Evaluating the importance of sham-controlled trials in the investigation of medical devices in interventional cardiology

Abstract

Cardiovascular medicine is one of the specialties that has relied most heavily on evidence from randomised clinical trials in determining best practice for the management of common disease conditions. When comparing treatment approaches, trials incorporating random allocation are the most appropriate method for protecting against treatment allocation bias. In order to protect against performance and ascertainment bias, trial designs including placebo control are preferable where feasible. In contrast to testing of medicines, treatments based on procedures or use of medical devices are more challenging to assess, as sham procedures are necessary to facilitate blinding of participants. However, in many cases, ethical concerns exist, as individual patients allocated to sham procedure are exposed only to risk without potential for benefit. Accordingly, the potential benefits to the general patient population must be carefully weighed against the risks of the exposed individuals. For this reason, trial design and study conduct are critically important to ensure that the investigation has the best chance of answering the study question at hand. In the current manuscript, we aim to review issues relating to the conduct of sham-controlled trials and discuss a number of recent examples in the field of interventional cardiology.