CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01014273RIVALUpdated Apr 7, 2011

A Trial of Trans-radial Versus Trans-femoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Access Site Approach in Patients With Unstable Angina or Myocardial Infarction Managed With an Invasive Strategy

A Phase 3 interventional study of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, sponsored by Population Health Research Institute. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2011-04-07.

Sponsored by Population Health Research Institute · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
7,021
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is a multi-national, multi-centre, randomized study comparing the trans-radial PCI access strategy and the trans-femoral PCI access strategy in ACS patients with UA or NSTEMI or STEMI planned to be treated with an invasive strategy (PCI).

The hypothesis is that radial access site PCI will be associated with significantly less major bleeding and access site complications compared with a femoral approach, without increasing the risk of ischemic events. The overall benefit-risk profile will favor a trans-radial approach.

02

Conditions studied

  • Acute Coronary Syndrome
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Keywords

  • Acute Coronary Syndrome
  • PCI
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
  • Radial Access
03

In context

Myocardial Infarction

2,744 studies on the registry are indexed under Myocardial Infarction; 418 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 7,021 is above the median of 148 across 1,595 interventional studies indexed under Myocardial Infarction.

Browse Myocardial Infarction studies →

Lead sponsor

Population Health Research Institute is the lead sponsor of 114 studies on the registry; 27 are open to participants now.

Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1.1 UA/NSTEMI patients

Ischemic symptoms suspected to represent a non-ST segment elevation ACS (unstable angina [UA] or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction NSTEMI) defined as:

Clinical history consistent with new onset, or a worsening pattern, of characteristic ischemic chest pain occurring at rest or with minimal exercise (lasting longer than 10 minutes) and planned to be managed with an invasive strategy

AND at least one of the following:

  1. Electrocardiogram (ECG) changes compatible with new ischemia [ST depression of at least 1mm or transient ST elevation or ST elevation of less than or equal to 1 mm or T wave inversion greater than 2 mm in at least 2 contiguous leads].

    or

  2. Patients > 60 years of age with normal ECG are eligible provided there is a high degree of certainty that presenting symptoms are due to myocardial ischemia. Such patients must have documented evidence of previous coronary artery disease (CAD) with at least one of the following:

    • Prior MI requiring hospitalization
    • Prior revascularization procedure (more than 3 months ago)
    • Cardiac catheterization showing significant CAD
    • Positive exercise test
    • Other objective evidence of atherosclerotic vascular disease or
  3. Already elevated cardiac enzymes or troponin I or T above the upper limit of normal.

1.2 STEMI patients

  1. Presenting with signs or symptoms of acute myocardial infarction lasting at least 20 minutes and planned to be managed with an invasive strategy with intent to perform a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during the index hospitalization.
  2. Definite ECG changes compatible with STEMI: persistent ST-elevation (> 2 mm in two contiguous precordial leads or > 1 mm in at least two limb leads), or new left bundle branch block, or Q-wave in 2 contiguous leads

    1. Randomized during index hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome 3) Suitable candidate for either radial or femoral artery PCI 4) Intent to perform same-sitting angiography and PCI. 5) Palpable radial artery with documented normal Allen's test 6) Acceptance by operator to use whichever route is assigned by the randomization process 7) Previous experience of the operator with at least 50 cases of radial artery access within the past year 8) Written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

  1. Age \< 18 years
  2. Active bleeding or significant increased risk of bleeding, severe hepatic insufficiency, current peptic ulceration, proliferative diabetic retinopathy.
  3. Uncontrolled hypertension
  4. Cardiogenic shock
  5. Prior CABG surgery with use of more than one internal mammary artery
  6. Documented severe peripheral vascular disease precluding a femoral approach
  7. Participation in any study with an investigational drug or device within the previous 30 days
  8. Medical, geographic or social factors making study participation impractical
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
7,021 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Trans-femoral access

    Femoral artery PCI access site

    Procedure: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

  • Active comparator
    Trans-radial access

    Radial artery PCI access site

    Procedure: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Interventions

  • ProcedurePercutaneous Coronary Intervention
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. First occurrence of the composite of death, MI, stroke or non CABG major bleeding (i.e. severe bleeding, other major bleeding) at 30 days.

