Isovue in Peripheral Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA)
A Phase IV Multi-Center Study to Compare ISOVUE -250 and VISIPAQUE 270 for Motion Artifact and Pain in Peripheral Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA)
1 other identifier
interventional
174
1 country
1
Brief Summary
No significant differences is expected in observed motion artifacts, heat or pain reported during peripheral DSA performed for diagnostic and/or endovascular therapeutic purposes.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for phase_4
Started Apr 2010
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
February 23, 2010
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
February 25, 2010
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
April 1, 2010
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
December 1, 2011
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 1, 2011
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
May 23, 2013
CompletedMay 30, 2013
April 1, 2012
1.7 years
February 23, 2010
February 25, 2013
May 23, 2013
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Level of Pain/Heat in the Lower Extremities Scored by the Participants on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Following Intra-arterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA
The 10-centimeter Pain VAS was completed by the Group 1 patients to assess his/her pain level (not scoring heat separately from pain) in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no pain and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst pain. The 10-centimeter Pain VAS (excluding Heat assessment, which was separately assessed) was completed by the Group 2 patients to assess his/her pain level in the lower extremity of interest. The scale was 0 to 10 cm, with the left end (0 cm)of the scale indicating no pain and the right end (10 cm) of the scale indicating the worst pain. Group 1 completed the Pain VAS (heat not separate from pain). Group 2 completed the Pain VAS for pain only and, separately, the Heat VAS for heat only.
immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration
Secondary Outcomes (4)
Level of Heat in the Lower Extremities Scored by Group 2 as Assessed on the Heat VAS Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA
Immediately after administration of agent using a power injector for the administration
The Number of Participants With Significant Motion Artifacts (Scores of 3 or 4) Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA.
Immediately postdose
The Number of Participants Requiring Repeat Injection(s) Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA.
Immediately postdose
The Number of Participants With Adequate Quality of Opacification Following Intraarterial Administration of ISOVUE-250 or VISIPAQUE 270 in Peripheral DSA
Immediately postdose
Study Arms (2)
Isovue 250 (iopamidol)
EXPERIMENTALVisipaque 270 (iodixanol)
ACTIVE COMPARATORInterventions
Participants received at least one intraarterial injection in one of the following 3 locations: aortic bifurcation (total volume 15-20 mL), iliac arteries (total volume 10-12 mL), or superficial femoral artery (total volume 8-12 mL to view only thigh, 10-15 mL to view calf as well, 20 mL for full runoff to foot).
Participants received at least one intraarterial injection in one of the following 3 locations: aortic bifurcation (total volume 15-20 mL), iliac arteries (total volume 10-12 mL), or superficial femoral artery (total volume 8-12 mL to view only thigh, 10-15 mL to view calf as well, 20 mL for full runoff to foot).
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- provides written informed consent;
- at least 18 years of age;
- scheduled to undergo peripheral DSA for the diagnosis and/or treatment of PAOD
You may not qualify if:
- pregnant or lactating female;
- known allergies to one more more ingredients in wither product;
- history of severe congestive heart failure (Class IV);
- previously enrolled or received an investigational compound within 30 days;
- history of hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast agents;
- renal impairment eGFR \<60 mL/min/1.73m2, calculated using the MDRD study equation
- any other medical condition decreasing chances of obtaining reliable data
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Bracco Diagnostics
Princeton, New Jersey, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Usha Halemane
- Organization
- Bracco Diagnostics Inc
Study Officials
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Martin Krix, M.D.
Bracco Diagnostics, Inc
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restriction Type
- OTHER
- Restrictive Agreement
- Yes
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 4
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- TRIPLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
February 23, 2010
First Posted
February 25, 2010
Study Start
April 1, 2010
Primary Completion
December 1, 2011
Study Completion
December 1, 2011
Last Updated
May 30, 2013
Results First Posted
May 23, 2013
Record last verified: 2012-04