RCT: O2 Vs Air in MI

[Melclin]

The AVOID (Air Verses Oxygen In myocardial infarction) trial is designed to determine if the withholding of routine oxygen therapy in patients with acute heart attack leads to reduced heart damage compared to the current practice of routine inhaled oxygen for all patients.

About bloody time.

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01272713

 

[281mustang]

Have there not already been studies on this that concluded that the vasoconstriction effect o2 has on the coronary arteries outweighs the benifit of a slightly higher o2 stat?

Not trying to imply that a couple studies are conclusive, just asking for my own knowladge.

 

[usalsfyre]

The real question is, has there been a cardiology study in the last 15 years that hasn't had a catchy, contrived name?

Probably needed to confirm what most have suspected for a longtime.

 

[jrm818]

nice!

I like this Dr. Bernard guy...he does good work. This looks like a nice tight study.

The primary endpoint is a bit soft, but as death or MACE are included as secondary endpoints I suppose they get a pass. Perhaps they would have needed prohibitively large numbers to detect a difference in one of the "harder" endpoints.

I don't quite understand this MRI endpoint:

"myocardial salvage [ Time Frame: 4 days and 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurement of infarct size as percent of area at risk determined with T2-weighted MRI (in small sub set of patients) at day 4 and repeated at 6 months."

How is the "area at risk" determined? Is there some MRI finding that suggests "risk" of damage? Or is "risk" determined at day 4 (that seems late), and final damage at 6 months?

 

[Farmer2DO]

nice!

I like this Dr. Bernard guy...he does good work. This looks like a nice tight study.

The primary endpoint is a bit soft, but as death or MACE are included as secondary endpoints I suppose they get a pass. Perhaps they would have needed prohibitively large numbers to detect a difference in one of the "harder" endpoints.

I don't quite understand this MRI endpoint:

"myocardial salvage [ Time Frame: 4 days and 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurement of infarct size as percent of area at risk determined with T2-weighted MRI (in small sub set of patients) at day 4 and repeated at 6 months."

How is the "area at risk" determined? Is there some MRI finding that suggests "risk" of damage? Or is "risk" determined at day 4 (that seems late), and final damage at 6 months?

I suspect they are basically looking to quantify the amount of necrotic tissue with imaging, rather than just enzyme levels. Likely a more accurate way to determine the amount of damage.

It looks like a good study. I'm eager to see the results.