Optimal Left Ventricular Lead Positioning During Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy; Comparison of Two Methods of Targeting
NCT ID: NCT03769272
Last Updated: 2019-07-05
Study Results
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.
UNKNOWN
40 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2019-08-01
2021-12-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
It has been suggested that presence of scar tissue in the heart and suboptimal placement of the pacing wire on the top of the main pumping chamber can explain this poor response. The best place to position the pacing wire on the surface of the main pumping chamber is the area that contracts last and it can be identified using ultrasound scan of the heart.
Unfortunately, ultrasound is not always possible to help identifying the best area and only a minority of hospitals are able to use this method. Therefore we aim to investigate alternative ways of positioning the pacing wire in the best possible area of the main pumping heart chamber. Investigators propose to measure electrical signals as an alternative and more effective way in positioning the wire in the most effective area. Investigators aim to look at the relationship between the best area identified by ultrasound scan and by electrical signals and also use electrical signals to avoid areas of scar.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Empiric Versus Imaging Guided Left Ventricular Lead Placement in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
NCT01323686
A Comparison of Two Techniques for Choosing the Best Place to Put a Pacing Lead for Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy
NCT02061241
Safety and Effectiveness of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Conventional Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Heart Failure
NCT07069738
Combining Myocardial Strain and Cardiac CT to Optimize Left Ventricular Lead Placement in CRT Treatment
NCT01426321
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Left Ventricular Lead Placement
NCT01417624
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
It is known that up to 30% of patients of patients undergoing CRT implantation do not attain symptomatic benefit . Given the inherent risks and costs of device implantation and maintenance, a reduction in the rate of CRT "non-responders" is an important goal.
Factors associated with a poor outcome include presence of myocardial scar, and suboptimal Left Ventricular (LV) lead placement.
Pacing the LV at the most delayed LV region promotes contractile synchrony resulting in more effective and energetically efficient ejection, geometric remodelling with reduced LV end-systolic volume and improved cardiac function.
Studies using transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) parameters to target the LV lead positioning have shown that an optimal LV lead position at the site of latest mechanical activation, avoiding low strain amplitude (scar), was associated with superior response to CRT and improved survival that persisted during follow-up.
It remains unclear whether the site of latest mechanical activation is related to the site of latest electrical activation, nor whether sensed electrical signals correspond to sites of scar. The site of latest electrical activation is assessed during CRT implant by measuring electrical activation (LV electrical delay) of the LV at different sites in relation to the first deflection of the QRS complex of the surface electrocardiogram (ECG).
A recent study evaluated the relationship between LV electrical delay and CRT outcomes/ response to CRT and concluded that electrical dyssynchrony was strongly and independently associated with reverse remodelling and led to improvement in the Quality of Life with CRT.
Despite TTE being an effective way of assessing optimal LV lead positioning for identifying mechanical activation, it is expensive, images can be suboptimal and usually requires an extra visit prior to implantation, therefore an intraprocedural way of identifying the optimal areas could be beneficial.
It is not known whether lead position as targeted by imaging methods of mechanical activation corresponds to the site of latest electrical activation, nor whether sensed electrical signals correspond to sites of scar. Investigators are planning to investigate the relationship between the site of latest mechanical activation using TTE and the site of latest electrical activation of the LV; and between scar and sensed electrical signals.
If the area of latest mechanical activation is related to the area of latest electrical activation then this can be an alternative, more convenient and cost effective way of assessing optimal LV lead positioning.
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.
CASE_CONTROL
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Echocardiographic targeting
No interventions assigned to this group
Electrogram targeting
Measurement of electrical delay during LV lead placement
Measurement of electrical signal in the heart during implantation of CRT, by positioning the lead in different places in the heart.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Measurement of electrical delay during LV lead placement
Measurement of electrical signal in the heart during implantation of CRT, by positioning the lead in different places in the heart.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. New York Heart Association class I-IV
3. QRS ≥130ms
4. Left Bundle Branch Block
5. Male or female, aged 18 years or above
6. Able to give consent
Exclusion Criteria
2. Unable to give consent
3. QRS≤120 ms
4. Right Bundle Branch Block
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Peter J Pugh
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Peter J Pugh
Consultant Cardiologist
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
227862
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.