Clinical trial NCT06176391: SCS for Vasospastic Angina Vasospastic Angina Pectoris - a Prospective Study
Official title: Spinal Cord Stimulation for Vasospastic Angina Pectoris - a Prospective Study
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Phase: NA
Conditions: Angina Pectoris; Angiospastic
Keywords: ANOCA (Angina with Non-Obstructive Coronary Artery disease)
Spinal Cord Stimulation
Angina Pectoris
Lead sponsor: Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: ZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development
First posted: 2023-12-19
Enrollment: 10
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Maximum age (years): 90
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: NA
Intervention model: SINGLE_GROUP
Intervention model description: Prospective pilot study
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: According to the 2020 Dutch guideline on chest pain (AP) without obstructive coronary artery disease, 70% of female and 30% of male patients undergoing a coronary angiogram (CAG), have no obstructive coronary artery disease.In the majority of patients the complaints are based on vascular dysfunction, including epicardial vascular spasms. For patients who are refractory to drug treatment, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can be a treatment option. SCS is used for the treatment of refractory neuropathic and ischaemic pain. In recent studies the use of SCS is proven for refractory angina pectoris, but the group with refractory vasospastic angina pectoris (rVSA) predominantly seen in women with invalidating impairment of quality of life, is overlooked, as no evidence of obstruction is found at CAG. With this pilot study the investigators hypothesize that SCS is effective in reducing the number and intensity of angina attacks, reducing nitrate use, reducing inhospital treatment and ER presentations, thereby reducing medical costs, and above all, increasing quality of life.

Detailed description: Rationale:

Of the patients undergoing a coronary angiogram because of chest pain (AP), 67% of female and 33% of male patients have no obstructive coronary artery disease. In the majority of patients (59-89%) the complaints are based on vascular dysfunction, including epicardial vascular spasms (EVS). For patients who are refractory to drug treatment, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can be a treatment option. SCS is used for the treatment of refractory neuropathic and ischaemic pain. In recent studies the use of SCS is proven effective for refractory angina pectoris, but the group with refractory vasospastic angina pectoris (rVSA), predominantly seen in women with invalidating impairment of quality of life, is overlooked, as no evidence of obstruction is found at CAG. With this study the investigators hypothesize that SCS is effective in reducing the number and intensity of angina attacks, reducing nitrate use, reducing inhospital treatment and ER presentations, thereby reducing medical costs, and above all, increasing quality of life.

Objective: the main objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical effects of SCS on the number and intensity of VSA attacks. Secondary objective is to objectivate the effects of SCS on coronary spasms during the provocative acetylcholine test, and assess medical costs, patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Study design: prospective study in two phases. Phase 1: evaluation of clinical effectiveness. Phase 2: evaluation of SCS on vascular spasms during acetylcholine provocation test.

Study population: 10 patients with refractory AP due to epicardial vascular spasms.

Intervention: implantation with a SCS device with one or two lead(s) in the epidural space of T1 to T4, active electrodes depending on mapping of the painfull area, under local anesthesia and sedation. Acetylcholine provocation test during coronary angiogram at 6 months.

Main study parameters/endpoints: primary endpoint is the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at month 1 and 3. Secundary endpoints are presentation at ER, estimated medical costs, and patient satisfaction measured on a 11 point Numeric Rating Scale and quality of life with the EQ5D at month 3, compared to baseline. Endpoints of the acetylcholine test are changes in coronary flow and coronary diameter compared to baseline.

Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: SCS is proven to be safe for neuropathic and ischaemic pain and is widely used in clinical practice. With the positive results of an ongoing clinical trial for refractory coronary angina, the investigators estimate the efficacy of SCS to be around 80-90% in reducing VSA attacks with 50% after 3 months and therefore very effective in otherwise refractory drug treatment regiments. Furthermore, baseline study parameters will be extracted from the routine questionnaires and during visits to the outpatient clinic.

