View clinical trials related to Bundle-Branch Block.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to assess the incidence (at 90-days) of ventricular pacing in patients undergoing permanent pacemaker placement after TAVR. As well as incidence (at 90-days) of atrioventricular block (AVB), intraventricular conduction delay (IVCD), bundle branch block (BBB), and rate histogram in patients undergoing permanent pacemaker placement after TAVR.
The purpose of this study is to better understand how adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) might benefit patients. aCRT works by sometimes giving stimulation to only the left side of the heart, rather than to both sides, depending on how it senses the heart is functioning. CRT without the adaptive algorithm works by giving stimulation to both sides of the heart. aCRT has already been approved by the FDA and is being used in patients now, but it is not clear which patients it should be used in compared to normal CRT. This study will include patients who are already scheduled to get a CRT device. The investigators will then randomize patients to the aCRT study arm or to the CRT study arm. After 6 months, the investigators will assess the electrical activity of the patients' hearts. After this time, the patient and their doctors will be able to decide if they would like to change the type CRT they have been designated.
Approximately one third of patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) do not derive any clinical benefit. CRT response can be improved by tailoring LV lead placement and programming of atrio-ventricular (AV) and inter-ventricular (VV) stimulation intervals to the individual patient. However, the best strategy to optimize lead positioning and device programming still remains to be established. Earlier work in our research group suggests that the vector cardiogram (VCG) can be used to determine the optimal LV lead position and AV- and VV-intervals, and pilot studies showed the feasibility to derive a VCG-like signal (D-VCG) from the implanted pacing electrodes. Other studies have suggested that the best position for the LV electrode is the region of latest electrical activation. The region of latest electrical activation can be identified by measuring the electrical delay on the LV lead (LVLED) during implantation. The objective of this study is to investigate whether D-VCG can be used to determine the optimal AV- and VV-interval and whether VCG and LVLED can be used to determine the optimal LV lead position.
The purpose of this clinical study is to test the hypothesis that market released Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) devices which contain the AdaptivCRT® (aCRT) algorithm have a superior outcome compared to standard CRT devices in CRT indicated patients with normal atrio-ventricular (AV) conduction and left bundle branch block (LBBB).
The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of left ventricular lead pacing location in the non-left bundle branch block (non-LBBB) heart failure patient population. The left ventricular lead pacing location will be guided by either the pacing site with the largest amount of dyssynchrony as measured by the LV electrical delay (QLV) or the physician's standard of care implant approach.
In patients undergoing CRT device implantation a lead positioning in the coronary sinus is required. Even this part of the surgical procedure is challenging. In this study we compared retrospectively to methods of CS-lead implantation: conventional vs. EP-catheter guided.
The aim of this study is to examine a correction term for an adapted QT interval during ventricular pacing (right, left and biventricular pacing) to obtain valid formulae correcting for the QT intervals in various pacing conditions.
The most common congenital heart disease is the ventricular septal defect, and after surgical closure of a such defect, an arrythmia called the right bundle branch block, is very frequent. Therefore the aim of this study is to investigate if this group of patients has inferior outcomes compared to the group without this arrythmia after surgical closure and compared to a group of healthy control subjects. All patients will be undergoing 1. exercise testing, 2. echocardiography, 3. echocardiography during exercise, and 4. MRI. The perspective is the ability to point out a group of patients with a possible need of further intervention, and additionally to increase the awareness of protecting the electrical system of the heart during the operation.
Heart failure (HF) affects 5 million Americans and is responsible for more health-care expenditure than any other medical diagnosis. Approximately half of all HF patients have electrocardiographic prolongation of the QRS interval and ventricular dyssynchrony, a perturbation of the normal pattern of ventricular contraction that reduces the efficiency of ventricular work. Ventricular dyssynchrony is directly responsible for worsening HF symptomatology in this subset of patients. Resynchronization of ventricular contraction is usually achieved through simultaneous pacing of the left and right ventricles using a biventricular (BiV) pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Clinical trial evidence supporting the use of BiV pacing in patients with prolonged QRS duration was obtained almost exclusively in patients with a left bundle-branch block (LBBB) electrocardiographic pattern. Recent evidence suggests that resynchronization of ventricular contraction in patients with LBBB can be obtained by univentricular left ventricular pacing with equal or superior clinical benefits compared to BiV pacing. Animal studies suggest that ventricular resynchronization can be obtained in subjects with right bundle-branch block (RBBB) through univentricular right ventricular pacing. No clinical trial evidence exists to support the use of BiV pacing in patients with RBBB. Thousands of patients with symptomatic HF and RBBB currently have univentricular ICDs in place for the prevention of sudden cardiac death. Most of these devices are currently programmed to avoid RV pacing. We aim to determine if ventricular resynchronization delivered through univentricular RV pacing improves symptoms in patients with RBBB and moderate to severe HF who have previously undergone BiV ICD implantation for symptomatic heart failure. We further aim to determine if ventricular resynchronization improves myocardial performance and ventricular geometry as detected by echocardiographic measures and quality of life for patients with HF and RBBB. We hypothesize that RV univentricular pacing delivered with an atrio-ventricular interval that maximizes ventricular synchrony is equivalent to BiV pacing for improvement in cardiac performance, HF symptoms, and positive ventricular remodeling in patients with HF and RBBB.
Despite the dramatic effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on survival and morbidity in people with congestive heart failure, 50-70% of eligible patients do not respond to this intervention. There is retrospective evidence that placement of the left ventricular (LV) lead at the region of latest mechanical delay markedly improves response to CRT. However, there is no feasible way to gauge dyssynchrony at LV lead sites during CRT implantation. Impedance recordings from pacing lead tips allow for real-time assessment of mechanical motion and may represent a useful intraoperative tool to guide optimum placement of the LV lead during CRT implantation. This pilot trial will assess the use of intraoperative impedograms in humans to measure regional dyssynchrony at potential LV lead locations during CRT implantation.