    Time frame: 30 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Non CABG major bleeding

    Time frame: within 30 days following randomization

  2. Death, MI or stroke

    Time frame: within 30 days following randomization

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Hamilton Health Sciences
    Hamilton, Ontario L8L 2X2, Canada
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Cantor WJ, Mehta SR, Yuan F, Dzavik V, Worthley M, Niemela K, Valentin V, Fung A, Cheema AN, Widimsky P, Natarajan M, Jedrzejowski B, Jolly SS. Radial versus femoral access for elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary angiography and intervention: insights from the RIVAL trial. Am Heart J. 2015 Nov;170(5):880-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2015.08.011. Epub 2015 Aug 16. PubMed 26542495 ↗
  • Jolly SS, Cairns J, Yusuf S, Niemela K, Steg PG, Worthley M, Ferrari E, Cantor WJ, Fung A, Valettas N, Rokoss M, Olivecrona GK, Widimsky P, Cheema AN, Gao P, Mehta SR; RIVAL Investigators. Procedural volume and outcomes with radial or femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Mar 18;63(10):954-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052. Epub 2013 Nov 21. PubMed 24269362 ↗
  • Jolly SS, Cairns J, Niemela K, Steg PG, Natarajan MK, Cheema AN, Rao SV, Cantor WJ, Dzavik V, Budaj A, Sheth T, Valentin V, Fung A, Widimsky P, Ferrari E, Gao P, Jedrzejowski B, Mehta SR; RIVAL Investigators. Effect of radial versus femoral access on radiation dose and the importance of procedural volume: a substudy of the multicenter randomized RIVAL trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Mar;6(3):258-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2012.10.016. PubMed 23517837 ↗
  • Mehta SR, Jolly SS, Cairns J, Niemela K, Rao SV, Cheema AN, Steg PG, Cantor WJ, Dzavik V, Budaj A, Rokoss M, Valentin V, Gao P, Yusuf S; RIVAL Investigators. Effects of radial versus femoral artery access in patients with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Dec 18;60(24):2490-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.050. Epub 2012 Oct 24. PubMed 23103036 ↗
  • Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, Niemela K, Xavier D, Widimsky P, Budaj A, Niemela M, Valentin V, Lewis BS, Avezum A, Steg PG, Rao SV, Gao P, Afzal R, Joyner CD, Chrolavicius S, Mehta SR; RIVAL trial group. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011 Apr 23;377(9775):1409-20. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2. Epub 2011 Apr 4. Erratum In: Lancet. 2011 Apr 23;377(9775):1408. Lancet. 2011 Jul 2;378(9785):30. PubMed 21470671 ↗
  • Jolly SS, Niemela K, Xavier D, Widimsky P, Budaj A, Valentin V, Lewis BS, Avezum A, Steg PG, Rao SV, Cairns J, Chrolavicius S, Yusuf S, Mehta SR. Design and rationale of the radial versus femoral access for coronary intervention (RIVAL) trial: a randomized comparison of radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Am Heart J. 2011 Feb;161(2):254-260.e1-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.11.021. Erratum In: Am Heart J. 2011 Jun;161(6):1221. PubMed 21315206 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 7, 2011, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01014273
Lead sponsor
Population Health Research Institute
Collaborators
Sanofi
First posted
Nov 16, 2009
Start date
Jun 2006
Primary completion
Feb 2011
Completion
Mar 2011
Last update
Apr 7, 2011

Study contacts

Sanjit Jolly, MD, MSc, FRCPC
principal investigator · Population Health Research Institute
Susan Chrolavicius
study director · Population Health Research Institute
Shamir Mehta, MD, MSc, FRCP(C), FACC
principal investigator · Population Health Research Institute

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2011. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion