View clinical trials related to Left Bundle-Branch Block.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to show that Electrocardiogram Ambulatory Monitoring-guided strategy is superior to ElectroPhysiological Study on the rate of alive patients with an appropriate Pacemaker implantation/non-implantation, at 12 months after randomization, in patients with New Onset Persistent Left Bundle Branch Block after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.
Heart failure (HF) is the most common nosology encountered in clinical practice. Its incidence and prevalence increase exponentially with increasing age and it is associated with the increased mortality, more frequent hospitalization and decreased quality of life. An initial approach to the treatment of HF patients with reduced left ventricular (LV) systolic function and left bundle branch block (LBBB) was implantation of device for cardiac resynchronization therapy using biventricular pacing. This has resulted in long-term clinical benefits such as improved quality of life, increased functional capacity, reduced HF hospitalizations and overall mortality. However, conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is effective in only 70% of patients. And the remaining 30% of patients are non-responders to conventional CRT. Cardiac conduction system pacing is currently a promising technique for these patients. Particularly, His bundle pacing (HBP) has been developed to achieve the same results. According to other studies HBP has shown greater improvement in hemodynamic parameters comparing with conventional biventricular CRT. But, nevertheless, there are significant clinical troubles with HBP, especially high pacing threshold. In this regard, in 2017, the left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) was developed, which demonstrated clinical advantages compared to conventional biventricular CRT. Also, since 2019, left bundle branch pacing-optimized CRT (LBBPO CRT) has been used in clinical practice. These methods have become an alternative to HBP due to the stimulation of LBB outside the blocking site, a stable pacing threshold and a narrow QRS complex duration on electrocardiogram. A series of case reports and observational studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of LBBP and LBBPO CRT in patients with CRT indications. However, it is not enough data about impact of CRT with LBBP and combined CRT with LBBP and LV pacing on myocardial remodeling, reducing mortality and complications. According to our hypothesis, CRT with LBBP and combined CRT with LBBP and LV pacing compared with conventional biventricular pacing will significantly improve the clinical outcomes and reverse myocardial remodeling in patients who are non-responders to biventricular CRT with HF, reduced LV ejection fraction and with indications to CRT devices with defibrillator function (CRT-D) or one of the CRT-D leads replacement.
Clinical, structural and mechanical features in patients with left bundle branch block.
The objective of this clinical investigation is to evaluate the clinical benefits of an MultiSite pacing (MSP) with patient specific left ventricular vector optimization in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) after 6 months of therapy. This clinical investigation is a single-center, prospective, two-arm, randomized 1:1, crossover study designed to evaluate the effectiveness of Optimized MSP CRT compared to conventional bi-ventricular pacing. Data will be collected at enrolment, CRT implant procedure, hospital pre-discharge, one, three and six months post implant. Enrolment data collection will include demographics, cardiovascular history, medication, echocardiography measurements, heart failure quality of life questionnaire and six minute walk test distance. CRT implant procedure data collection will include implanted system information, lead location and conduction times. The electrical conduction recording procedure will include surface ECG and device electrogram (EGM) recordings during various MSP vector pacing configurations at the time of CRT device implant. Patients will also undergo simultaneous invasive pressure measurements using a left ventricular pressure wire to allow haemodynamic measurements (dP/dtmax) during various MSP vector pacing configurations. Optimal MSP programming settings will be determined by the narrowest QRS duration recorded by 12 lead ECG and the greatest change in dP/dtmax by pressure wires study. In a subgroup of patients (approximately 25 patients), non-invasive electrical activation data will be collected with electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi) within 45 days of the implant procedure. Patients will then be randomized 1:1 to receive either standard biventricular pacing or Optimized MSP at their one-month follow-up (± 15 days) visit. At the 3 months (± 15 days) post randomization follow up visit, data collection will include surface ECG, EGMs, echocardiographic parameters and quality of life questionnaire. The patients will then undergo cross-over to the alternate randomization group with programming adjusted accordingly. At the final, 6 months (± 15 days) post randomization follow-up visit, data collection will include surface ECG, EGMs, echocardiographic parameters and quality of life questionnaire. This will mark the completion of the study for each patient. The expected duration of enrolment is 18 months. The total duration of the clinical investigation is expected to be 25 months.