|
注册号: Registration number: |
ChiCTR1900022941 |
|
最近更新日期: Date of Last Refreshed on: |
2019-05-04 21:14:12 |
|
注册时间: Date of Registration: |
2019-05-04 00:00:00 |
|
注册号状态: |
预注册 |
|
Registration Status: |
Prospective registration |
|
注册题目: |
杨珏医师:该研究尚未获得伦理委员会批准。请于批准后再开始纳入参试者,并与我们联系上传批件。 顺行与逆行性脑灌注对A型主动脉夹层术中脑保护的前瞻对比研究 |
|
Public title: |
A prospective comparative study for antegrade and retrograde cerebral perfusion for cerebral protection in operation of Stanford A aortic dissection |
|
注册题目简写: |
|
|
English Acronym: |
|
|
研究课题的正式科学名称: |
A型主动脉夹层患者术中采用不同脑灌注方式对术后脑部并发症发生率的影响:一项随机化对照试验。 |
|
Scientific title: |
The influence of different methods of cerebral protection on neurological complications in operation of Stanford A aortic dissection: a randomized controlled trial. |
|
研究课题代号(代码): Study subject ID: |
|
|
在二级注册机构或其它机构的注册号: The registration number of the Partner Registry or other register: |
|
申请注册联系人: |
杨珏 |
研究负责人: |
范瑞新 |
|
Applicant: |
Yang Jue |
Study leader: |
Fan Ruixin |
|
申请注册联系人电话: Applicant telephone: |
+86 13632199949 |
研究负责人电话:
Study leader's |
+86 13825000989 |
|
申请注册联系人传真 : Applicant Fax: |
研究负责人传真: Study leader's fax: |
||
|
申请注册联系人电子邮件: Applicant E-mail: |
yj198924402@126.com |
研究负责人电子邮件: Study leader's E-mail: |
fanruixin@163.com |
|
申请单位网址(自愿提供): Applicant website(voluntary supply): |
研究负责人网址(自愿提供): Study leader's website(voluntary supply): |
||
|
申请注册联系人通讯地址: |
广东省广州市东川路96号 |
研究负责人通讯地址: |
广东省广州市东川路96号 |
|
Applicant address: |
96 Dongchuan Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China |
Study leader's address: |
96 Dongchuan Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China |
|
申请注册联系人邮政编码: Applicant postcode: |
研究负责人邮政编码: Study leader's postcode: |
||
|
申请人所在单位: |
广东省人民医院 |
||
|
Applicant's institution: |
Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital |
||
|
研究负责人所在单位: |
广东省人民医院 |
||
|
Affiliation of the Leader: |
Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital |
||
|
是否获伦理委员会批准: |
否 |
||
|
Approved by ethic committee: |
No |
||
|
伦理委员会批件文号: Approved No. of ethic committee: |
伦理委员会批件附件: Approved file of Ethical Committee: |
||
|
批准本研究的伦理委员会名称: |
|
||
|
Name of the ethic committee: |
|
||
|
伦理委员会批准日期: Date of approved by ethic committee: |
2013-08-26 00:00:00 | ||
|
伦理委员会联系人: |
|
||
|
Contact Name of the ethic committee: |
|
||
|
伦理委员会联系地址: |
|
||
|
Contact Address of the ethic committee: |
|
||
|
伦理委员会联系人电话: Contact phone of the ethic committee: |
伦理委员会联系人邮箱: Contact email of the ethic committee: |
||
|
研究实施负责(组长)单位: |
广东省人民医院 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Primary sponsor: |
Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究实施负责(组长)单位地址: |
广东省广州市东川路96号 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Primary sponsor's address: |
96 Dongchuan Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
试验主办单位(项目批准或申办者): Secondary sponsor: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
经费或物资来源: |
构建AAS高危预警模型 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Source(s) of funding: |
The establishment of risk early warning model for acute aortic syndrome(AAS) |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究疾病: |
急性主动脉综合征 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Target disease: |
acute aortic syndrome |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究疾病代码: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Target disease code: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究类型: |
