Clinical Trials Logo

Pacemaker Electrode Infection clinical trials

View clinical trials related to Pacemaker Electrode Infection.

Filter by:
  • None
  • Page 1

NCT ID: NCT05037474 Active, not recruiting - ICD Clinical Trials

Contemporary Transvenous Lead Extraction Outcomes

TLE
Start date: April 1, 2020
Phase:
Study type: Observational

Presentation of procedural safety and outcomes data from a high volume TLE centre

NCT ID: NCT04146883 Recruiting - Clinical trials for Implantable Defibrillator User

Post-procedure Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Cardiac Electrical Device Implantation: ABxFREE Study

ABxFREE
Start date: August 20, 2019
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

This study is a multi-center open-label randomized study, and we sought to investigate the redundancy of post-procedural prophylactic antibiotics in cardiac implantable electronic device implantation. There are 2 arms in this study. One arm will receive pre-procedural intravenous antibiotics only. The other arm will receive both pre-procedural intravenous antibiotics and post-procedural 3-day oral antibiotics.

NCT ID: NCT03387488 Not yet recruiting - Heart Failure Clinical Trials

Video Assisted Pericardioscopic Surgery: Minimal-invasive Implantation of Epimyocardial Pacemaker Leads in Humans

VAPS
Start date: November 1, 2020
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

Particularly in CRT (Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy), limited accessibility of the coronary sinus along with its branches and the mismatch between the region of latest left ventricular (LV) contraction and an adequate epimyocardial vein frequently lead to therapy failure and might even be responsible for the 30 % non-responders, although this aspect has not been thoroughly investigated yet. Further complications such as postoperative micro- (i.e. increased thresholds) or macro-dislodgement (i.e. loss of stimulation success) of the LV electrodes are frequent complications leading to reoperation or a change of strategy. The current transthoracic epimyocardial approach via mini-thoracotomy circumvents the aforesaid obstacles and is regarded as the first-choice alternative approach. Participation in the trial would prevent patients from this invasive, transthoracic approach and at the same time allow the same degree of freedom in lead placement. Risks and complications are in this case comparable to the open surgical approach but with a lower risk of intraoperative rib fracture, postoperative pain with consecutive pulmonary hypo-ventilation and pneumonia. Apart from the benefit of the single individual, societies benefit will include a much higher responder rate in CRT patients and less lead-associated infections. Thoracotomy with breach of the pleural cavity and single lung ventilation - a procedure that itself bears a high risk for postoperative atelectasis, pleural effusion and infection will be avoided. In patients on hemo-dialysis and patients who suffer from an infected pacemaker-system, extravascular lead placement should be preferred. Again, the current open, transthoracic epimyocardial approach via mini-thoracotomy is regarded as the first-choice alternative approach. Aim of this study is the validation of the feasibility of an alternative, minimal-invasive therapy method for implanting a cardiac pacemaker.