Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07812935

Closed-Loop Stimulation in Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing

This prospective, single-center, crossover study evaluated the effects of closed-loop stimulation (CLS) compared with conventional accelerometer-based rate-adaptive pacing (VVIR) in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation undergoing left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Chronotropic responses were evaluated during standardized mental and physical stress testing. Heart rate distribution during daily activity, functional capacity, quality of life, and device-related parameters were also assessed.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Clinical Provincial Hospital No. 2 in Rzeszow

Rzeszów, Podkarpackie Voivodeship, 35-302, Poland

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age ≥18 years
  • Permanent atrial fibrillation
  • Chronotropic incompetence
  • Permanent pacemaker with left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP)
  • Ventricular pacing burden >50%
  • Ability to provide written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

  • Age <18 years
  • Inability or unwillingness to provide informed consent

Treatment and study plan

Closed-loop stimulation

Device

The pacemaker was programmed to closed-loop stimulation (CLS), an impedance-based rate-adaptive pacing algorithm that adjusts the pacing rate in response to changes in intracardiac impedance associated with cardiac contractile dynamics.

Accelerometer-Based VVIR Pacing

Device

The pacemaker was programmed to VVIR mode with accelerometer-based rate-adaptive pacing. The pacing rate was adjusted according to physical activity detected by the device's accelerometer.

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Heart Rate During Mental Stress

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Change in heart rate (ΔHR) during the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT), calculated as the peak heart rate recorded during the test minus the baseline heart rate. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing and expressed in beats per minute (bpm).

  2. Change in Heart Rate During Isometric Handgrip

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Change in heart rate (ΔHR) during the 5-minute isometric handgrip test performed at 30% of maximal voluntary contraction, calculated as the peak heart rate recorded during the test minus the baseline heart rate. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing and expressed in beats per minute (bpm).

  3. Change in Heart Rate During Treadmill Exercise

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Change in heart rate (ΔHR) during the symptom-limited treadmill exercise test using the modified Bruce protocol, calculated as the peak heart rate achieved during exercise minus the baseline heart rate. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing and expressed in beats per minute (bpm).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Exercise Duration During Treadmill Testing

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Total exercise duration during the symptom-limited treadmill exercise test performed using the modified Bruce protocol. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing and expressed in seconds.

  2. Metabolic Equivalents Achieved During Treadmill Testing

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Exercise capacity during the symptom-limited treadmill exercise test using the modified Bruce protocol, expressed as metabolic equivalents (METs) achieved during the test. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing.

  3. Heart Rate Score During Daily Activity

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Heart Rate Score (HRS), defined as the percentage of all sensed and paced ventricular beats occurring in the most populated 10-beats-per-minute heart rate histogram bin. HRS was assessed from pacemaker-derived heart rate histograms under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing. Higher HRS values indicate a more concentrated heart rate distribution and less heart rate variation across histogram bins. The score ranges from 0% to 100%.

  4. Health-Related Quality of Life Assessed With the EQ-5D-5L Index

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Health-related quality of life was assessed using the EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) descriptive system. Responses were converted to an EQ-5D-5L index value using the Polish value set. Index values range from -0.590 to 1.000, with higher values indicating better health-related quality of life. A value of 1 represents full health, 0 represents a health state equivalent to death, and negative values represent health states valued as worse than death. The outcome was compared between closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing.

  5. Self-Rated Health Assessed With the EQ VAS

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Self-rated health was assessed using the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS), ranging from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst health the participant can imagine and 100 represents the best health the participant can imagine. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing.

  6. Patient-Reported Pacing-Mode Preference

    Time frame: At the end of the study, after completion of both 1-month pacing periods

    At the end of the study, participants were asked during which of the two pacing periods they experienced better overall subjective well-being, or whether they had no preference. Responses were subsequently categorized according to the pacing mode programmed during the preferred period as preference for closed-loop stimulation (CLS), preference for accelerometer-based VVIR pacing, or no preference.

  7. Ventricular Pacing Percentage

    Time frame: At the end of each 1-month pacing period

    Ventricular pacing percentage was obtained from pacemaker interrogation and defined as the proportion of ventricular events that were paced during each study period. The outcome was assessed under both closed-loop stimulation (CLS) and accelerometer-based VVIR pacing and expressed as a percentage from 0% to 100%.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Bartlomiej Wrobel

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Closed-Loop Stimulation Combined With Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients With Atrioventricular Conduction Disorders

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
Sep 10, 2026
Registry last updated
Sep 10, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.