Predictors of Response to Biventricular Pacing in Heart Failure
NCT ID: NCT00156390
Last Updated: 2019-11-06
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
187 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2005-06-30
2012-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Biventricular (BIV) pacing has recently emerged as an exciting new treatment of advanced HF with dramatic benefits to some patients. Current candidates include those with ventricular conduction abnormalities and reduced ejection fraction who continue to suffer from severe HF symptoms despite optimal pharmacological therapy. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated that BIV pacing improves myocardial function, functional capacity, quality of life, as well as reduces the incidence of hospitalization and even prolongs life. Despite all this, about one third of patients with HF do not benefit from BIV pacing, the so-called 'non-responders'. Our group and others have shown that there are direct genetic effects of BiV pacing in an animal model, however, there are gaps in existing knowledge about the effects of left ventricular (LV) pacing site or genetic influences on the degree of response to this novel therapy.
This proposal aims at identifying predictors of benefit from Biventricular (BIV) pacing with the goal of optimizing the degree of benefit and increasing the proportion of patients who respond to this therapy. Patients who fulfill current indications for BIV pacing will undergo and echocardiography (echo) with regional tissue Doppler analysis and cardiac imaging consisting of a myocardial perfusion imaging(EGC rest gated Spect scan using Sestamibi) prior to implantation of a BIV pacing device. They will then be randomly assigned to empiric versus echo and Spect scan-guided LV lead positioning. In this latter group, optimal LV pacing site will be defined as the site of latest peak tissue velocity by tissue Doppler echo and Spect scan testing. In the empiric group, the LV lead position will be chosen by the masked operator based on the coronary sinus venous anatomy, on electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria, or other as per standard of care. Blood would be collected from all patients at the time of the procedure for analysis of genetic polymorphisms.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Safety and Efficacy Study of the QuickFlex Micro Model 1258T Left Heart Pacing Lead
NCT00763698
Conventional Biventricular Versus Left Bundle Branch Pacing on Outcomes in Heart Failure Patients
NCT05769036
Respiratory Sinus Arrhythmia Pacing Post-CABG Surgery in Patients With HFrEF
NCT06384963
Efficiency Study of Triple-Site Cardiac Resynchronization in Patients With Heart Failure
NCT00814840
Respiratory Sinus Arrhythmia (RSA) Pacing Post-CABG Surgery in Patients With HFrEF
NCT06359938
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
2. To test the hypothesis that LV lead positioning away from dense scars as determined by resting nuclear perfusion imaging and close to the site of latest LV mechanical activation translates into improved response after BIV pacing. Our group and others have demonstrated improved acute hemodynamics and long term response to BIV pacing if the LV lead position was concordant with the site of latest mechanical activation of the LV. Also, our group and others have shown that an LV pacing lead positioned at the site of a scar or in the vicinity of a high scar density area is associated with little echocardiographic and clinical response after BIV pacing. To date, standard clinical practice continues to consist of placing the LV lead tip in the most lateral and posterior position. Maintaining this approach in all cardiomyopathy patients regardless of the nature of the myocardial insult or the sites of scaring may not be optimal and may account for the lack of response to BIV therapy in a significant number of patients. The primary objective of this specific aim is to demonstrate that MIBI/echo-guided LV lead placement is superior to standard lead placement and that patients who are randomized to the MIBI/echo-guided arm will exhibit greater improvement in the symptoms of HF and greater improvement of LV function at the 6-month interval compared to patients receiving standard LV lead placement. Approach: Heart failure patients (n=210) enrolled in this study will be randomly assigned in a 2:1 fashion to one of two study arms:
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
1
echo-guided LV lead placement
echo-guided left ventricular lead placement
placement of the LV lead of the biventricular pacing device under echocardiographic guidance
2
LV lead placement as per standard of care (without echo-guidance)
LV lead placement as per standard of care (without echo guidance)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
echo-guided left ventricular lead placement
placement of the LV lead of the biventricular pacing device under echocardiographic guidance
LV lead placement as per standard of care (without echo guidance)
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Samir Saba
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Samir Saba
Director, Cardiac Electrophysiology, UPMC
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Samir Saba, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Pittsburgh
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Saba S, Marek J, Schwartzman D, Jain S, Adelstein E, White P, Oyenuga OA, Onishi T, Soman P, Gorcsan J 3rd. Echocardiography-guided left ventricular lead placement for cardiac resynchronization therapy: results of the Speckle Tracking Assisted Resynchronization Therapy for Electrode Region trial. Circ Heart Fail. 2013 May;6(3):427-34. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.112.000078. Epub 2013 Mar 8.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
Related Info
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
0504006
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: secondary_id
0504006
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.