Right Apical Versus Septal Pacing Trial

NCT ID: NCT00199498

Last Updated: 2016-04-13

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

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

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

160 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2005-04-30

Study Completion Date

2016-12-31

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 examine whether RV (right ventricular)septal pacing has any effect on LV ( left ventricular) function than RV apical pacing in patients who require ventricular pacing.

Detailed Description

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

The primary objective of this study is to compare the effect of RV pacing site on LV systolic function as measured by LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction).

Secondary objectives of this trial include:

1. to compare the effect of RVSeptal(RVS) versus RVApical(RVA)pacing on other indices of systolic and diastolic LV function
2. to compare the rate of heart failure-related hospitalization between RVS versus RVA pacing
3. to compare new-onset atrial fibrillation and stroke rates between RVS versus RVA pacing
4. to assess the effect of RVA versus RVS pacing on quality of life and functional capacity
5. to compare the rate of successful pacemaker lead implantation, complications and chronic electrical performance of RVS versus RVA pacing

Conditions

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

Heart Block Heart Failure

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

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

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

Septal RV lead placement

patient randomized to Septal RV lead placement

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Septal RV lead placement

Intervention Type DEVICE

RV lead is implanted (according to randomization), on septum

Apical RV lead placement

patient randomized to Apical RV lead placement (current standard placement)

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Apical RV lead placement

Intervention Type DEVICE

RV lead implanted ( according to randomization )at the apex

Interventions

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

Apical RV lead placement

RV lead implanted ( according to randomization )at the apex

Intervention Type DEVICE

Septal RV lead placement

RV lead is implanted (according to randomization), on septum

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

1. a)Fixed (third degree) AV block b) Atrial Fibrillation with average Ventricular rate on ECG \</= 40bpm or mean heart rate on Holter monitor \</= 60bpm c) Sinus node Dysfunction with PR interval \>/= 300msec d) Paroxysmal, persistent or permanent AF undergoing AV node , AV node/HIS ablation e) 2°AV Block with ≥3:1 block
2. the subject is 18 years of age or older
3. the subject has provided written consent -

Exclusion Criteria

1. Pre-existing permanent cardiac pacemaker or ICD (defibrillator)
2. Presence of Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy
3. Recent cardiac surgery (\</= 30 days)
4. Recent myocardial infarction (\</= 30 days)
5. Presence of mechanical prosthetic tricuspid valve
6. Patient inability or unwillingness to comply with study protocol and required study visit schedule
7. Concomitant research study whose protocol would conflict or affect the outcome of this study
8. Patient not expected to survive for the duration of the study follow-up due to co-morbid medical condition
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.

Medtronic

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Raymond Yee

Dr.Raymond Yee MD FRCPC

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Raymond Yee, MD FRCPC

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Western University, Canada

Locations

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

London Health Sciences Centre

London, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Countries

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

Canada

Other Identifiers

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

HSREB # 10880

Identifier Type: OTHER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

R-04-399

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Minimizing Ventricular Pacing
NCT01611389 UNKNOWN NA
Pacing in Heart Failure With Preserved LVEF
NCT03215849 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION NA