Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04409119

Direct HIS/LBB Pacing as an Alternative to Biventricular Pacing in Patients With HFrEF and a Typical LBBB.

The study will investigate the feasibility of using direct HIS pacing or left bundle branch pacing (LBB pacing) as an alternative to biventricular pacing in patients with symptomatic heart failure and an ECG with a typical left bundle branch block pattern.

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

Rigshospitalet

Copenhagen, Capital Region, 2100, Denmark

About this study

Biventricular pacing has for more than a decade been standard of care for patients with HFrEF, LVEF < 35%, NYHA II-IV despite optimal medical treatment and an ECG with left bundle branch block (LBBB). However, it is not always ideal because of several drawbacks such as phrenic nerve capture, inability to reach late activated areas and many more. Direct HIS pacing can in many cases capture the left bundle and provide normal electrical activation of the left ventricle but sometimes with high pacing thresholds. Recently direct left bundle branch pacing has shown promise with synchronous activation of the left ventricle at low pacing thresholds.

In the present study we randomize 150 patients in two centres to either conventional CRT (50 patients) or HIS/LBB pacing (100 patients). In the HIS/LBB arm, direct HIS-pacing is attempted first but if its not possible or the pacing threshold for capturing the left bundle branch is > 2.5 V at 1 ms we switch to placing a LBB-lead.

Power calculation for non-inferiority: With the 50 patients in the first His Alternative study (25 Biv-CRT og 25 His-CRT) we observed a fall in systolic volumes of 34% and 46% with a standard deviation of 13-16%. Using these numbers it would take at least 108 patients to be 90% sure that the lower limit of a one-sided 97.5% confidence interval (equal to a 95% two-sided confidence interval) would be over the non-inferiority limit of -10%.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients over 18 years of age, ischemic or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy with LVEF ≤ 35% assessed by echocardiography, NYHA class II-IV heart failure symptoms despite optimal medical treatment and
  • Either planned new implantation of a biventricular pacing system (CRT-P or CRT-D), where the ECG is with sinus rhythm and a typical left bundle branch block (see definition below)
  • Or planned upgrade of an existing pacemaker or ICD to a biventricular pacing system (CRT-P or CRT-D), where the ECG is with sinus rhythm and a typical left bundle branch block or there has been> 90% right ventricular pacing from an existing pacemaker for at least 2 months prior to enrollment
  • Signed informed consent

Typical left bundle branch block:

QRS width > 130 msec for women and > 140 msec for men QS or rS pattern in leads V1 and V2, and mid-QRS plateau phase with or without extras in at least 2 of leads V1, V2, V5, V6, I, and aVL

Exclusion criteria

  • Existing biventricular pacing system
  • Permanent atrial fibrillation
  • Severe renal failure with eGFR < 30 ml/min
  • AMI or CABG within the last three months
  • The patient does not want to participate

Treatment and study plan

HIS/LBB pacing

Device

3830 lead to HIS or LBB

LV pacing

Device

LV lead in a CS branch

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Left ventricular end-systolic volume

    Time frame: 6 months

    Echocardiographic response after 6 months defined as decrease in left ventricular systolic volume

  2. Success rate of implanting a HIS-bundle lead with capture of the left bundle branch or a LBB-lead with narrowing of QRS

    Time frame: 6 months

    The success rate of implanting a pacing lead to the HIS-bundle with capture of the left bundle at a threshold < 2.5 V at 1 ms or implantation of a LBB lead with narrowing of the QRS duration and maintaining this effect at 6 month follow-up

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in LVEF and left ventricular chamber dimensions

    Time frame: 6 months

    Echocardiographic response assessed by chamber dimensions and LVEF on a continuous scale

  2. Change in 6-min hall-walk test

    Time frame: 6 months

    Functional response after 6 months defined as an increase in 6-min walking distance of ≥ 20% of the initial value

  3. Change in NYHA class

    Time frame: 6 months

    Symptomatic response after 6 months defined as a fall in NYHA class of ≥ 1

  4. Change in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure score

    Time frame: 6 months

    Change in well-being after 6 months defined as a decrease in Minnesota Living With Heart Failure score of ≥ 15% of baseline

  5. Shortening of QRS duration

    Time frame: 6 months

    Shortening the duration of the QRS complex defined as the widest paced QRS complex rated at 12-lead ECG after 6 months

  6. Change in NT-pro BNP value

    Time frame: 6 months

    Change in NT-pro BNP value

  7. Complications

    Time frame: 6 months

    Device-related complications (periprocedural: electrode reoperation, pneumothorax, hemothorax, pericardial bleeding/tamponade and later (after 30 days post implantation): LV/HIS electrode reoperation, change of device due to battery depletion and infection requiring extraction).

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Rigshospitalet, Denmark

Other

Collaborators

  • Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust

Registry information

Official study title

Direct HIS/LBB Pacing as an Alternative to Biventricular Pacing in Patients With Symptomatic Heart Failure Despite Optimal Medical Treatment and an ECG With a Typical Left Bundle Branch Block Pattern.

Acronym: HIS-alt_2

Important dates

Study start
2020
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
Jun 1, 2020
Registry last updated
Feb 12, 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.