Intentional coronary revascularization versus conservative therapy in patients after peripheral artery revascularization due to critical limb ischemia: the INCORPORATE trial

Author:

Toth Gabor G,Brodmann Marianne,Kanoun Schnur Sadeek S,Bartus Stanislaw,Vrsalovic Mislav,Krestianinov Oleg,Kala Petr,Bil Jacek,Gil Robert,Kanovsky Jan,Di Serafino Luigi,Paolucci Luca,Barbato Emanuele,Mangiacapra Fabio,Ruzsa ZoltanORCID

Abstract

Abstract Objectives INCORPORATE trial was designed to evaluate whether default coronary-angiography (CA) and ischemia-targeted revascularization is superior compared to a conservative approach for patients with treated critical limb ischemia (CLI). Registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03712644) on October 19, 2018. Background Severe peripheral artery disease is associated with increased cardiovascular risk and poor outcomes. Methods INCORPORATE was an open-label, prospective 1:1 randomized multicentric trial that recruited patients who had undergone successful CLI treatment. Patients were randomized to either a conservative or invasive approach regarding potential coronary artery disease (CAD). The conservative group received optimal medical therapy alone, while the invasive group had routine CA and fractional flow reserve-guided revascularization. The primary endpoint was myocardial infarction (MI) and 12-month mortality. Results Due to COVID-19 pandemic burdens, recruitment was halted prematurely. One hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled. Baseline cardiac symptoms were scarce with 92% being asymptomatic. Eighty-nine patients were randomized to the invasive approach of whom 73 underwent CA. Thirty-four percent had functional single-vessel disease, 26% had functional multi-vessel disease, and 90% achieved complete revascularization. Conservative and invasive groups had similar incidences of death and MI at 1 year (11% vs 10%; hazard ratio 1.21 [0.49–2.98]). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) trended for hazard in the Conservative group (20 vs 10%; hazard ratio 1.94 [0.90–4.19]). In the per-protocol analysis, the primary endpoint remained insignificantly different (11% vs 7%; hazard ratio 2.01 [0.72–5.57]), but the conservative approach had a higher MACCE risk (20% vs 7%; hazard ratio 2.88 [1.24–6.68]). Conclusion This trial found no significant difference in the primary endpoint but observed a trend of higher MACCE in the conservative arm. Graphical Abstract A graphical abstract illustrating the key highlights of the design and comparisons

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3