Medtronic
Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112, United States
NCT Number: NCT06606288
The purpose of this study is to use real-world evidence to validate that conduction system pacing (CSP), delivered via a Medtronic 3830 catheter-delivered lead and a Medtronic dual-chamber transvenous pacemaker, is a safe and effective alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients indicated for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) to deliver cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), as documented in the clinical literature.
This study is active but is not currently recruiting participants.
Notify MeAll sexes
Observational
Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112, United States
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Dual-chamber CSP cohort:
BVP comparator cohort:
Exclusion criteria
Dual-chamber CSP cohort:
BVP comparator cohort:
Implant with a Medtronic dual-chamber transvenous pacemaker on or after the study data with lead type and placement data indicating conduction system pacing
Implant with a Medtronic bi-ventricular pacemaker (CRT-P) on or after the study date
Time frame: 30 days
Demonstrate that dual-chamber CSP is non-inferior to BVP on implant safety in patients indicated for CRT.
Endpoint: Compare the acute (≤ 30 days) overall complication rate associated with dual chamber CSP vs. BVP. The acute overall complication rate is a composite measure of separate elements of complications (embolism and thrombosis, events at puncture site, cardiac effusion and perforation, device-related complications, and other procedural complications) and reinterventions (lead-related reinterventions, device revisions, replacements, removals, and upgrades to CRT).
Time frame: 12 months
Demonstrate that dual-chamber CSP is non-inferior to BVP in patients indicated for CRT.
Endpoint: Compare the heart failure hospitalization rate associated with CSP vs. BVP in the CRT-indicated population.
Time frame: 12 months
Compare the device-related reintervention rate associated with dual chamber CSP vs. BVP.
Time frame: 12 months
Compare the composite endpoint of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality rate associated with dual=chamber CSP use vs. BVP in the CRT-indicated population.
Time frame: 12 months
Compare the all-cause mortality rate associated with dual-chamber CSP use vs. BVP in the CRT-indicated population.
Medtronic Cardiac Rhythm and Heart Failure
Industry
Acronym: CORE-CPP
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.
NCT05719714
Cardiovascular Diseases, Chronic Disease
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06122779
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Diseases
Miami, Florida, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04481919
Acute Heart Failure, Cardiovascular Diseases
Nashville, Tennessee, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05824923
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Diseases
Shenyang, Liaoning, China
View Trial Details