Reducing Episodes by Septal Pacing Efficacy Confirmation Trial (RESPECT)

NCT ID: NCT00289289

Last Updated: 2012-08-08

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

400 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2004-02-29

Study Completion Date

2011-07-31

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 find out if specialized programs in the AT500 and EnRhythm pacemakers will reduce the number of irregular heartbeat in the upper chamber of the heart and reduce symptoms (such as shortness of breath, dizziness, and others).

Detailed Description

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

The purpose of the study was to confirm the AT500 intervention pacing effectiveness data previously seen in the ASPECT clinical trial and to gather additional data to understand the effectiveness of the intervention pacing features. Specifically, the goal of the trial is to demonstrate a reduction in frequency in symptomatic atrial tachycardia/atrial fibrillation recurrence with the intervention pacing features in patients with a pacing indication and a history of atrial tachyarrhythmias with atrial pacing leads located in the region of Bachmann's Bundle.

Conditions

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

Atrial Fibrillation Tachycardia, Supraventricular Arrhythmia Bradycardia

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

Atrial Fibrillation Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Arrhythmia Bradycardia Cardiac Pacemaker IPG Indication Pacing

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants

Study Groups

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

On-Off

Subjects have intervention pacing features turned On according to randomization assignment in the first crossover period then Off in the second period.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Intervention Pacing Features

Intervention Type DEVICE

Intervention pacing features (atrial rate stabilization algorithm, atrial preference pacing algorithm, post mode switch overdrive pacing algorithm) in the pacemaker.

Off-On

Subjects have intervention pacing features turned Off according to the randomization assignment for the first crossover period and then On in the second period.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Intervention Pacing Features

Intervention Type DEVICE

Intervention pacing features (atrial rate stabilization algorithm, atrial preference pacing algorithm, post mode switch overdrive pacing algorithm) in the pacemaker.

Non-randomized

Subjects that did not have device recorded episodes of atrial tachycardia/atrial fibrillation during the 3 month observation period post-implant did not qualify for randomization but were continued to be followed in the study. There were no programming requirements and symptom activations were not collected.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

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

Intervention Pacing Features

Intervention pacing features (atrial rate stabilization algorithm, atrial preference pacing algorithm, post mode switch overdrive pacing algorithm) in the pacemaker.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Subjects with fast and/or slow heartbeats who are in need of dual chamber pacing (pacing in both the atria and ventricles) as determined by their doctor.
* Subjects who have a history of occasional fast heartbeats originating from the upper heart chambers.
* Subjects who have experienced at least two symptomatic episodes of fast heartbeats three months prior to enrollment.
* Subjects that are expected to stay on the same heart medications during the length study.

Exclusion Criteria

* Subjects who have permanent (chronic) or persistent (not self-terminating) atrial fibrillation (fast heartbeats originating from the upper heart chambers).
* Subjects who have atrial fibrillation due to a reversible cause, i.e. electrolyte imbalance.
* Subjects who are current or immediate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients.
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Medtronic Cardiac Rhythm and Heart Failure

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.

RESPECT Team

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

Medtronic

Locations

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

Little Rock, Arkansas, United States

Site Status

Rancho Mirage, California, United States

Site Status

San Diego, California, United States

Site Status

Yuba City, California, United States

Site Status

Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Jacksonville, Florida, United States

Site Status

Lakeland, Florida, United States

Site Status

Chicago, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Decatur, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Urbana, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Indianapolis, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Cedar Rapids, Iowa, United States

Site Status

Louisville, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Owensboro, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Takoma Park, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Springfield, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Clifton, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

Morristown, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Site Status

Mineola, New York, United States

Site Status

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Cleveland, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Spartanburg, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Amarillo, Texas, United States

Site Status

Austin, Texas, United States

Site Status

Corpus Christi, Texas, United States

Site Status

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Site Status

Salt Lake City, Utah, United States

Site Status

Burlington, Vermont, United States

Site Status

Richmond, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Morgantown, West Virginia, United States

Site Status

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Site Status

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Countries

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

United States Canada

Other Identifiers

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

217

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id