Thoratec HeartMate II Left Ventricular Assist System (LVAS) for Destination Therapy

NCT ID: NCT00121485

Last Updated: 2022-06-27

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

200 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2005-02-28

Study Completion Date

2012-01-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to determine the safety and effectiveness of the Thoratec HeartMate II Left Ventricular Assist System (LVAS) as Destination Therapy in end-stage heart failure patients who do not qualify for cardiac transplantation.

The Destination Therapy indication for use was approved by FDA on January 20, 2010 (ref. PMA P060040/S005).

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The HeartMate II is a high speed, electric, axial flow, rotary blood pump. The pump drains blood from the left ventricular apex via a rigid inlet cannula and ejects into the aortic root via an outflow cannula joined to the aorta with an end to side anastomosis. Power and control of the pump are delivered through a percutaneous cable from the pump to the belt-worn System Driver.

The Destination Therapy trial is a prospective, randomized, unblinded, non-inferiority evaluation of the HeartMate II LVAS, compared to the HeartMate XVE.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Heart Failure, Congestive Ventricular Dysfunction Cardiomyopathies

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

HeartMate II

Implantation of HeartMate II LVAS

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Left Ventricular Assist System (LVAS)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Implantation of left ventricular assist device for hemodynamic support

HeartMate XVE

Implantation of HeartMate XVE LVAS

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Left Ventricular Assist System (LVAS)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Implantation of left ventricular assist device for hemodynamic support

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Left Ventricular Assist System (LVAS)

Implantation of left ventricular assist device for hemodynamic support

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Thoratec HeartMate II ventricular assist

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

The following are general criteria; more specific conditions are included in the study protocol:

* Subjects with advanced heart failure symptoms (NYHA Class IIIB or IV) who are:

* On optimal medical management and are failing to respond; or
* In Class III or Class IV heart failure and dependent on IABP and/or inotropes; or
* Treated with ACE inhibitors or beta-blockers and found to be intolerant.
* Ineligible for cardiac transplant
* VO2max \<=14 ml/kg/min
* LVEF \<=25%

Exclusion Criteria

The following are general criteria; more specific conditions are included in the study protocol:

* Evidence of, or risk factors for end-organ dysfunction that would make LVAS implantation futile
* Existence of factors that would adversely affect patient survival or function of the LVAS
* Intolerance to anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapies.
* Existence of any ongoing mechanical circulatory support other than intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation.
* Participation in any other clinical investigation that is likely to confound study results or affect study outcome
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Thoratec Corporation

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

Abbott Medical Devices

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Pooja Chatterjee

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Thoratec Corporation

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Mayo Clinic Hospital

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Sharp Memorial Hospital

San Diego, California, United States

Site Status

California Pacific Medical Center

San Francisco, California, United States

Site Status

University of Colorado Hospital

Denver, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Washington Hospital Center

Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States

Site Status

Shands Hospital @ University of Florida

Gainesville, Florida, United States

Site Status

Tampa General Hospital

Tampa, Florida, United States

Site Status

Emory University Hospital

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Advocate Christ Medical Center

Oak Lawn, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Methodist Hospital

Indianapolis, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Jewish Hospital

Louisville, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

University of Maryland School of Medicine

Baltimore, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Johns Hopkins Hospital

Baltimore, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Tufts / New England Medical Center

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Massachusetts General Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Brigham & Women's Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

University of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Henry Ford Health System

Detroit, Michigan, United States

Site Status

University of Minnesota

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Mayo Clinic

Rochester, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Barnes-Jewish Hospital/Washington University

St Louis, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Bryan LGH Heart Institute

Lincoln, Nebraska, United States

Site Status

Newark Beth Israel Medical Center

Newark, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

New York Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

University of Rochester

Rochester, New York, United States

Site Status

Montefiore Medical Center

The Bronx, New York, United States

Site Status

Duke University Medical Center

Durham, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Cleveland Clinic

Cleveland, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Ohio State University

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

INTEGRIS Baptist Medical Center

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States

Site Status

Milton Hershey Medical Center

Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Hahnemann University Hospital

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Hospital of University of PA

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Allegheny General Hospital

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

University of Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Baptist Memorial Hospital

Memphis, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Medical City Hospital Dallas

Dallas, Texas, United States

Site Status

Texas Heart Institute

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

LDS Hospital (Intermountain Health Care)

Salt Lake City, Utah, United States

Site Status

Sentara Norfolk General Hospital

Norfolk, Virginia, United States

Site Status

University of Washington

Seattle, Washington, United States

Site Status

Sacred Heart Medical Center

Spokane, Washington, United States

Site Status

University of Wisconsin Medical School

Madison, Wisconsin, United States

Site Status

St. Luke's Medical Center

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States

Site Status

Toronto General Hospital

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Hospital Royal Victoria / McGill University Health Centre

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Slaughter MS, Rogers JG, Milano CA, Russell SD, Conte JV, Feldman D, Sun B, Tatooles AJ, Delgado RM 3rd, Long JW, Wozniak TC, Ghumman W, Farrar DJ, Frazier OH; HeartMate II Investigators. Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med. 2009 Dec 3;361(23):2241-51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0909938. Epub 2009 Nov 17.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 19920051 (View on PubMed)

Petrucci RJ, Rogers JG, Blue L, Gallagher C, Russell SD, Dordunoo D, Jaski BE, Chillcott S, Sun B, Yanssens TL, Tatooles A, Koundakjian L, Farrar DJ, Slaughter MS. Neurocognitive function in destination therapy patients receiving continuous-flow vs pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist device support. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2012 Jan;31(1):27-36. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2011.10.012.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 22153550 (View on PubMed)

Park SJ, Milano CA, Tatooles AJ, Rogers JG, Adamson RM, Steidley DE, Ewald GA, Sundareswaran KS, Farrar DJ, Slaughter MS; HeartMate II Clinical Investigators. Outcomes in advanced heart failure patients with left ventricular assist devices for destination therapy. Circ Heart Fail. 2012 Mar 1;5(2):241-8. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.111.963991. Epub 2012 Jan 26.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 22282104 (View on PubMed)

Brisco MA, Sundareswaran KS, Milano CA, Feldman D, Testani JM, Ewald GA, Slaughter MS, Farrar DJ, Goldberg LR; HeartMate II Clinical Investigators. Incidence, risk, and consequences of atrial arrhythmias in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices. J Card Surg. 2014 Jul;29(4):572-80. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12336. Epub 2014 Apr 18.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 24750460 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

TC010230-2

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

MDT-1118 Japan DT Study
NCT03884504 COMPLETED PHASE3
HeartMate 3 ELEVATE™ Registry
NCT02497950 COMPLETED