MR Rescue trial

[Neuroresident]

Hi,
Does anyone know about what is going on with this trial? I looked up on clinicaltrials.gov and it seems that they have stop recruiting patients. But I haven't heard about the results getting presented in abstract form or published in journal.

Here is the link:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT00389467?show_locs=Y#locn

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[neglect]

Who cares, there is no placebo group? Seems like a useless study to me.

 

[Darktide]

Medical mgt group serves as the control... anything else would be irresponsible.

 

[typhoonegator]

Pretty sure we're still recruiting...

 

[burs0028]

Final patient was enrolled a few months ago now. Will probably be a while until you see any published data because they have to wait and see how the last few patients are doing at 90 day f/u.

They do have a control group "standard medical therapy" ie. no thrombectomy.

Kind of unfortunate that the stent-retreival devices came around just as this study wrapped up; would be a lot more useful with patients treated with the newer devices.

 

[RAD345]

Still analyzing data. Recruiting finished a few months ago.

The timing for imaging was too long, Esp with MRA neck, including the arch that takes 45min to 1 hour....totally unnecessary.

I do not expect good results considering all Carotid T and M1 occlusions who were enrolled up to 6 hours.

 

[typhoonegator]

Pretty sure we're still recruiting...

Sorry, I read MR-Rescue and confabulated that to MR-Witness, which is still recruiting.

Carry on, then.

 

[95439]

Hasn't IMSIII obviated the need for this trial?

 

[typhoonegator]

The hypothesis for MR-rescue is that we need to be specific about the criteria we use to select the cases we take to neuroIR, rather than the overall concept of neuroIR. IMS-3 results are plagued by the rapid evolution of these therapies, or at least so goes the argument, and so will not be the final word (although all future studies will need to take IMS-3 results into account for trial design).

 

[Vader]

The main problem is that the devices used in MR-RESCUE are relatively ineffective tools compared to newer generation devices (i.e. Solitaire) that may have higher re-canalization rates with fewer bleeds. As others have alluded to, the trial design and what patient population is targeted is of critical importance. Another challenge is that medical therapy has gotten much better over the years (i.e. see the SAMMPRIS trial), thereby raising the bar for devices to demonstrate efficacy over best medical therapy.