Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07563153

Impact of Optimized Pacing Strategies on Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes in Heart Failure Patients With Pacemaker

This study aims to evaluate the clinical impact of an optimized pacing strategy in patients with heart failure.

* Intervention: Adjustment of the pacemaker lower rate limit to an individualized, hemodynamically optimized heart rate. * Primary Endpoint: Heart failure symptoms, assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score. * Hypothesis: In patients with heart failure requiring permanent pacing, an optimized pacing strategy will lead to a significant improvement in heart failure symptoms (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score) at 12 months compared with the conventional pacing strategy.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

19 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

About this study

Heart failure is a growing health concern with increasing prevalence in the aging population, and permanent pacemaker implantation is frequently required due to concomitant bradyarrhythmias. Heart rate is closely associated with hemodynamic status in patients with heart failure; however, evidence guiding the optimal pacemaker lower rate setting remains limited. Although the conventional lower rate is typically set at 50-60 bpm, recent studies suggest that a moderately increased pacing rate may improve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. Furthermore, advances in physiological pacing techniques, such as conduction system pacing, provide the potential for greater clinical benefits through optimized heart rate settings in this patient population.

Enrolled subjects are randomized in a 1:1 ratio into either the optimized pacing group or the conventional pacing strategy group based on stratification factors.

The optimized pacing group undergoes post-procedural right heart catheterization with adjustments to the lower rate limit, where the heart rate (HR) that yields the lowest mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (mPCWP) or the highest cardiac output is determined as the optimal HR. In the conventional pacing strategy group, the lower rate limit is set at 60 bpm. Clinical symptoms and parameters of both groups are subsequently compared over a one-year follow-up period.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with symptomatic bradycardia who meet the indication for permanent pacemaker implantation and fulfill one of the following conditions:
  • Sick sinus syndrome with or without impaired atrioventricular conduction
  • Persistent or permanent atrial fibrillation with slow ventricular response
  • Chronotropic incompetence
  • Patients diagnosed with heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50% on transthoracic echocardiography with at least one of the following:
  • H2FPEF score ≥ 6 or HFA-PEFF score ≥ 5
  • N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide ≥ 300 pg/mL (sinus rhythm) or ≥ 600 pg/mL (atrial fibrillation)
  • Prior hospitalization for heart failure or documented use of loop diuretics for heart failure symptoms

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients expected to have a ventricular pacing burden ≥ 20% without sufficient capture of cardiac physiologic pacing, which includes biventricular pacing, His bundle pacing, and left bundle branch area pacing.

(Sufficient cardiac physiologic pacing is defined as a paced QRS duration ≤ 140 ms.)

  • Patients not expected to achieve sufficient pacing dependency, defined as:
  • In sinus rhythm: baseline atrial rate > 60 bpm on Holter monitoring or inpatient ECG monitoring
  • In atrial fibrillation/flutter: baseline ventricular rate > 60 bpm on Holter monitoring or inpatient ECG monitoring
  • Patients with contraindications to permanent pacemaker implantation
  • Patients with moderate or greater valvular stenosis or regurgitation.
  • Patients with dyspnea not attributable to heart failure, due to uncontrolled comorbid conditions
  • Pregnant or breastfeeding women.
  • Patients who have refused active treatment.

Treatment and study plan

Adjustment of the pacemaker/ICDs lower rate limit (LRL)

Procedure

Optimized Pacing Strategy

Conventional lower rate (60bpm)

Procedure

Conventional Pacing Strategy

Primary outcomes

  1. Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Higher scores indicate better health status and a higher quality of life, score 0 to 100

Secondary outcomes

  1. NTproBNP

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    pg/mL (picograms per milliliter)

  2. Functional status (NYHA class)

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    class I to IV, higher NYHA classes indicate poorer functional status.

  3. Distance in 6-minute walk test

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    m

  4. Occurrence of atrial fibrillation

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Documented incidence of atrial fibrillation on 12-lead ECG

  5. Atrial fibrillation burden

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Atrial fibrillation burden(%) recorded by CIEDs

  6. Invasive hemodynamics parameters in right heart catheterization

    Time frame: At the time of CIED implantation

    pressure of RA, RV, PA, PCWP as mmHg Cardiac output as L/min (Liters per minute)

  7. CIED Battery longevity

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    year

  8. All-cause mortality

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    All-cause mortality rate(%) during 1year follow-up

  9. Cardiac mortality

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Cardiac mortality rate(%) during 1year follow-up

  10. Re-hospitalization due to all cause

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    All cause re-hospitalization rate(%) during 1year follow-up

  11. Hospitalization due to heart failure

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Hospitalization due to heart failure rate(%) during 1year follow-up

  12. Average heart rate

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Average heart rate(bpm) monitored by the device

  13. Heart rate distribution

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    heart rate distribution recorded in CIED (% of total time) 60bpm to 70 70bpm to 80 80bpm to 90 90bpm to 100 over 100bpm

  14. Pacing burden

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Atrial pacing and ventricular pacing burden(%) recorded in CIEDs

  15. Peak oxygen consumption(Peak VO2) and Oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold(VO2 at AT)

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Peak VO2 and VO2 at AT measured by cardiopulmonary exercise test. Both parameter calculated in mL/kg/min

  16. LV ejection fraction (LVEF)

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    LVEF(%) measured by echocardiogram

  17. E/e' ratio measured by echocardiogram

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    E/e' ratio, calculated as the ratio of early mitral inflow velocity (E) to early diastolic mitral annular velocity (e'), both velocities measured in m/s.

  18. Cardiac index

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Cardiac index(as L/min/m^2) measured with echocardiogram and body surface area

  19. Peak TR velocity

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Peak TR velocity(TR V max) measured by echocardiogram (m/s)

  20. Left atrial strain

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    Left atrial strain(%) measured by echocardiogram

  21. ECG parameters

    Time frame: From enrollment to 1year after the procedure

    QRS duration, QT interval, P wave duration, PR interval (as ms)

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Juwon Kim, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

82-10-2079-8154

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Samsung Medical Center

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes of OPTimized PACing StratEgies in Heart Failure Patients With Pacing Indications: Randomized-Controlled Trial (OPTPACE-HF)

Acronym: OPTPACE-HF

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2028
Study completion
2028
First posted
May 1, 2026
Registry last updated
May 1, 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.