Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Active, Not Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT05365568

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Using Conventional Stylet-driven Pacemaker Leads for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

The aim of this study proposal is to compare the effectiveness of two distinct pacing modalities for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Our primary hypothesis is that left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) using conventional stylet driven pacemaker leads is an effective resynchronization method that yield to at least similar clinical benefits and outcomes when compare to biventricular pacing.

Active, Not Recruiting

This study is active but is not currently recruiting participants.

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

UZA, Edegem, Antwerpen, Belgium

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Recently some retrospective or uncontrolled studies were published that compared cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) and biventricular pacing (BiV), although with a limited number of patients. Moreover, only one of these studies compared LBBAP + right ventricle stimulation to conventional BiV stimulation prospectively. None of the studies used conventional stylet-driven pacemaker leads for LBBAP. Therefore, the present trial aims to fill-in the gap in the current literature regarding LBBAP for CRT and provide a first randomized head-to-head comparison against CRT.

The aim of this study proposal is to compare the effectiveness of two distinct pacing modalities for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Our primary hypothesis is that left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) using conventional stylet driven pacemaker leads is an effective resynchronization method that yields to at least similar clinical benefits and outcomes when compared to biventricular pacing.

The study is a multicentre, randomized trial comparing LBBAP against biventricular pacing. After characterization of the type device implanted (Pacing or Defibrillator), randomization will occur between both groups in a 1:1 ratio. The trial purpose is to demonstrate the efficacy of LBBAP to treat clinical heart failure in-patient indicated to receive a CRT.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Aged 18 or above
  • Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) and NYHA meeting one off the previous indications documented with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) no later than 3 months before randomization.
  • New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV
  • Baseline left bundle branch block and QRS >130ms or QRS >150ms of any morphology or a wide paced QRS duration.

Exclusion criteria

  • Younger than 18 years old
  • Pregnancy
  • Any unstable medical condition, life expectancy < 12 months
  • Inability to provide consent or to undergo follow-up
  • Narrow QRS duration (≤130ms) or prolonged QRS duration with typical Right Bundle Branch Block (RBBB) morphology on 12 lead ECG and sinus rhythm.
  • Significant hypertrophic cardiomyopathy - any septum abnormality contra-indicating LBBAP implantation (according to physician's evaluation)
  • Patients who are unable to perform a 6 minute walk test (6MWT) Note: patients should be able to perform a 6 minute walk test, but it is not a requirement to have the test performed before the procedure (e.g. due to inability of planning).

Treatment and study plan

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP)

Procedure

Left bundle branch area pacing using conventional stylet driven pacemaker leads for cardiac resynchronization therapy

Biventricular pacing (BiV)

Procedure

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using biventricular pacing (BiV)

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of days elapsed from study procedure to first occurrence of one of the following events (combined endpoint) or to study close-out in the total patient population.

    Time frame: 12 months

    First occurrence of one of the following clinical events: death, hospitalization or unscheduled visit for heart failure (HF) or worsening HF symptoms with adaptation of the medical therapy, implant failure for any cause, implantable electronic cardiac device (IECD) re-intervention for any reason during follow-up (Lead Dislocation/phrenic nerve stimulation…)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Improvement of procedural characteristics: Operative and fluoroscopic times

    Time frame: 1 day

    Improvement of procedural characteristics: Operative and fluoroscopic times

  2. Correction of electrical desynchrony post-implant

    Time frame: 1/6/12 months

    Correction of electrical desynchrony post-implant, at 1/6/12 months

  3. Clinical functional response (6MWT)

    Time frame: 6 months

    Clinical functional response as evaluated by the improvement of the 6 Minutes Walk Test (6MWT) at 6 months follow-up

  4. Left ventricular reverse remodelling

    Time frame: 6/12 months

    Left ventricular reverse remodelling at 6 and 12 months follow-up as evaluated by the reduction of the Left Ventricular End-systolic Volume (LVESV) using trans-thoracal echocardiography

  5. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies

    Time frame: 6/12 months

    ICD therapies at 6 and 12 months

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

AZ Sint-Jan AV

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Using Conventional Stylet Driven Pacemaker Leads for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: a Randomized Study

Acronym: LeCaRT

Important dates

Study start
2022
Primary completion
2025
Study completion
2028
First posted
May 9, 2022
Registry last updated
Sep 23, 2024

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.