Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT04595305 |
Other study ID # |
ABT-CIP-10291 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
N/A
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
September 16, 2019 |
Est. completion date |
August 23, 2022 |
Study information
Verified date |
October 2022 |
Source |
Abbott Medical Devices |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Interventional
|
Clinical Trial Summary
Normal heart function involves rhythmic contraction of all four chambers of the heart and
this rhythm is maintained by the electrical wiring (conduction system) of the heart.
Abnormality in this system results in either very slow or very fast heart rates leading to
insufficient blood supply to the body due to inefficient pumping of the heart. cardiac
resynchronization therapy pacemaker and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator
devices are used to synchronise heart function. The purpose of this study is not only to
determine the pattern of electrical wiring of the heart and identify the variations seen in
individuals with heart failure, but also, to explore the benefits of different types of
pacing using CRT devices.
Description:
Heart failure (HF) is an abnormality of cardiac structure or function leading to failure of
the heart to deliver oxygen at the rate commensurate with the requirement of the patient or
is able to do so only at the expense of elevated left ventricular filling pressures. European
Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2016 guidelines defined HF as a syndrome in which patients have
typical symptoms (e.g. breathlessness, swelling and fatigue) and signs (elevated jugular
pressure, pulmonary crackles and displaced apex beat) resulting from an abnormality of
cardiac structure or function. Patients with HF experience decreased exercise capacity,
inability to perform activities of daily living, diminished quality of life, increased
frequency of hospitalization and higher rates of mortality. HF is highly prevalent and
affects approximately 26 million people worldwide with an estimated mortality of 50% within 5
years of diagnosis.1, 2 It remains a major threat to the public health system since more than
1 million patients are hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of HF annually, and, in western
countries it is the most common cause of hospitalization in individuals >65 years of age.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using biventricular (BiV) pacing has been developed
to restore synchrony in HF patients with delayed ventricular activation, predominantly of the
left ventricle (LV). Studies have demonstrated that simultaneous or sequential BiV pacing
restores the synchrony of contraction, reduces mitral regurgitation, and improves cardiac
output. Several landmark clinical trials published in the past few years have provided
compelling evidence that CRT can produce significant clinical benefits, including
improvements in patients' HF symptoms, quality of life, hospitalization rates, and
echocardiographic measures which confer a mortality benefit. Majority of patients show a
benefit from CRT treatment however, up to 40% derive no improvement. In the MIRACLE study,
34% of patients did not demonstrate an improvement based on a clinical composite score (CCS)
that combined all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization, New York Heart Association (NYHA)
class and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Quality of Life Score. Birnie and Tang et
al have summarized nonresponder rates from various clinical studies and the authors suggest
that while most studies quote non-responder rates at 20-30% the true rate may be as high as
40-50%. They indicate that the inconsistencies might be largely due to the lack of standard
definitions or methodologies to measure CRT response.
The precise mechanisms determining response are yet to be fully elucidated. It is generally
believed that success is based on minimizing electrical activation times in the LV with a
fusion between a left ventricular wavefront from a lead placed in the coronary sinus (CS) and
a wavefront from a lead placed in the RV or an intrinsic wavefront.
The effects of different RV pacing sites have been varied in terms of their relationship to
outcomes from CRT pacing. Initial smaller studies showed different outcomes between right
ventricular apex (RVA) and outflow tract (RVOT) lead position, however further studies failed
to demonstrate a benefit. Following this it was demonstrated that lead position initially
believed to be septal were in fact antero-septal and that co-ordinated conduction would not
be expected from these sites. Differing activation patterns have been demonstrated on
Electroanatomic mapping (EAM) between intrinsic left bundle branch block (LBBB
(circumferential)) and RV apical pacing (longitudinal). Another small study showed that RV
lead placement at the site of latest activation during LV pacing improved acute haemodynamic
measurements compared to standard RVA pacing, as did a true mid septal site compared to RVOT
pacing - with the RV septum being the latest activated site during LV pacing when the CS lead
was in the lateral vein.
LV septal activation has been proposed as a possible contributor to a successful response to
CRT implantation. Trans-septal activation time has been shown in an animal model to
correspond to the presence or absence of Heart failure when an LBBB is present, and
successful acute haemodynamic response correlated to minimal epicardial activation time, LV
endocardial pre-excitation and shortest QRS duration. Trans-septal conduction times have also
been theorized to account for why QRS shortening with CRT is less than expected, however the
degree to which this contributes is unknown.
Left ventricular total and septal scar have also been correlated to non-response to CRT. This
would be expected to contribute to a longer trans-septal activation, as well as to local
tissue strain measurement on echocardiography. Patterns of scar and their relationship to
trans-septal activation times have not been documented. In the normal human heart up to three
early endocardial sites have been documented and the location of scar relative to these sites
and its effect is unknown. Earliest LV septal activation in LBBB heart failure patients may
occur in mid septal regions suggesting activation of the LBB or outside of this region
demonstrating direct trans-septal conduction, whether this correlates to CRT response is yet
to be determined. Further evidence exists that there is a delay between electrical and
mechanical activation of different cardiac segments (EMD), and that this is variable in the
normal heart, as well as in the failing heart where it is further exacerbated between septal
and lateral walls of the left ventricle. Reduction in total activation time may increase the
total amount of myocardium recruited at any time point and that this may minimize EMD.
This single arm, non-randomized, open-label, multi-center, clinical investigation of 20
subjects is designed to characterize RV and LV septal activation patterns in CRT patients
with various pacing configurations. The study will also assess the association of CRT
response to septal activation patterns, septal scar and morphology of surface ECG.