Rationale and design of the PE-TRACT trial: A multicenter randomized trial to evaluate catheter-directed therapy for the treatment of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism - 08/02/25
, Andrea B. Troxel, ScD b, Thaddeus Tarpey, PhD c, Sameer Parpia, PhD d, Samuel Z. Goldhaber, MD e, f, William W. Stringer, MD g, Elizabeth A. Magnuson, ScD h, David J. Cohen, MD, MSc i, j, Susan R. Kahn, MD, MSc k, l, Sunil V. Rao, MD m, Timothy A. Morris, MD n, Keith S. Goldfeld, DrPH o, Suresh Vedantham, MD pAbstract |
Background |
The optimal management of patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE), who have right heart dysfunction (determined by a combination of imaging and cardiac biomarkers) but a normal blood pressure, is uncertain. These patients suffer from reduced functional capacity and a lower quality of life over the long-term, despite use of anticoagulant therapy. Catheter-directed therapy (CDT) is a promising treatment for acute PE that rapidly removes thrombus and potentially improves cardiac dysfunction. However, CDT has risk and is costly, and it is not known whether it improves long-term cardiorespiratory fitness and/or quality of life compared with anticoagulation alone.
Methods |
We are therefore conducting an open-label, assessor-blinded, multicenter randomized trial, the Pulmonary Embolism: Thrombus Removal with Catheter-Directed Therapy (PE-TRACT) Study, to compare CDT plus anticoagulation (CDT group) with anticoagulation alone (No-CDT group) in 500 patients with intermediate-risk PE. The primary study hypothesis is that CDT will increase the peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2) with cardiopulmonary exercise testing at 3 months and reduce New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class at 12 months compared with No-CDT. These 2 primary efficacy outcomes will be analyzed sequentially using a “gatekeeping” procedure; for NYHA class to be compared, peak oxygen consumption must first be shown to be significantly increased by CDT. Safety and cost-effectiveness will also be assessed.
Conclusion |
When completed, PE-TRACT will provide important evidence regarding the benefits and risks of CDT to treat intermediate-risk PE compared with anticoagulation alone.
Trial Registration |
clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05591118.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
Vol 281
P. 112-122 - mars 2025 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Rationale and design of the DEFIANCE study: A randomized controlled trial of mechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation alone for iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis
- Steven D. Abramowitz, Xhorlina Marko, Donna D'Souza, Sonya Noor, Keith Pereira, Mitchell J. Silver, Stuart P. Rosenberg, Craig D. Markovitz, Thomas Tu, Ido Weinberg, Stephen Black
- Deferral of routine percutaneous coronary intervention in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Rationale and design of the PRO-TAVI trial
- Hugo M. Aarts, Kimberley I. Hemelrijk, Gijs M. Broeze, Dirk Jan van Ginkel, Geert A.A. Versteeg, Daniel C. Overduin, Jan G. Tijssen, Marcel A.M. Beijk, Jan Baan, Marije M. Vis, Jorrit S. Lemkes, Robbert J. de Winter, Michael G. Dickinson, Adriaan O. Kraaijeveld, Mostafa M. Mokhles, Thomas C. Dessing, Maik J. Grundeken, Bimmer E.P.M. Claessen, Pim A.L. Tonino, Carl E. Schotborgh, Martijn Meuwissen, Gert K. van Houwelingen, Joanna J. Wykrzykowska, Giovanni Amoroso, Tessel N. Vossenberg, Pieter A. Vriesendorp, Niels van Royen, Jurriën M. ten Berg, Ronak Delewi, Michiel Voskuil
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?