Conventional 3-lead CRT defibrillator system implantation
DeviceConventional 3-lead(1 atrial and 2 ventricular leads) system implantation
NCT Number: NCT03587064
The principal objective is to test non-inferiority of the CRT-DX system as compared to a conventional CRT-D system, in terms of the combined endpoint of mortality, hospitalizations due cardiovascular causes, any complication leading to loss of lead functionality, in the subset of patients without evidence of sinus dysfunction on optimal therapy.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
AOU Ospedali Riuniti Ancona, Ancona, Italy
Resting heart rate is strongly associated with incident worsening Heart Failure (HF) and mortality. Current devices for cardiac resynchronization (CRT-D) normally provide atrio-ventricular (AV) sequential pacing modes during resynchronization, but the best pacing programming strategy is not clear.
On the one hand a basic rate of 50 to 70 bpm (optionally with some rate-responsive function) could be considered for therapy up-titration, specifically betablockers; on the other hand, increasing pacing rates may partially reduce benefits from resynchronization, reducing filling time and contractility reservoir.
The Pegasus investigation is the only large randomized investigation comparing DDD with 70 bpm basic rate to DDD(R) @40 bpm. Results showed no difference in investigation endpoints, including mortality and HF-hospitalization.
These results may support the use of a device implementing both a CRT function and a right ventricular single-lead with and an atrial sensing dipole (CRT-DX system). This system can track ventricular pacing and resynchronization following atrial sensing, even if it cannot provide atrial pacing support. It should be assessed whether such limitation is counterbalanced by the advantages related to the reduced number of necessary leads, with simplified implantation and less complications.
The objective of the investigation is to assess whether atrial pacing support is really necessary in the subset of patients with indication to CRT-D and no evidence of sinus dysfunction on optimal therapy. The investigation will test the hypothesis that a CRT-DX system is not inferior to a conventional CRT-D system in this class of subjects.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Conventional 3-lead(1 atrial and 2 ventricular leads) system implantation
2-lead (2 ventricular leads with dipole for atrial sensing) DX system implantation
Time frame: 1 year
It includes number of patients who experienced death, hospitalization due to cardiac causes, or any lead-related complication leading to loss of functionality (including lead dislodgement, conduction or insulation failure, loss of sensing or capture that couldn't resolved by reprogramming)
Time frame: 1 year
Rate of implant revisions to add, replace, reposition, and remove an atrial pacing lead.
Time frame: 1 year
Inappropriate detections and interventions of high rate ventricular episodes.
Time frame: 1 year
In the conventional CRT-D group, atrial pacing percentage.
Time frame: 1 year
Six minute walking test distance at one year
Time frame: 1 year
Incidence of atrial tachyarrhythmias (AT)
Time frame: 1 year
Incidence of Ventricular Arrhythmias (VA) requiring therapy delivery
Time frame: 1 year
Incidence of both VA and AT due to bradycardia or short-long-short sequence
Time frame: 1 year
Impossibility to implant any component (leads and device) of the initially planned system
Time frame: 1 year
Skin-to-skin and fluoroscopy time
Time frame: 1 year
Atrial sensing amplitude measured by devices in both investigation arms
Time frame: 1 year
Incidence of far field oversensing episodes in both investigation arms
Associazione Portatori Dispositivi Impiantabili Cardiaci
Other
Non-inferiority Randomized Clinical Investigation of CRT-DX Versus CRT-D Systems
Acronym: CRT-NEXT
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.
NCT03012490
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy, Cardiovascular Diseases
Lille, France
View Trial DetailsNCT03839121
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy, Cardiovascular Diseases
Linz, Austria
View Trial DetailsNCT03579641
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Cardiac Conduction System Disease
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04595305
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy, Cardiovascular Diseases
Macquarie Park, New South Wales, Australia
View Trial Details