干预性研究 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Study type: |
Interventional study |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究所处阶段: |
探索性研究/预试验 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Study phase: |
0 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究设计: |
随机平行对照 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Study design: |
Parallel |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究目的: |
主动脉夹层(aortic dissection,AD)是致残致死率极高的大血管疾病,大部分夹层累及升主动脉和主动脉弓部的患者尽早外科手术才能减少心肌缺血和血管破裂心包填塞的风险从而获得良好的预后。主动脉夹层手术难度最大的部分主要在于主动脉根部和主动脉弓部的处理。脑损伤一直都是弓部处理中最严重的并发症和致死性因素。术后脑部并发症与患者的预后及远期生活质量密切相关。虽然近年来在全主动脉弓置换术中脑保护方面取得了一定进展,但中枢神经系统暂时性或永久性功能失常发生率偏高仍然是目前亟待解决的问题。术中深低温停循环和选择性脑灌注技术是脑保护的核心,但关于脑保护灌注方式、灌注压力、灌注流量、深低温停循环温度选择及术中术后脑损伤评价系统目前尚没有指南共识如何提高弓部手术过程中更加确实有效的脑保护措施降低脑部并发症发生率一直是目前国际国内研究热点。全球各大心脏中心在针对两种不同灌注方式的脑保护机制及效能方面的也进行了大量的研究,包括对狗、猪等动物实验研究和大宗的病例回顾性分析,结果仍存在争议。正如最早使用的深低温停循环技术由于其时限受脑缺血耐受能力的限制,目前已相对较少应用于成人主动脉弓部手术中。逆行性脑灌注和顺行性脑灌注作为两种能够维持脑血流的方式被目前大部分血管中心所采用。对于这两类灌注方式目前争议仍比较大,逆行性脑灌注虽然不需要在弓部分支血管内插管,这样降低了由于分支血管受夹层累及血栓形成或者本身血管粥样斑块插管后导致的脑梗塞的几率,而且能均匀降低脑中枢的温度和充分去除乳酸代谢产物,但有研究认为灌注血液存留于静脉窦部或者经奇静脉分流而导致有效的脑灌注量不足。顺行性脑灌注虽然提供前向的生理性灌注血流,但弓上分支血管由于插管或者阻断所导致的脑梗塞的几率还是会存在,而且灌注量不能随生理需要量调节而导致脑奢灌的损伤可能性依然存在。本文通过前瞻性、随机对照的研究设计,对比两种灌注方式对中枢神经系统保护的效果,并随访其近期结局,优化主动脉弓部手术中脑保护策略。 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Objectives of Study: |
Aortic dissection (AD) is a major vascular disease with extremely high incidence of disability and mortality. For most patients with dissection involving the ascending aorta and aortic arch, early surgery can reduce the risk of myocardial ischemia, pericardial tamponade and improve the prognosis. The treatment of the aortic root and aortic arch has been most challenging for aortic dissection. Brain injury has always been the most serious complication and fatal factor in bow treatment. Postoperative brain complications are closely related to the prognosis and long-term life quality of patients. Although some progress has been made in brain protection in total aortic arch replacement in recent years, the high incidence of temporary or permanent dysfunction of the central nervous system is still an urgent problem to be solved. Intraoperative deep hypothermic circulatory arrest and selective cerebral perfusion technique are the core measures for brain protection. However, no consensus has been reached regarding the brain protection perfusion, perfusion pressure, perfusion flow, deep hypothermic circulatory temperature selection and intraoperative and postoperative brain injury evaluation system. Thus, several studies involving brain protection measures and methods for reducing brain complication incidences during the bow surgery have been conducted at home and abroad. The world's major cardiac centers have also conducted a large number of studies on the brain protection mechanisms and efficacy of two different perfusion methods, including animal studies on dogs and pigs and retrospective analysis of large cases. Yet the results have remained controversial. Due to its limitation on cerebral ischemic tolerance, the earliest deep hypothermia circulatory arrest technique has presently been rarely used in adult aortic arch surgery. Retrograde cerebral perfusion and antegrade cerebral perfusion are used by most current vascular centers as two ways to maintain cerebral blood flow. However, there are still controversies regarding these two types of perfusion