A Randomized Controlled Trial of Nonfasting vs Fasting Before Interventional Coronary Procedures: The TONIC Trial
Primary resultResult — go to the resultAbsolute between-group difference −1.7 % 1-sided 95% CI upper limit 1.8%Authors' conclusion
The TONIC randomized trial demonstrates the noninferiority of a nonfasting strategy to the usual fasting strategy for coronary procedures regarding safety, while improving patients' comfort.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing non-emergency coronary procedures
- Participants
- 739 patients
- Comparison
- Nonfasting vs fasting before coronary procedures
- Nonfastingn = 365
- Fastingn = 374reference
- Primary endpoint
- Composite of:
- Vasovagal reaction
- Hypoglycemia (blood sugar ≤0.7 g/L) and isolated nausea and/or vomiting
Methodological detailsnoninferiority, monocentric, prospective, single-blind
- Noninferiority
- Monocentric
- Prospective
- Single-blind
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Absolute between-group difference
−1.7 %
1-sided 95% CI upper limit 1.8%
Events by treatment group
Nonfastingvs Fasting
absolute between-group difference −1.7 % (1-sided 95% CI upper limit 1.8%)
Secondary outcomes
Procedure satisfaction and perceived pain
- Similar in both groups
Hunger and thirst
- Less hunger and thirst with nonfasting
- P < 0.01
Would choose nonfasting for redo procedure
- Patients choosing nonfasting strategy
- 79%
Safety
Food-related adverse events
- No food-related adverse event occurred
Contrast-related AKI
- Similar between groups
Original publication
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Nonfasting vs Fasting Before Interventional Coronary Procedures: The TONIC Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 27 May 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →