NCT00658203CompletedPhase 4
Clinical Evaluation on Advanced Resynchronization
Conditions
Interventions
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- LivaNova
- Enrollment
- 310
- Locations
- 36
- Primary Endpoint
- The primary endpoint will be evaluated at 1 year (M12), in term of improved, unchanged or worsened patient's conditions, with a composite analysis of NYHA class evolution, heart-failure-related hospitalisations and Quality of Life evaluation.
Study Overview
Brief Summary
The aim of the study is to compare clinical benefits of the cardiac resynchronisation (CRT) achieved by the PEA optimised pacing configuration and a CRT optimised by standard clinical procedure.
PEA optimised configuration (PEA-CRT) is obtained, during patient's follow-up, using the Peak Endocardial Acceleration sensor features onboard the device.
Detailed Description
The study is a prospective, multicentre, controlled and randomised clinical investigation, with two single-blinded arms.
The objective of the study is to compare the clinical benefits of Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy (CRT) optimised by automatic PEA sensor features (PEA-CRT), with those obtained by standard optimisation procedure (STD-CRT).
The patient candidate for inclusion in the study has a severe chronic Heart Failure, indicated for the implantation of a Biventricular pacing system according to updated ESC guidelines (2005).
All patients included in the study will be followed-up for 1 year; patient's follow-ups are scheduled during hospitalisation, at one month, 3 months, 6 months and one year after implantation.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •The patient candidate for inclusion in the study must be indicated for implantation of a Biventricular pacing system, with the following clinical conditions:
- •Severe Heart Failure (NYHA Class III or IV)
- •Cardiomyopathy of any etiology
- •Sinus rhythm
- •Reduced Left-Ventricular Ejection Fraction
- •Left-Ventricular End Diastolic Diameter greater than or equal to 30 mm/m2 (LVEDD>30 mm/m2)
- •QRS Duration:
- •> 150 ms or
- •> 120 ms and documented Mechanical Dissynchrony (by ECHO) meeting two out of three of the following criteria:
- •Aortic Pre-Ejection Delay > 140 ms
- •Interventricular Mechanical Delay > 40 ms
- •Delayed activation of postero-lateral Left Ventricular wall (after mitral valve opening)
- •Optimal and stable (1 month before inclusion) pharmacological treatment, including, if tolerated, Beta Blockers, Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme (ACE) Inhibitors or ACE Inhibitor substitutes, Spironolactone, and diuretics
Exclusion Criteria
- •Any patient who has one of the following characteristics will be excluded from the study:
- •ICD indication (Life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias)
- •Persistent or permanent Atrial Arrhythmia without possibility to restore sinus rhythm (spontaneous termination, anti-tachycardia pacing, pharmacological or electrical cardioversion).
- •Patient already implanted with a conventional pacemaker device
- •Myocardial infarction within the last three months
- •Heart surgery, or revascularization within the last three months, or expected
- •Heart surgery refused because of co-morbidity factors
- •Included in transplantation list
- •Already enrolled in other study
- •Life expectancy less than 1 year
- •Pregnancy
- •Age less than 18
- •Forfeiture of freedom or under guardianship
- •Not able to understand the aim of the study and its procedures
- •Refusing to cooperate
Arms & Interventions
1
Active Comparator
PEA optimized CRT
Intervention: New Living CHF (Device)
2
Other
Standard optimized CRT
Intervention: New Living CHF (Device)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
The primary endpoint will be evaluated at 1 year (M12), in term of improved, unchanged or worsened patient's conditions, with a composite analysis of NYHA class evolution, heart-failure-related hospitalisations and Quality of Life evaluation.
Time Frame: 12 months
Secondary Outcomes
- PEA-CRT optimisation is at least effective as the standard optimisation in term of efficacy of the therapy and patients' quality of life.(12 months)
- PEA is an index of the patients' clinical status and allows to predict acute HF episode in both arms.(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of NYHA(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Cardiovascular mortality(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Heart Failure Quality Of Life (EuroQoL-5D) score(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of BNP dosage(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Number and duration of heart-failure-related patient's hospitalisations, during the study period.(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Left Ventricular End Diastolic Diameter(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Left Ventricular End Systolic Diameter(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Left Pre-Ejection Interval(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Right Pre-Ejection Interval(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Total Duration of Left Systole(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of E velocity(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of A velocity(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Ventricular spike-Mitral valve closure interval(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Ventricular spike-Mitral valve opening interval(12 months)
- Efficacy of the therapy comparing the two arms in terms of Mitral Valve regurgitation.(12 months)
- Time spent to achieve the CRT optimal configuration during each follow-up(12 months)
- PEA monitoring and prognostic relevance correlating the PEA diagnostic trends with the parameters used to asses the efficacy of the therapy and patients' quality of life (NYHA class, mortality, HF-hospitalisation, EuroQoL-5D score, BNP dosage, Echo(12 months)
- (LVEF) comparing the changes Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in the two arms with an intermediate analysis at 6 months done by a Core Centre.(6 and 12 months)
Investigators
Study Sites (36)
Loading locations...
Similar Trials
Completed
Phase 4
'Effect of CRT on Defibrillation Threshold Estimates' StudySudden Cardiac DeathNCT00626093Abbott Medical Devices77
Completed
Not Applicable
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Efficacy EnhancementsAtrial FibrillationNCT02222818Medtronic Cardiac Rhythm and Heart Failure71
Completed
Phase 4
Spanish Atrial Fibrillation And Resynchronization StudyChronic Heart FailureCardiomyopathy, DilatedAtrial FibrillationNCT01181414Hospital Clinic of Barcelona60
Terminated
Not Applicable
MODULA-Study: Modul 10: Benefit of CRT-Therapy in CRT-Patients With QRS-Complex of 120 - 150 MsHeart FailureNCT00180401Boston Scientific Corporation100
Approved For Marketing
Not Applicable
Clinical Evaluation of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) Using the Ovatio CRT Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) SystemCongestive Heart Failure (CHF)NCT00528320ELA Medical, Inc.