Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Randomized Study

Not Applicable

Recruiting

• Conditions: Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction
• Interventions: Procedure: Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP); Procedure: Biventricular pacing (BiV)

• Registration Number: NCT05365568
• Lead Sponsor: AZ Sint-Jan AV

Brief Summary

The aim of this study proposal is to compare the effectiveness of two distinct pacing modalities for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Our primary hypothesis is that left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) using conventional stylet driven pacemaker leads is an effective resynchronization method that yield to at least similar clinical benefits and outcomes when compare to biventricular pacing.

Detailed Description

Recently some retrospective or uncontrolled studies were published that compared cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) and biventricular pacing (BiV), although with a limited number of patients. Moreover, only one of these studies compared LBBAP + right ventricle stimulation to conventional BiV stimulation prospectively. None of the studies used conventional stylet-driven pacemaker leads for LBBAP. Therefore, the present trial aims to fill-in the gap in the current literature regarding LBBAP for CRT and provide a first randomized head-to-head comparison against CRT.

The aim of this study proposal is to compare the effectiveness of two distinct pacing modalities for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Our primary hypothesis is that left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) using conventional stylet driven pacemaker leads is an effective resynchronization method that yields to at least similar clinical benefits and outcomes when compared to biventricular pacing.

The study is a multicentre, randomized trial comparing LBBAP against biventricular pacing. After characterization of the type device implanted (Pacing or Defibrillator), randomization will occur between both groups in a 1:1 ratio. The trial purpose is to demonstrate the efficacy of LBBAP to treat clinical heart failure in-patient indicated to receive a CRT.

Study Timeline

• Study First Submitted: 2022-04-29
• Study First Submitted QC: 2022-05-06
• Study First Posted: 2022-05-09
• Study Start: 2022-09-01
• Status Verified: 2022-10
• Last Update Submitted: 2022-10-07
• Last Update Posted: 2022-10-12
• Primary Completion: 2023-09-01
• Study Completion: 2024-09-01

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: RECRUITING
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 170

Inclusion Criteria

• Aged 18 or above
• Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) and NYHA meeting one off the previous indications documented with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) no later than 3 months before randomization.
• New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV
• Baseline left bundle branch block and QRS >130ms or QRS >150ms of any morphology or a wide paced QRS duration.

Exclusion Criteria

• < 18 years age
• Pregnancy
• Any unstable medical condition, life expectancy < 12 months
• Inability to provide consent or to undergo follow-up
• Narrow QRS duration (≤130ms) or prolonged QRS duration with typical Right Bundle Branch Block (RBBB) morphology on 12 lead ECG and sinus rhythm.
• Significant hypertrophic cardiomyopathy - any septum abnormality contra-indicating LBBAP implantation (according to physician's evaluation)
• Patients who are unable to perform a 6 minute walk test (6MWT) Note: patients should be able to perform a 6 minute walk test, but it is not a requirement to have the test performed before the procedure (e.g. due to inability of planning).

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
LBBAP	Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP)	-
BiV	Biventricular pacing (BiV)	-

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Number of days elapsed from study procedure to first occurrence of one of the following events (combined endpoint) or to study close-out in the total patient population.	12 months	First occurrence of one of the following clinical events: death, hospitalization or unscheduled visit for heart failure (HF) or worsening HF symptoms with adaptation of the medical therapy, implant failure for any cause, implantable electronic cardiac device (IECD) re-intervention for any reason during follow-up (Lead Dislocation/phrenic nerve stimulation...)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies	6/12 months	ICD therapies at 6 and 12 months
Left ventricular reverse remodelling	6/12 months	Left ventricular reverse remodelling at 6 and 12 months follow-up as evaluated by the reduction of the Left Ventricular End-systolic Volume (LVESV) using trans-thoracal echocardiography
Improvement of procedural characteristics: Operative and fluoroscopic times	1 day	Improvement of procedural characteristics: Operative and fluoroscopic times
Clinical functional response (6MWT)	6 months	Clinical functional response as evaluated by the improvement of the 6 Minutes Walk Test (6MWT) at 6 months follow-up
Correction of electrical desynchrony post-implant	1/6/12 months	Correction of electrical desynchrony post-implant, at 1/6/12 months

Trial Locations

Locations (11)

CHU Charleroi; 🇧🇪 Lodelinsart, Henegouwen, Belgium

CHU HELORA - Site Jolimont; 🇧🇪 Haine-Saint-Paul, Belgium

UZA; 🇧🇪 Edegem, Antwerpen, Belgium

Jessa Ziekenhuis Hasselt; 🇧🇪 Hasselt, Limburg, Belgium

UZ Gent; 🇧🇪 Gent, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium

UZ Leuven; 🇧🇪 Leuven, Vlaams-Brabant, Belgium

UCL Saint-Luc; 🇧🇪 Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Vlaams-Brabant, Belgium

Clinique Saint-Pierre Ottignies; 🇧🇪 Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Waals-Brabant, Belgium

AZ Sint-Jan Brugge; 🇧🇪 Brugge, West-Vlaanderen, Belgium

AZ Delta; 🇧🇪 Roeselare, West-Vlaanderen, Belgium

CHR Citadelle Liège; 🇧🇪 Liège, Belgium