← Clinical Trial Results
ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Randomized Trial Multivessel Disease NCT01960933

DANAMI-3 PRIMULTI: Complete Statistical Analysis of Complete Revascularization in STEMI

An independent statistical review of the randomized DANAMI-3 PRIMULTI trial evaluating culprit-lesion-only treatment versus complete revascularization guided by fractional flow reserve in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Scope of this record

This page provides an independent statistical analysis and educational interpretation of publicly reported results. ClinicalTrials.gov provides the official trial registry record.

1. Trial at a Glance

DANAMI-3 PRIMULTI was a randomized, parallel-design clinical trial evaluating treatment strategies for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

650
Enrollment
2
Arms
2011-05
Start Date
2015-02
Primary Completion
FeatureDescription
TrialDANAMI-3 PRIMULTI
NCT IDNCT01960933
ConditionST-elevation Myocardial Infarction; Multi Vessel Disease
AllocationRandomized
Design modelParallel
MaskingNone
Primary purposeTreatment
Lead sponsorRigshospitalet, Denmark

2. Clinical Question

Population

Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Intervention

Complete revascularization using percutaneous coronary intervention and fractional flow reserve guidance.

Comparator

Culprit lesion only treatment.

Primary Question

Whether complete revascularization changes the risk of the registry-defined composite endpoint compared with treatment of the culprit lesion only.

3. Trial Design

Allocation
Randomized
Structure
Parallel design with two arms
Masking
None
Interventions
Percutaneous coronary intervention and FFR procedures

Culprit lesion only

Treatment limited to the culprit coronary lesion.

Complete revascularization

Additional treatment strategy incorporating fractional flow reserve guidance.

4. Endpoints

EndpointTime FrameDescription
All cause death, myocardial infarction or revascularization1 yearComposite of all cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or ischemia (either subjective or objective) driven revascularization of non-culprit coronary lesions eligible for and randomized to either of the two treatment arms at the time of the index procedure

5. Planned Analysis

The registry identifies a primary composite endpoint of all cause death, myocardial infarction or revascularization at 1 year. Composite cardiovascular endpoints of this type are typically analyzed by comparing time-to-first-event outcomes between randomized groups using methods such as Kaplan-Meier estimation, log-rank testing, and regression models for hazard ratios when those analyses are prespecified.

Registry reporting status. The ClinicalTrials.gov record does not report posted statistical analyses or endpoint results for this trial.

6. Statistical Methodology

Composite endpoints

A composite endpoint combines multiple clinical outcomes into a single analysis outcome. The interpretation depends on the individual components because each component may differ in clinical importance, frequency, and treatment sensitivity.

Time-to-event analysis

For cardiovascular outcome trials, time-to-event methods account for different lengths of follow-up and allow participants without an event at the analysis time to contribute information through censoring.

Hazard ratios

HR < 1 → lower estimated event rate in the intervention group

A hazard ratio compares event rates over time. It does not directly represent the percentage of patients who experience or avoid an event.

7. Statistical Methods Explained

Why use a composite endpoint?

A composite endpoint can increase statistical efficiency by combining clinically related events, but interpretation requires understanding which components contribute most to the overall result.

Why is randomization important?

Randomization helps balance measured and unmeasured baseline characteristics between groups, supporting an unbiased comparison of assigned strategies.

Why analyze time to first event?

Patients may experience events at different times. Time-to-event methods incorporate both whether an event occurred and when it occurred.

Why does censoring matter?

Participants without an observed endpoint event contribute follow-up information until their last assessment or another censoring point defined by the analysis.

8. Limitations

9. Why This Trial Matters Statistically

ConceptHow it appears in DANAMI-3 PRIMULTI
RandomizationRandomized comparison of two treatment strategies
Composite endpointAll cause death, myocardial infarction or revascularization
Time-to-event analysisRelevant framework for cardiovascular outcomes
Multicomponent outcomesRequires interpretation of individual clinical events

10. Sources