An observational study in Coronary Artery Disease, sponsored by Medical University of Graz. Status unknown. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-06-28.
Sponsored by Medical University of Graz · Observational
The study aims to evaluate the decision-making pathways of interventional cardiologists, when assessing patients, presented with stable coronary artery disease.
2nd International Survey on Interventional Strategies is a web-based platform.
The survey contains specific questions and dedicated case presentations on two major topics.
The first part queries the characteristics of the participants, including overall experience in interventional cardiology, annual volume of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and duration of experience with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), intravascular ultrasound (IVUS),optical coherence tomography (OCT), fractional flow reserve (FFR) and non-hyperaemic pressure ratios (NHPR). The survey uses here predefined categories and single-choice questions.
The second part investigates personal strategies for evaluating angiographically intermediate stenoses in the catheterization laboratory. Here, participants are asked to evaluate 5 complete coronary angiograms. All cases are characterised as stable angina without relevant changes on resting ECG. No information about non-invasive testing is known or provided.
Here participants are asked to (1) localise all relevant stenoses by indicating the involved segment; (2) define percent diameter stenosis (%DS) by visual estimate; and (3) determine the significance of the stenosis of interest. In cases of angiographic uncertainty, the preferred diagnostic tool is asked to be selected from the arsenal available in the catheterisation laboratory, namely QCA, IVUS, OCT, FFR or NHPR. Participants are asked to make their decisions assuming ideal world conditions, without considering any financial restrictions or local regulations, but only after the best clinical practice achievable in this virtual catheterisation laboratory.
5,598 studies on the registry are indexed under Coronary Artery Disease; 957 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 500 is above the median of 336 across 1,947 observational studies indexed under Coronary Artery Disease.
Browse Coronary Artery Disease studies →Medical University of Graz is the lead sponsor of 459 studies on the registry; 98 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Participants will be invited to join the survey via different online platforms and via social media.
Inclusion criteria
Total cohort will be grouped according to experience in interventional cardiology, as defined by a single choice questionnaire: Yearly personal PCI volume Less than 75 / Between 75 and 150 / Between 151 and 250 / More than 250
Total cohort will be grouped according to experience with intravascular ultrasound, as defined by a single choice questionnaire: General: No experience / Less than 1 year / Between 1 and 3 years / Between 3 and 5 years / More than 5 years Yearly: None / Less than 15 / Between 15 and 50 / More than 50
Total cohort will be grouped according to experience with optical coherence tomography, as defined by a single choice questionnaire: General: No experience / Less than 1 year / Between 1 and 3 years / Between 3 and 5 years / More than 5 years Yearly: None / Less than 15 / Between 15 and 50 / More than 50
Total cohort will be grouped according to experience with fractional flow reserve, as defined by a single choice questionnaire: General: No experience / Less than 1 year / Between 1 and 3 years / Between 3 and 5 years / More than 5 years Yearly: None / Less than 50 / Between 50 and 150 / Between 151 and 250 / More than 250
Total cohort will be grouped according to experience with non-hyperaemic pressure ratios, as defined by a single choice questionnaire: General: No experience / Less than 1 year / Between 1 and 3 years / Between 3 and 5 years / More than 5 years Yearly: None / Less than 50 / Between 50 and 150 / Between 151 and 250 / More than 250
Need for using any additional diagnostic tool
It will be assessed, how often participants express their desire to use one or other additional diagnostic tool to make a decision about lesion significance
Time frame: One month
Need for using any additional diagnostic tool in different subgroups
It will be assessed, how often the different subgroups of participants (i.e. by age, by interventional experience, by experience with different tools) express their desire to use one or other additional diagnostic tool to make a decision about lesion significance
Time frame: One month
Accuracy of visually estimated lesion severity
Visually estimated diameter stenosis will be compared to quantitatively assessed diameter stenosis
Time frame: One month
No study locations are listed for this record.
This study is status unknown, as verified in Jun 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
Medical University of Graz