Design of the ROLLERCOASTR trial: rotational atherectomy, lithotripsy or laser for the management of calcified coronary stenosis

Q2 Medicine
A. Jurado-Román, A. Gómez-Menchero, I. Amat-Santos, J. Caballero-Borrego, S. Ojeda, R. Ocaranza-Sanchez, S. Jiménez-Valero, G. Galeote, and Raúl Moreno
{"title":"Design of the ROLLERCOASTR trial: rotational atherectomy, lithotripsy or laser for the management of calcified coronary stenosis","authors":"A. Jurado-Román, A. Gómez-Menchero, I. Amat-Santos, J. Caballero-Borrego, S. Ojeda, R. Ocaranza-Sanchez, S. Jiménez-Valero, G. Galeote, and Raúl Moreno","doi":"10.24875/recice.m23000381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and objectives: Coronary calcification is one of the leading factors that affect negatively the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention. Several calcium modification techniques exist. However, there is a lack of randomized evidence on the therapy of choice in this scenario. Methods: The ROLLERCOASTR is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial designed to compare the safety and efficacy profile of 3 plaque modification techniques in the moderate-to-severe coronary calcification setting: rotational atherectomy (RA), excimer laser coronary angioplasty (ELCA), and intravascular lithotripsy (IVL). The study primary endpoint is stent expansion evaluated by optical coherence tomography. An intention-to-treat analysis will be conducted with an alpha coefficient of 0.05 between the reference group (RA) and the remaining 2 groups (ELCA and IVL). An analysis of the study primary endpoint per protocol will be conducted for consistency purposes. If the non-inferiority hypothesis is confirmed, a superiority 2-sided analysis will be conducted. Both the clinical events committee and the independent core laboratory will be blinded to the treatment arm. Assuming an α error of 0.05, an β error of 0.2 (80% power), a margin of irrelevance ( ε ) of 7, and losses of 10% due to measurement difficulty or impossibility to complete the intervention, we estimate a sample size of 56 cases per group. The study secondary endpoints are device success, procedural success, crossover rate among the different techniques used, and the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events at 1-year follow-up. Conclusions: The ROLLERCOASTR trial will evaluate and compare the safety and effectiveness of 3 plaque modification techniques: RA, ELCA, and IVL in patients with calcified coronary stenosis. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov with identifier NCT04181268.","PeriodicalId":34613,"journal":{"name":"REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/recice.m23000381","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: Coronary calcification is one of the leading factors that affect negatively the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention. Several calcium modification techniques exist. However, there is a lack of randomized evidence on the therapy of choice in this scenario. Methods: The ROLLERCOASTR is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial designed to compare the safety and efficacy profile of 3 plaque modification techniques in the moderate-to-severe coronary calcification setting: rotational atherectomy (RA), excimer laser coronary angioplasty (ELCA), and intravascular lithotripsy (IVL). The study primary endpoint is stent expansion evaluated by optical coherence tomography. An intention-to-treat analysis will be conducted with an alpha coefficient of 0.05 between the reference group (RA) and the remaining 2 groups (ELCA and IVL). An analysis of the study primary endpoint per protocol will be conducted for consistency purposes. If the non-inferiority hypothesis is confirmed, a superiority 2-sided analysis will be conducted. Both the clinical events committee and the independent core laboratory will be blinded to the treatment arm. Assuming an α error of 0.05, an β error of 0.2 (80% power), a margin of irrelevance ( ε ) of 7, and losses of 10% due to measurement difficulty or impossibility to complete the intervention, we estimate a sample size of 56 cases per group. The study secondary endpoints are device success, procedural success, crossover rate among the different techniques used, and the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events at 1-year follow-up. Conclusions: The ROLLERCOASTR trial will evaluate and compare the safety and effectiveness of 3 plaque modification techniques: RA, ELCA, and IVL in patients with calcified coronary stenosis. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov with identifier NCT04181268.
ROLLERCOASTR试验的设计:旋磨、碎石或激光治疗钙化性冠状动脉狭窄
引言和目的:冠状动脉钙化是影响经皮冠状动脉介入治疗安全性和有效性的主要因素之一。存在几种钙改性技术。然而,在这种情况下,缺乏关于选择治疗的随机证据。方法:ROLLERCOASTR是一项前瞻性、多中心、随机临床试验,旨在比较3种斑块修饰技术在中重度冠状动脉钙化环境中的安全性和有效性:旋磨术(RA)、准分子激光冠状动脉成形术(ELCA)和血管内碎石术(IVL)。研究的主要终点是通过光学相干断层扫描评估支架扩张。将在参考组(RA)和其余2组(ELCA和IVL)之间进行意向治疗分析,α系数为0.05。出于一致性目的,将根据方案对研究主要终点进行分析。如果非劣效性假设得到证实,则将进行优效性双侧分析。临床事件委员会和独立核心实验室都将对治疗部门视而不见。假设α误差为0.05,β误差为0.2(80%的幂),不相关裕度(ε)为7,由于测量困难或无法完成干预而损失10%,我们估计每组样本量为56例。研究的次要终点是器械成功率、手术成功率、所用不同技术的交叉率以及1年随访中主要心血管不良事件的发生率。结论:ROLLERCOASTR试验将评估和比较3种斑块修饰技术:RA、ELCA和IVL在钙化性冠状动脉狭窄患者中的安全性和有效性。该试验在clinicaltrials.gov上注册,标识符为NCT04181268。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed
REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信