A Pilot Study Comparing the Programmed Delay Between the Atrial and Ventricle Interval

NCT ID: NCT00794183

Last Updated: 2012-06-26

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

TERMINATED

Clinical Phase

EARLY_PHASE1

Total Enrollment

25 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2004-06-30

Study Completion Date

2010-11-30

Brief Summary

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

The idea of this study is to compare different ways of setting up a pacemaker, using blood tests to give us information about how well it's working. We hope to learn if we can use this approach to figure out the best pacemaker setup ("programming") for each individual patient.

The setting we propose to adjust is the timing between the impulse sent between top and bottom chambers.

Detailed Description

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

There are different kinds of pacemakers and different ways they can be set up to try to make the heart beat regularly. A normal heart has four chambers; these four chambers pump in a co-ordinated way to move blood effectively. When pacemakers were first invented, they told the heart when to pump, but didn't make the four chambers work well together. Newer pacemakers can give more detailed instructions, so the chambers work together more effectively. We already know that the newer (bi-ventricular) pacemakers work better for some patients with heart failure.

There are blood tests (often referred to as "markers") that give us information about how well your heart is working and about how your body is responding to heart failure. The idea of this study is to compare different ways of setting up a pacemaker, using these blood tests to give us information about how well it's working. We hope to learn if we can use this approach to figure out the best pacemaker setup ("programming") for each individual patient.

Usually pacemakers have two wires or leads, one is in the top right chamber and the other in the bottom right chamber of the heart. The newer pacemakers, which are given to patients with heart failure, have an additional lead or wire, which goes to the left side of the heart. So when heart contracts the lead from top chamber sends impulses to bottom chambers and the leads in right and left sides of bottom chamber responds by sending impulses in a co-ordinated way enabling heart to contract efficiently.

Currently, the standard way of treating patients with heart failure is by pacing the top and then bottom chambers, based on a timing interval determined by ultrasound, while also pacing the two bottom chambers in a coordinated manner. There are differences of opinion among experts and by previous studies regarding this method. Pacing is accomplished through pacemaker wires, which are placed in the right top chamber, the right bottom chamber and the left bottom chamber of the heart.

The setting we propose to adjust is the timing between the impulse sent between top and bottom chambers.

Conditions

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

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

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants

Study Groups

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

1

AVD set by taking the larger of 0.50ms or A-V interval 0.30

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

CRT device settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Comparision of A-V delay settings

2

AVD set by taking the larger of 0.50ms or A-V interval 0.50

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

CRT device settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Comparision of A-V delay settings

3

AVD set by taking the larger of 0.50ms or A-V interval 0.70

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

CRT device settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Comparision of A-V delay settings

Interventions

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

CRT device settings

Comparision of A-V delay settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Diagnosis of chronic heart failure
* patients on stable pharmacologic therapy for at least 3 months
* EF\< 35%
* age \>18 years
* NYHA functional class III or IV
* eligible for either CRT pacer or CRT defibrillator for heart failure
* Ischemic or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy
* patients that are able to tolerate VDD mode with a lower rate of 40bpm programming

Exclusion Criteria

* systolic blood pressure \<70mmHg
* Likely to receive a left ventricular assist device or cardiac transplant within 6 months of implant procedure
* patients who have previously received a CRT device
* documented atrial fibrillation
* complete heart block
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.

Minnesota Medical Foundation

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Minnesota

OTHER

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.

David G Benditt, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Minnesota

Locations

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

University of Minnesota

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

Other Identifiers

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

0303M44604

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Pacing in Heart Failure With Preserved LVEF
NCT03215849 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION NA