Only in patients who specifically consent to it, an additional acetylcholine test 6 months after SCS implantation during coronary angiography (CAG) is performed. This is an additional coronary angiogram procedure under local anesthesia which potentially provokes VSA. Done by experienced personal this is a safe test with a complication risk of 0-0.7% for severe cardiac complications, comparable to coronary angiogram with functional flow reserve measurement.

A potential benefit for the participants is that SCS results in reduction of VSA attacks, reduction of nitrate use, less presentation at an ER, an improved quality of life, and acceptation as standard treatment.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* VSA is objectivated with a provocative acetylcholine test
* mentally competent and able to fill in the questionnaires
* refractory VSA defined as disabling chest pain with a maximum tolerated dosage of calcium antagonists, long acting nitrates, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors for a minimum of three months
* absence of obstructive coronary artery disease evident in a main coronary artery (diameter stenosis\<50%, Instant Flow Reserve (IFR) \>0.89, or Fractional Flow reserve (FFR) \>0.80)
* able to use the remote control of the SCS system

Exclusion Criteria:

* inability to visit the outpatient department for the follow-up visits
* unable to provide informed consent
* myocardial infarction in the previous three months
* procedures like percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), nor instability of the clinical signs and symptoms of refractory angina in the previous three months
* implanted pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) incompatible with SCS
* indication for ongoing anticoagulation therapy
* pregnant women and those who are breastfeeding

