17 research outputs found

    Use of cardiovascular registries in regulatory pathways:perspectives from the EU-MDR Cardiovascular Collaboratory

    Get PDF
    On May 26, 2021, the European Medical Device Regulation (EU-MDR) entered into effect resulting in a major shift in the requirements for assessment of medical devices in Europe. The EU-MDR Cardiovascular Collaboratory (EU-MCVC) was founded to contribute to the development of faster, more efficient, and more effective pathways for innovation of cardiac medical devices. A registry is an organized system that collects uniform data and evaluates specified outcomes in a population defined by a disease, condition, or exposure. Most registries have been created to improve the quality of care and provide feedback to physicians, hospitals, and health providers. Clinical registries represent an ideal construct for scientific, clinical, and policy-making collaboration. We describe diverse experiences from 5 European countries and address the traditional quality components in clinical trials. Continued collaboration is expected among academics, clinical trialists, patient representatives, regulatory experts, research organizations, registry platforms, regulatory bodies, and industry partners. Data quality is a primary concern and registry leaders need to optimize data quality to become regulatory compliant. A collaborative approach among medical device stakeholders may improve quality of care, reduce costs, and provide faster access to innovative technologies, with the common objective of improving cardiovascular care and outcomes

    Use of cardiovascular registries in regulatory pathways:perspectives from the EU-MDR Cardiovascular Collaboratory

    Get PDF
    On May 26, 2021, the European Medical Device Regulation (EU-MDR) entered into effect resulting in a major shift in the requirements for assessment of medical devices in Europe. The EU-MDR Cardiovascular Collaboratory (EU-MCVC) was founded to contribute to the development of faster, more efficient, and more effective pathways for innovation of cardiac medical devices. A registry is an organized system that collects uniform data and evaluates specified outcomes in a population defined by a disease, condition, or exposure. Most registries have been created to improve the quality of care and provide feedback to physicians, hospitals, and health providers. Clinical registries represent an ideal construct for scientific, clinical, and policy-making collaboration. We describe diverse experiences from 5 European countries and address the traditional quality components in clinical trials. Continued collaboration is expected among academics, clinical trialists, patient representatives, regulatory experts, research organizations, registry platforms, regulatory bodies, and industry partners. Data quality is a primary concern and registry leaders need to optimize data quality to become regulatory compliant. A collaborative approach among medical device stakeholders may improve quality of care, reduce costs, and provide faster access to innovative technologies, with the common objective of improving cardiovascular care and outcomes

    Effects of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents or bare metal stent on fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events: patient level meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    Objectives To examine the safety and effectiveness of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents. Design Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Cox proportional regression models stratified by trial, containing random effects, were used to assess the impact of stent type on outcomes. Hazard ratios with 95% confidence interval for outcomes were reported. Data sources and study selection Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials that compared cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents with bare metal stents were selected. The principal investigators whose trials met the inclusion criteria provided data for individual patients. Primary outcomes The primary outcome was cardiac mortality. Secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, definite or probable stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularisation, and all cause death. Results The search yielded five randomised controlled trials, comprising 4896 participants. Compared with patients receiving bare metal stents, participants receiving cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents had a significant reduction of cardiac mortality (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.91; P=0.01), myocardial infarction (0.71, 0.55 to 0.92; P=0.01), definite stent thrombosis (0.41, 0.22 to 0.76; P=0.005), definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.48, 0.31 to 0.73; P<0.001), and target vessel revascularisation (0.29, 0.20 to 0.41; P<0.001) at a median follow-up of 720 days. There was no significant difference in all cause death between groups (0.83, 0.65 to 1.06; P=0.14). Findings remained unchanged at multivariable regression after adjustment for the acuity of clinical syndrome (for instance, acute coronary syndrome v stable coronary artery disease), diabetes mellitus, female sex, use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and up to one year v longer duration treatment with dual antiplatelets. Conclusions This meta-analysis offers evidence that compared with bare metal stents the use of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents improves global cardiovascular outcomes including cardiac survival, myocardial infarction, and overall stent thrombosis

    The Multi-center Evaluation of the Accuracy of the Contrast MEdium INduced Pd/Pa RaTiO in Predicting FFR (MEMENTO-FFR) Study

    No full text
    Aims: Adenosine administration is needed for the achievement of maximal hyperaemia fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment. The objective was to test the accuracy of Pd/Pa ratio registered during sub maximal hyperaemia induced by non-ionic contrast medium (contrast FFR [cFFR]) in predicting FFR and comparing it to the performance of resting Pd/Pa in a collaborative registry of 926 patients enrolled in 10 hospitals from four European countries (Italy, Spain, France and Portugal). Methods and results: Resting Pd/Pa, cFFR and FFR were measured in 1,026 coronary stenoses functionally evaluated using commercially available pressure wires. cFFR was obtained after intracoronary injection of contrast medium, while FFR was measured after administration of adenosine. Resting Pd/Pa and cFFR were significantly higher than FFR (0.93 +/- 0.05 vs. 0.87 +/- 0.08 vs. 0.84 +/- 0.08, p&lt;0.001). A strong correlation and a close agreement at Bland-Altman analysis between cFFR and FFR were observed (r=0.90, p&lt;0.001 and 95% CI of disagreement: from -0.042 to 0.11). ROC curve analysis showed an excellent accuracy (89%) of the cFFR cut-off of &lt;= 0.85 in predicting an FFR value &lt;= 0.80 (AUC 0.95 [95% CI: 0.94-0.96]), significantly better than that observed using resting Pd/Pa (AUC: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88-0.91; p&lt;0.001). A cFFR/FFR hybrid approach showed a significantly lower number of lesions requiring adenosine than a resting Pd/Pa/FFR hybrid approach (22% vs. 44%, p&lt;0.0001). Conclusions: cFFR is accurate in predicting the functional significance of coronary stenosis. This could allow limiting the use of adenosine to obtain FFR to a minority of stenoses with considerable savings of time and costs
    corecore