Comparison of Pacing Lead Design on Left Bundle Branch Pacing Outcomes: The LEAD_LBBP Randomized Clinical Trial

NCT ID: NCT06318130

Last Updated: 2025-06-06

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

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

210 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-01-01

Study Completion Date

2025-10-19

Brief Summary

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

This trial seeks to evaluate the performance of the extendable helix, stylet-driven pacing lead (SDL) compared to the fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead (LLL) during left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), with respect to enduring left bundle branch capture on follow-up, incidence of acute lead failure, pacing characteristics including QRS duration, pacing thresholds, R-wave amplitudes and lead impedance, and finally, safety profile during LBBP implantation. These data will guide future lead selection during LBBP implantation in achieving improved procedural success and optimal lead performance.

Detailed Description

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

This study is a single-blind, randomised controlled trial, aimed at evaluating the performance of the extendable helix, stylet driven pacing lead (SDL) compared to the fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead (LLL) during left bundle branch pacing (LBBP). The study is a multicentre study across 3 major hospitals in Singapore, and LBBP performed by independent electrophysiologists experienced in performing LBBP.

The primary objective of the study is to determine differences in incidence of loss of left bundle capture by pacing lead design (LLL vs SDL). The secondary objectives are to determine if lead design affects frequency of lead failure during implantation, investigate differences in short- and medium-term LBBP parameters on follow-up by lead design, and evaluate differences in safety profile between LLL and SDL in LBBP.

This study aims to recruit a target of 210 patients. A previous retrospective study found a loss of LB capture rate of 9% with LLL and 25% with SDL. A sample size of 170 will be required for a type-1 error rate of 5% and power of 80%. Accounting for a dropout rate of 20%, a total of 210 patients will be recruited (105 per group). Eligible subjects will be randomised to either the LLL or the SDL arm. The randomisation list will be generated with a computer-generated sequence in permuted blocks of 4, stratified by centre, to ensure a final allocation ratio of 1:1.

Conditions

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

Pacemaker DDD

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

A target of 210 participants will be enrolled in this study consisting of two groups and randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either of two groups.

Group 1: Fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead (FHL) Group 2: Extendable helix, stylet driven pacing lead (EHL)
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

TRIPLE

Participants Investigators Outcome Assessors
Subjects will be blinded to the type of pacing lead received. Operators will not be blinded as they will be performing the procedure. Post-procedure, investigators and outcomes assessors will be blinded to the treatment arm during adjudication of outcomes.

Study Groups

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

Fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead (FHL)

Lumenless leads used are fixed helix pacing leads (SelectSecure 3830 pacing lead from Medtronic) during the LBBP procedure.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Patients will be randomised to the fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead design during LBBP implantation.

Extendable helix, stylet-driven leads (EHL)

Stylet-driven leads used are extendable helix pacing leads (Biotronik Solia S60 lead from Biotronik or Tendril STS pacing lead from St. Jude Medical) during the LBBP procedure.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Extendable helix, stylet-driven pacing lead.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Patients will be randomised to the extendable helix, stylet-driven pacing lead design during LBBP implantation.

Interventions

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

Fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead.

Patients will be randomised to the fixed helix, lumenless pacing lead design during LBBP implantation.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Extendable helix, stylet-driven pacing lead.

Patients will be randomised to the extendable helix, stylet-driven pacing lead design during LBBP implantation.

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. Fulfil current indications for pacemaker therapy according to international guideline recommendations:

1. Symptomatic sinus bradycardia/sinus node dysfunction or AV block requiring pacemaker insertion.
2. Symptomatic heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) \<35%, left bundle branch block and QRS duration \>120ms.
3. Symptomatic heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) \<35%, right bundle branch block and QRS duration \>150ms.
4. LVEF \<50% with significant anticipated ventricular pacing requirement of ≥20%.
2. Age ≥21 years old
3. Able to provide informed consent
4. Planned LBBP implantation

Exclusion Criteria

1. Severe tricuspid regurgitation or previous tricuspid valve intervention requiring implantation of left ventricular lead in the coronary sinus.
2. Unable to provide informed consent.
3. Pregnant women.
4. \<21 years of age.
Minimum Eligible Age

21 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

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

National University Hospital, Singapore

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.

Eugene Tan, MBBS

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

NUHS

Locations

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

National University Heart Centre Singapore

Singapore, , Singapore

Site Status

Countries

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

Singapore

Other Identifiers

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

LEAD-LBBP

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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