Primary outcomes:
measure: Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ)
timeFrame: baseline (before implant) - 1 month after implant - 3 months after implant
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Euroquol Quality of Life questionnaire (EQ5D-5L)
timeFrame: baseline (before implant) -1 month after implant - 3 months after implant
measure: Patient satisfaction - Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10
timeFrame: 1 month and 3 months after implant
measure: Complications and side effects
timeFrame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
measure: Acetylcholine provocation test during coronary angiogram
timeFrame: 6 months after implant
Other outcomes:
Locations:
Study officials:
affiliation: Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
name: Markus Hollmann, MD, PhD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Deer TR, Mekhail N, Provenzano D, Pope J, Krames E, Leong M, Levy RM, Abejon D, Buchser E, Burton A, Buvanendran A, Candido K, Caraway D, Cousins M, DeJongste M, Diwan S, Eldabe S, Gatzinsky K, Foreman RD, Hayek S, Kim P, Kinfe T, Kloth D, Kumar K, Rizvi S, Lad SP, Liem L, Linderoth B, Mackey S, McDowell G, McRoberts P, Poree L, Prager J, Raso L, Rauck R, Russo M, Simpson B, Slavin K, Staats P, Stanton-Hicks M, Verrills P, Wellington J, Williams K, North R; Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee. The appropriate use of neurostimulation of the spinal cord and peripheral nervous system for the treatment of chronic pain and ischemic diseases: the Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee. Neuromodulation. 2014 Aug;17(6):515-50; discussion 550. doi: 10.1111/ner.12208.
citation: Murphy DF, Giles KE. Dorsal column stimulation for pain relief from intractable angina pectoris. Pain. 1987 Mar;28(3):365-368. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(87)90070-4.
citation: Mannheimer C, Eliasson T, Augustinsson LE, Blomstrand C, Emanuelsson H, Larsson S, Norrsell H, Hjalmarsson A. Electrical stimulation versus coronary artery bypass surgery in severe angina pectoris: the ESBY study. Circulation. 1998 Mar 31;97(12):1157-63. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.97.12.1157.
citation: Mobilia G, Zuin G, Zanco P, Di Pede F, Pinato G, Neri G, Cargnel S, Raviele A, Ferlin G, Buchberger R. [Effects of spinal cord stimulation on regional myocardial blood flow in patients with refractory angina. A positron emission tomography study]. G Ital Cardiol. 1998 Oct;28(10):1113-9. Italian.
citation: Dejongste MJ. Efficacy, safety and mechanisms of spinal cord stimulation used as an additional therapy for patients suffering from chronic refractory angina pectoris. Neuromodulation. 1999 Jul;2(3):188-92. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1403.1999.00188.x. No abstract available.
citation: Lopshire JC, Zhou X, Dusa C, Ueyama T, Rosenberger J, Courtney N, Ujhelyi M, Mullen T, Das M, Zipes DP. Spinal cord stimulation improves ventricular function and reduces ventricular arrhythmias in a canine postinfarction heart failure model. Circulation. 2009 Jul 28;120(4):286-94. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.812412. Epub 2009 Jul 13.
citation: Liu Y, Yue WS, Liao SY, Zhang Y, Au KW, Shuto C, Hata C, Park E, Chen P, Siu CW, Tse HF. Thoracic spinal cord stimulation improves cardiac contractile function and myocardial oxygen consumption in a porcine model of ischemic heart failure. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012 May;23(5):534-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2011.02230.x. Epub 2011 Dec 8.
citation: Taylor RS, De Vries J, Buchser E, Dejongste MJ. Spinal cord stimulation in the treatment of refractory angina: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2009 Mar 25;9:13. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-9-13.
citation: Andrell P, Yu W, Gersbach P, Gillberg L, Pehrsson K, Hardy I, Stahle A, Andersen C, Mannheimer C. Long-term effects of spinal cord stimulation on angina symptoms and quality of life in patients with refractory angina pectoris--results from the European Angina Registry Link Study (EARL). Heart. 2010 Jul;96(14):1132-6. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2009.177188. Epub 2010 May 18.
citation: McNab D, Khan SN, Sharples LD, Ryan JY, Freeman C, Caine N, Tait S, Hardy I, Schofield PM. An open label, single-centre, randomized trial of spinal cord stimulation vs. percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization in patients with refractory angina pectoris: the SPiRiT trial. Eur Heart J. 2006 May;27(9):1048-53. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi827. Epub 2006 Mar 22.
citation: Vervaat FE, van der Gaag A, van Suijlekom H, Botman CJ, Teeuwen K, Wijnbergen I. Improvement in quality of life and angina pectoris: 1-year follow-up of patients with refractory angina pectoris and spinal cord stimulation. Neth Heart J. 2020 Sep;28(9):478-484. doi: 10.1007/s12471-020-01422-0.
citation: Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, Daley J, Deedwania PC, Douglas JS, Ferguson TB Jr, Fihn SD, Fraker TD Jr, Gardin JM, O'Rourke RA, Pasternak RC, Williams SV, Gibbons RJ, Alpert JS, Antman EM, Hiratzka LF, Fuster V, Faxon DP, Gregoratos G, Jacobs AK, Smith SC Jr; American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina). Circulation. 2003 Jan 7;107(1):149-58. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000047041.66447.29. No abstract available.
citation: Suwaidi JA, Hamasaki S, Higano ST, Nishimura RA, Holmes DR Jr, Lerman A. Long-term follow-up of patients with mild coronary artery disease and endothelial dysfunction. Circulation. 2000 Mar 7;101(9):948-54. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.101.9.948.
citation: Deer T, Slavin KV, Amirdelfan K, North RB, Burton AW, Yearwood TL, Tavel E, Staats P, Falowski S, Pope J, Justiz R, Fabi AY, Taghva A, Paicius R, Houden T, Wilson D. Success Using Neuromodulation With BURST (SUNBURST) Study: Results From a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial Using a Novel Burst Waveform. Neuromodulation. 2018 Jan;21(1):56-66. doi: 10.1111/ner.12698. Epub 2017 Sep 29.
citation: Chakravarthy K, Kent AR, Raza A, Xing F, Kinfe TM. Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation: Review of Preclinical Studies and Comments on Clinical Outcomes. Neuromodulation. 2018 Jul;21(5):431-439. doi: 10.1111/ner.12756. Epub 2018 Feb 12.