Rush University Medical Center
Chicago, Illinois, 60612, United States
NCT Number: NCT03903107
The goal of this study is to assess the feasibility, accuracy and safety of performing fluoroless (or low fluoro) conduction system pacing utilizing electro-anatomic mapping (EAM) with the CARTO 3 mapping system (Biosense Webster Inc, Irvine, CA) in comparison to a group of patients undergoing conventional conduction system pacing (CSP) Implants.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Chicago, Illinois, 60612, United States
The goal of this study is to assess the feasibility, accuracy and safety of performing fluoroless (or low fluoro) conduction system pacing utilizing electro-anatomic mapping (EAM) with the CARTO 3 mapping system (Biosense Webster Inc, Irvine, CA) in comparison to a group of patients undergoing conventional conduction system pacing (CSP) Implants.
In this study, we plan to randomize patients to fluoroscopy guided CSP vs 3D mapping guided CSP implants with low/zero fluoroscopy. The study with assess if 3D EAM guided implants can be performed successfully and without any significant increase in device implant related complications.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
conventional standard approach Conduction System Pacing(CSP) using fluoroscopy
Conduction System Pacing(CSP) using electroanatomic mapping system with no or minimal fluoroscopy
Time frame: Intra-procedure
Feasibility of achieving a successful CSP implant at the His Bundle or Left Bundle branch with low or zero Fluoroscopy. This will result in low to no fluoroscopy exposure for both the subject and the operator, as well as shorter procedure times.This will be documented during procedure.
Time frame: Intra-procedure
Total radiation exposure during procedure time will be documented at the total time the patient is exposed to fluoroscopy during the procedure. This will will be tracked and documented as total fluoroscopy duration, His lead Fluoroscopy duration and DAP. The total amounts of procedural fluoroscopy exposure will be compared between the two treatment arms.
Time frame: 30 days post procedure
The study team will review medical history of enrolled subjects for any adverse event experienced post-procedurally. All adverse events will be reviewed by PI for determination as to whether "procedure-related" or not.
Time frame: for a period of 6 months post procedure
The study team will track the device follow-up data for a duration of 3 months post device implant. Any patients with > 2V increase in His Lead capture threshold from baseline and need for ventricular pacing will undergo a lead revision.
Rush University Medical Center
Other
Fluoroless Conduction System Pacing Utilizing Electro-Anatomic Mapping Versus Conventional Implantation: The Fluoroless- CSP Trial
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.
NCT06540079
Arrhythmia, Sinus, Arrhythmias, Cardiac
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02586480
Arrhythmia, Sinus, Arrhythmias, Cardiac
Terre Basse, Guadeloupe, France
View Trial DetailsNCT07209852
Arrhythmia, Sinus, Arrhythmias, Cardiac
Bruges, Belgium
View Trial DetailsNCT07348991
Arrhythmia, Sinus, Arrhythmias, Cardiac
View Trial Details