Completed

Shock Trial: Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock.

0 criteria met from your profileSee at a glance how your profile meets each eligibility criteria.
What is being tested

angioplasty, transluminal, percutaneous coronary

+ coronary artery bypass
+ thrombolytic therapy
Procedure
Drug
Who is being recruted

Cardiovascular Diseases
+3

+ Coronary Disease
+ Heart Diseases
From 18 to 75 Years
How is the trial designed

Treatment Study

Phase 3
Interventional
Study Start: September 1994

Summary

Principal SponsorCarelon Research
Last updated: March 4, 2014
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner
Study start date: September 1, 1994Actual date on which the first participant was enrolled.

To test if early revascularization, primarily with angioplasty (PTCA) or bypass surgery (CABG), reduced all-cause in-hospital mortality from cardiogenic shock compared to conventional treatment, including thrombolysis. BACKGROUND: Approximately 7.5 percent of all acute myocardial infarctions which are diagnosed in an emergency room or in-hospital lead to cardiogenic shock and an in-hospital death rate of 70 to 80 percent, usually within one to two days of diagnosis of cardiogenic shock. The high death rate has not changed in the last two decades. Non-random clinical series and animal studies suggest that rapid revascularization following cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction may substantially improve survival. However, the apparent benefit reported in the non-random clinic studies could have resulted partly from a selection bias towards patients with a better prognosis. DESIGN NARRATIVE: Randomized, multicenter, Phase III, controlled clinical trial. Patients with shock due to left ventricular failure complicating myocardial infarction were randomly assigned to emergency revascularization or initial medical stabilization. Revascularization was accomplished by either coronary-artery bypass grafting or angioplasty. A total of 152 patients were randomized to early revascularization and 150 patients to conventional therapy consisting of thrombolytics and a possible late attempt at revascularization. Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation was performed in 86 percent of the patients in both groups. The primary endpoint was mortality from all causes at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality at six months and assessment of the quality of life in survivors after discharge. All patients with a clinically suspected diagnosis of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction formed a registry, with limited information collected on in-hospital procedures, medications, length of stay and vital status at discharge. The study has been extended through June, 2005 for patient follow-up and data analyses. Long-term survival rates (6 to 11 years post-MI) will be estimated and the quality of life of survivors of acute MI complicated by cardiogenic shock will be studied. Extended trial data analyses will be conducted: a) To determine the early echocardiographic parameters which are associated with one year survival in cardiogenic shock patients, and to assess the interaction of these parameters with early revascularization; b) To examine differences in disease course and patient outcome as a function of age, gender, national practice, and changes in serial hemodynamic measurements, as well as to better characterize the related conditions and complications of cardiogenic shock.

Official TitleShock Trial: Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. 
Principal SponsorCarelon Research
Last updated: March 4, 2014
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner

Protocol

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
Design Details
Treatment Study
These studies test new ways to treat a disease, condition, or health issue. The goal is to see if a new drug, therapy, or approach works better or has fewer side effects than existing options.

How participants are assigned to different groups/arms
In this clinical study, participants are placed into groups randomly, like flipping a coin. This ensures that the study is fair and unbiased, making the results more reliable. By assigning participants by chance, researchers can better compare treatments without external influences.

Other Ways to Assign Participants
Non-randomized allocation
: Participants are assigned based on specific factors, such as their medical condition or a doctor's decision.

None (Single-arm trial)
: If the study has only one group, all participants receive the same treatment, and no allocation is needed.

Eligibility

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria: person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Conditions
Criteria
Any sexBiological sex of participants that are eligible to enroll.
From 18 to 75 YearsRange of ages for which participants are eligible to join.
Healthy volunteers not allowedIf individuals who are healthy and do not have the condition being studied can participate.
Conditions
Pathology
Cardiovascular Diseases
Coronary Disease
Heart Diseases
Myocardial Infarction
Myocardial Ischemia
Shock, Cardiogenic
Criteria
No eligibility criteria are available at this time.Please check with the study contact for more details. 
Anonymus Profile Image
Ensure optimum compatibilityAdd your profile to know your probability eligibility score.


Study Centers

These are the hospitals, clinics, or research facilities where the trial is being conducted. You can find the location closest to you and its status.
This study has no location dataSave this study to your profile to know when the location data is available. 

CompletedNo study centers