Dynamic Coronary Roadmap versus standard angiography for percutaneous coronary intervention: the randomised, multicentre DCR4Contrast trial
Authors' conclusion
Compared to conventional angiography-guided PCI, DCR guidance was associated with a significant reduction in both contrast volume and the number of cineangiography runs during PCI.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI)randomised
- Participants
- 356 patients
- Comparison
- Dynamic Coronary Roadmap (DCR)-guided PCI vs conventional angiography-guided PCI
- DCRn = 179
- Controln = 177reference
- Primary endpoint
- Total volume of iodinated contrast administered
Methodological detailsmulticentre, international, prospective, unblinded, stratified 1:1
- Multicentre
- International
- Prospective
- Unblinded
- Stratified 1:1
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Total contrast volume during PCI
P < 0.001
Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | DCR | Control | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of cineangiography runs during PCI | 8.7 ± 4.7 | 11.7 ± 7.6 | P < 0.001 |
Original publication
Dynamic Coronary Roadmap versus standard angiography for percutaneous coronary intervention: the randomised, multicentre DCR4Contrast trial. EuroIntervention. Published 5 February 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →