scholarly journals Ross for Valve replacement In AduLts (REVIVAL) pilot trial: rationale and design of a randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e046198
Author(s):  
Richard Whitlock ◽  
Emilie Belley-Cote ◽  
Filip Rega ◽  
Michael W.A. Chu ◽  
Graham R McClure ◽  
...  

IntroductionIn non-elderly adults, aortic valve replacement (AVR) with conventional prostheses yield poor long-term outcomes. Recent publications suggest a benefit of the Ross procedure over conventional AVR and highlight the need for high-quality randomised controlled trial (RCTs) on the optimal AVR. We have initiated a pilot trial assess two feasibility criteria and one assumption: (1) evaluate the capacity to enrol six patients per centre per year in at least five international centre, (2) validate greater than 90% compliance with allocation and (3) to validate the proportion of mechanical (≥65%) vs biological (≤35%) valves in the conventional arm.Methods and analysisRoss for Valve replacement In AduLts (REVIVAL) is a multinational, expertise-based RCT in adults aged 18–60 years undergoing AVR, comparing the Ross procedure versus one of the alternative approaches (mechanical vs stented or stentless bioprosthesis). The feasibility objectives will be assessed after randomising 60 patients; we will then make a decision regarding whether to expand the trial with the current protocol. We will ultimately examine the impact of the Ross procedure as compared with conventional AVR in non-elderly adults on survival free of valve-related life-threatening complications (major bleeding, systemic thromboembolism, valve thrombosis and valve reoperation) over the duration of follow-up. The objectives of the pilot trial will be analysed using descriptive statistics. In the full trial, the intention-to-treat principle will guide all primary analyses. A time-to-event analysis will be performed and Kaplan-Meier survival curves with comparison between groups using a log rank test will be presented.Ethics and disseminationREVIVAL will answer whether non-elderly adults benefit from the Ross procedure over conventional valve replacement. The final results at major meetings, journals, regional seminars, hospital rounds and via the Reducing Global Perioperative Risk Multimedia Resource Centre.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03798782Protocol versionJanuary 29, 2019 (Final Version 1.0)

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e048178
Author(s):  
Katie Mellor ◽  
Saskia Eddy ◽  
Nicholas Peckham ◽  
Christine M Bond ◽  
Michael J Campbell ◽  
...  

ObjectivesPrespecified progression criteria can inform the decision to progress from an external randomised pilot trial to a definitive randomised controlled trial. We assessed the characteristics of progression criteria reported in external randomised pilot trial protocols and results publications, including whether progression criteria were specified a priori and mentioned in prepublication peer reviewer reports.Study designMethodological review.MethodsWe searched four journals through PubMed: British Medical Journal Open, Pilot and Feasibility Studies, Trials and Public Library of Science One. Eligible publications reported external randomised pilot trial protocols or results, were published between January 2018 and December 2019 and reported progression criteria. We double data extracted 25% of the included publications. Here we report the progression criteria characteristics.ResultsWe included 160 publications (123 protocols and 37 completed trials). Recruitment and retention were the most frequent indicators contributing to progression criteria. Progression criteria were mostly reported as distinct thresholds (eg, achieving a specific target; 133/160, 83%). Less than a third of the planned and completed pilot trials that included qualitative research reported how these findings would contribute towards progression criteria (34/108, 31%). The publications seldom stated who established the progression criteria (12/160, 7.5%) or provided rationale or justification for progression criteria (44/160, 28%). Most completed pilot trials reported the intention to proceed to a definitive trial (30/37, 81%), but less than half strictly met all of their progression criteria (17/37, 46%). Prepublication peer reviewer reports were available for 153/160 publications (96%). Peer reviewer reports for 86/153 (56%) publications mentioned progression criteria, with peer reviewers of 35 publications commenting that progression criteria appeared not to be specified.ConclusionsMany external randomised pilot trial publications did not adequately report or propose prespecified progression criteria to inform whether to proceed to a future definitive randomised controlled trial.


BDJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 230 (4) ◽  
pp. 229-235
Author(s):  
Jan Clarkson ◽  
Craig Ramsay ◽  
Thomas Lamont ◽  
Beatriz Goulao ◽  
Helen Worthington ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elanor C. Hinton ◽  
Laura A. Birch ◽  
John Barton ◽  
Jeffrey M. P. Holly ◽  
Kalina M. Biernacka ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document