methods. Retrograde cerebral perfusion does not require intubation in the partial branch of the arch, which reduces the incidence of thrombus of the branch vessels involved in the dissection and the probability of cerebral infarction by vascular atheromatous plaque post intubation, and can evenly reduce the temperature of the brain center and fully remove lactic acid metabolites. Though few studies have suggested that perfused blood remains in the sinus or shunt through the veins, resulting in insufficient cerebral perfusion. Although antegrade cerebral perfusion provides a forward physiological perfusion of blood flow, the probability of cerebral infarction caused by intubation or blockage of the upper branch of the bow will still exist. And the damage by cerebral luxury irrigation is still possible attributable to the fact that the amount of perfusion cannot be adjusted with physiological requirements. In the present study, a prospective randomized controlled study has been conducted to compare the protective effects of two perfusion methods on central nervous system. Follow up of the recent outcomes and optimal brain protection strategy in aortic arch surgery has been conducted. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
药物成份或治疗方案详述: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Description for medicine or protocol of treatment in detail: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
纳入标准: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Inclusion criteria |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
排除标准: |
1、患者脑梗塞病史; |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Exclusion criteria: |
1. The history of cerebral infarction. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
研究实施时间: Study execute time: |
从 From 2019-06-01 00:00:00至 To 1990-01-01 00:00:00 |
征募观察对象时间: Recruiting time: |
从 From 2020-01-01 00:00:00 至 To 1990-01-01 00:00:00 |
|
干预措施: Interventions: |
|
|
研究实施地点: Countries of recruitment and research settings: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
测量指标: Outcomes: |
|
|
采集人体标本:
Collecting sample(s)
|
|
|
征募研究对象情况: Recruiting status: |
尚未开始 Not yet recruiting |
年龄范围: Participant age: |
|
||||||
|
性别: |
男女均可 |
Gender: |
Both |
||||||
|
随机方法(请说明由何人用什么方法产生随机序列): |
采用统计学软件SPSS 25.0生成的随机数表,将纳入研究的100例患者随机分为2组。 |
||||||||
|
Randomization Procedure (please state who generates the random number sequence and by what method): |
We used SPSS 25.O to produce random numbers. According to these random numbers,100 patients were diveded into two groups randomly. |
||||||||
|
是否公开试验完成后的统计结果: Calculated Results after the Study Completed public access: |
公开/Public |
|
盲法: |
open |
|
Blinding: |
open |
|
试验完成后的统计结果(上传文件): |
|
|
Calculated Results after
|
|
|
是否共享原始数据: IPD sharing |
否No |
|
共享原始数据的方式(说明:请填入公开原始数据日期和方式,如采用网络平台,需填该网络平台名称和网址): |
http://120.76.154.90:8016/logon?ReturnUrl=/ |
|
The way of sharing IPD”(include metadata and protocol, If use web-based public database, please provide the url): |
http://120.76.154.90:8016/logon?ReturnUrl=/ |
|
数据采集和管理(说明:数据采集和管理由两部分组成,一为病例记录表(Case Record Form, CRF),二为电子采集和管理系统(Electronic Data Capture, EDC),如ResMan即为一种基于互联网的EDC: |
ResMan或者我科自有临床数据管理平台 |
|
Data collection and Management (A standard data collection and management system include a CRF and an electronic data capture: |
We will use ResMan or other EDC to collect and manage datas. |
|
数据与安全监察委员会: Data and Safety Monitoring Committee: |
有/Yes |