One Year Pacing Dependency After TAVR

NCT ID: NCT06756282

Last Updated: 2025-01-03

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

RECRUITING

Total Enrollment

90 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2024-11-13

Study Completion Date

2027-10-13

Brief Summary

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

Pace maker implantation after the procedure of TAVR can be estimated at 15% of patients. However, some studies have shown that the conduction disturbances after TAVR could resolve over time, and that roughly between one- and two-thirds of patients who required a permanent pace maker implantation post TAVR were not found to be dependent at subsequent follow-up. This study aims to evaluate a cohort of patients permanently implanted with a pacemaker post-TAVR for high-grade conductive disorders and to describe the prevalence of effective pacemaker stimulation at 1 year follow-up. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of the prevalence of effective stimulation 3 months after implantation of the pace maker , description of the types of conductive disorders associated with atrial and/or ventricular stimulation, description of the initial indication for pacemaker implantation, description of the characteristics of the population with or without stimulation dependency. The objective is to better rationalize indication of permanent stimulation after TAVI

Detailed Description

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

A number of independent predictors have been found for long-term pacemaker dependence after TAVR that included a pre-existing RBBB, first-degree atrioventricular block, left anterior hemiblock, porcelain aorta, and implantation depth of the prosthesis However, indications for definitive cardiac stimulation after TAVR remain controversial excepted in case of complete or persistent high-grade BAV. The recommendations are particularly imprecise regarding intraventricular conductive disorders (LBBB++) and AVB 1.

Regarding the potential occurrence of more serious and delayed conductive disorders, the implantation of a pacemaker can sometimes be proposed to limit the duration of hospitalization in intensive care or ECG monitoring. The pacemaker implantation rate therefore probably does not reflect the true incidence of high-grade conductive disorders after TAVI because this rate varies greatly depending on the center, the indications for definitive stimulation still remain unclear, the rapid implantation times for a conductive disorder which risks getting worse (LBBG++) in a context of ever-shorter hospitalization periods can artificially increase the number of implantations.

the main objective of our study is therefore to evaluate a cohort of patients permanently implanted post-TAVR in our center since September 2023 for high-grade conductive disorders and to describe the prevalence of effective pacemaker stimulation at 1 year follow-up. Secondary objectives include the prevalence of effective stimulation 3 months after implantation of the definitive pace maker , description of the types of conductive disorders associated with pacing dependency at follow-up, description of the initial indication for pacemaker implantation, description of the characteristics of the population with or without stimulation dependency Describe serious clinical events at 3 months and 12 months (mortality, stroke, heart failure, rehospitalization for cardiac causes, complications related to the pace maker) Describe the profile of stimulation or non-stimulus dependent patients

Conditions

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

Patients Above 18 Years Patient Discharge Pacing Therapy Aortic Stenosis (Treated With TAVI)

Study Design

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

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

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

Patients who need permanent pace maker implantation after TAVR

patients with high degree conductive disorders after TAVR who required pacemaker implantation before discharge the study will evaluated pacing dependency at one year (main objective) and the profile of patients with pacing dependency (type of initial conductive disorder, clinical characteristics)

Pacemaker and defibrillator

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

only patients with pacemaker implantation will be evaluated in the study

Interventions

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

Pacemaker and defibrillator

only patients with pacemaker implantation will be evaluated in the study

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

all patients who need a permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR

Exclusion Criteria

Patients who have already a pace maker before TAVR
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Biotronik France

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

University Hospital, Montpellier

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

Locations

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

University Hospital of Montpellier

Montpellier, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

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

France

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Florence Leclercq, PUPH

Role: CONTACT

0467336189

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Florence Leclercq, Professor

Role: primary

Other Identifiers

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

2024-09-137

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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