Hospital

    Roma, RM, 00157

Other trials in Italy

About this study

Official title: Comparing Advanced Hemostasis and Ultrasound-Guided Puncture to Conventional Approaches in Distal Radial Access: A Dual Randomized Pragmatic Trial

Meta-analysis results show that distal radial access (DRA) is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of radial artery occlusion compared to conventional transradial access (TRA). This is of paramount importance in an evolving interventional context where an increasing number of radial access procedures are being performed to address a growing number of independent health conditions. DRA is also associated with a lower rate of vascular access-related adverse events, establishing it as the safest vascular access ever.

However, available data show that the success rate of DRA is lower than that of conventional TRA. Also, while the duration of hemostasis has been shown to be shorter, it has most likely not yet reached its full potential for shortening. Thus, the two extreme phases of DRA require important further evaluation.

The CompAring uLtrasound-guided Puncture and advanced HemostAsis to cOnventional approaches in distal radial access: a dual randoMizEd praGmatic triAl (ALPHA\&OMEGA) trial will address this lack of knowledge by exploring whether a significantly shorter hemostasis duration can be achieved with DRA when using hemostasis enhancement and exploring whether ultrasound-guided puncture can increase the success rate of DRA.

Being tested
Transradial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch, Distal radial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch, Ultrasound-guidance, Conventional guidance
Keywords
Trasnradial access, Distal radial access, Ultrasound guidance, Potassium ferrate, Hemostasis

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Transradial potassium ferrate hemostatic patchDevice

    Use of a potassium ferrate hemostatic patch to enhance transradial access hemostasis

  • Distal radial potassium ferrate hemostatic patchDevice

    Use of a potassium ferrate hemostatic patch to enhance distal radial access hemostasis

  • Ultrasound-guidanceProcedure or surgery

    Ultrasound guidance for distal radial access

  • Conventional guidanceProcedure or surgery

    Conventional guidance for distal radial access

Study groups in NCT06835829
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Distal radial accessExperimentalNot described
Receives: Device: Distal radial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch
Conventional transradial accessActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Device: Transradial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch
Distal radial access ultrasound-guidedExperimentalNot described
Receives: Procedure: Ultrasound-guidance
Distal radial access conventional guidanceActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Procedure: Conventional guidance

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Hemostasis duration.

    Time from complete removal of the introducer sheath and initiation of hemostatic compression to definitive complete deflation of the hemostatic device (device fully deflated without any subsequent requirement for reinflation)

    Measured: From the time procedure ends until the time hemostasis ends, assessed up to 48 hours.

  2. Access success

    Insertion of the introducer sheath into the first distal radial artery attempted, using the randomized puncture strategy

    Measured: Starts when the anesthesia needle contacts the skin and stops when the introducer sheath has been properly placed

Secondary outcomes (18)
  1. Vascular access site-related hematoma

    Hematoma at the access site through which the procedure was completed, graded by the Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries Study (EASY) modified classification; reported as grade II or higher and as any hematoma

    Measured: From the time hemostasis ends until the time patient is discharged from hospital, assessed up to 30 days.

  2. Vascular access site-related bleeding

    Bleeding at the access site through which the procedure was completed, classified by Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria; reported as type 2 or higher

    Measured: From the time procedure ends until the time patient is discharged from hospital, assessed up to 30 days.

  3. Vascular access site-related complication

    Composite of modified EASY hematoma grade II or higher, BARC type 2 or higher bleeding, arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, or need for vascular intervention at the access site

    Measured: From the time procedure ends until the time patient is discharged from hospital, assessed up to 30 days.

  4. Forearm radial artery occlusion

    Absence of flow in the forearm radial artery on vascular ultrasound, assessed by an investigator independent of the procedural team

    Measured: From at least 6 hours after the procedure (ideally 8 to 24 hours) until the time patient is discharge from hospital, assessed up to 30 days.

  5. Distal radial artery occlusion

    Absence of flow at the distal radial puncture site on vascular ultrasound, in patients with distal radial access

    Measured: From at least 6 hours after the procedure (ideally 8 to 24 hours) until the time patient is discharge from hospital, assessed up to 30 days.

  6. Effectiveness of patent hemostasis

    Reverse Barbeau waveform type A or B during compression, in patients with conventional transradial access

    Measured: From the time hemostasis starts until the time hemostasis is optimized, assessed up to 5 minutes.

  7. Number of deflation attempts required to achieve hemostasis

    Measured: From the time hemostasis starts until the time hemostasis ends, assessed up to 48 hours.

  8. Hemostasis at the first scheduled deflation attempt

    Hemostasis effective at the first scheduled deflation attempt without reinflation during the 30-minute observation window

    Measured: From the end of hemostasis to the next 30 minute

  9. Total air volume used for hemostasis compression

    Measured: From the time hemostasis starts until the time hemostasis is optimized, assessed up to 5 minutes.

  10. Access time

    Time from contact of the anesthesia needle with the skin to proper placement of the introducer sheath, in patients with access success at the first attempted site

    Measured: During the index procedure

  11. Puncture attempts

    Number of skin punctures with the needle at the first access site; redirection without withdrawal from the skin is not a new attempt

    Measured: During the index procedure

  12. Puncture success

    Introduction of a guidewire through the punctured distal radial artery at the first attempted site

    Measured: During the index procedure

  13. Puncture time

    Time from needle contact with the skin to passage of the guidewire through the needle into the artery, in patients with puncture success at the first attempted site

    Measured: During the index procedure

  14. First-pass success

    Introducer sheath placement after a single puncture attempt

    Measured: During the index procedure

  15. Radial artery spasm

    Angiographically identified radial artery spasm

    Measured: During the index procedure

  16. Puncture strategy switch

    Switch from the randomized to the non-randomized puncture strategy (from US-guided to conventional and vice versa)

    Measured: During the index procedure

  17. Access site cross-over

    Puncture of an access site other than the randomized one, reported as within-randomization (contralateral, same access) or between-randomization (other access)

    Measured: During the index procedure

  18. Vascular access site-related pain

    Pain felt from access site puncture until sheath removal, on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 10

    Measured: Immediately after removal of the introducer sheath

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted19 Feb 2025
  2. Study start31 Dec 2025
  3. Primary completion6 Jul 2026
  4. Study completion7 Jul 2026

Resources

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 N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
Prospective open-label, randomized, controlled trial that integrates two independent nonfactorial randomized comparisons. In the first comparison, 480 patients will be randomized in 1:1 ratio to either to conventional transradial access or distal radial access using the potassium ferrate patch for hemostasis enhancement. In the second comparison, the 240 patients assigned to distal radial access will be randomized 1:1 to either conventional artery puncture or ultrasound-guided puncture.
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
480 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06835829
Sponsor's protocol ID
2023-00123
Other IDs
2023
Acronym
ALPHA&OMEGA
Status last verified
Aug 2026
First submitted
1 Feb 2025
Last updated
2 Nov 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Transradial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch, Distal radial potassium ferrate hemostatic patch and Ultrasound-guidance in people with Coronary Catheterization, run by Associazione per lo Studio delle Malattie Cardiovascolari Cardiva ONLUS at 6 sites in 2 countries.

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 7 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 2 Nov 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 6 sites in Belgium, Italy. 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?

Hemostasis duration. (time frame: From the time procedure ends until the time hemostasis ends, assessed up to 48 hours.). 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 2 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in