Skip to content

PROTECT-PACE STUDY - The Protection of Left Ventricular Function During Right Ventricular Pacing

PROTECT-PACE STUDY - The Protection of Left Ventricular Function During Right Ventricular Pacing. Does Right Ventricular High-septal Pacing Improve Outcome Compared With Right Ventricular Apical Pacing?

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00461734
Acronym
PROTECT-PACE
Enrollment
248
Registered
2007-04-18
Start date
2007-08-31
Completion date
2015-09-30
Last updated
2017-04-25

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Keywords

Right Ventricular High Septal Pacing, Right Ventricular Apical Pacing, Left Ventricular Dysfunction, Heart Block, Pacemaker, Atrial Fibrillation, Ejection Fraction

Brief summary

This study will be done in patients who require the implantation of a cardiac pacemaker (an electronic device that controls the heartbeat) for complete heart block (a heart rhythm abnormality resulting in a slow heart beat). Pacemakers regulate the heart beat by delivering pulses of electricity through special wires (pacing leads) which are placed inside the heart. This study will compare two groups of pacemaker patients. Each group will have their pacing leads placed in a particular location in the heart. The purpose of the study is to show whether the position used in one group is better for maintaining effective heart function compared to the position used in the other group. The leads in one group will be placed in a position called the Right Ventricular Apex. This is the traditional and most frequently used position for pacemaker leads. The leads in the other group will be placed in a position called the Right Ventricular High Septum. This is a less commonly used position, but may result in health benefits for the patients compared with the Right Ventricular Apex.

Detailed description

There is an increasing amount of evidence to suggest that other positions in the heart may be more effective than the conventional Right Ventricular Apex (RVA) position for restoring good heart function. The best site to place a lead has not yet been proven. This is a study comparing the long term clinical effects of two different lead positions. The measurements taken to assess the clinical effects include: * the effectiveness of the heart's pumping action (as measured by ultrasound scans) * measurements of how far patients can walk in 6 minutes * analysis of blood samples * collection of information from the pacemaker about heart rhythm problems Half of the patients in the study will receive conventional leads placed in the more common RVA position in the heart. The other half will receive a relatively new type of lead placed in what is called the Right Ventricular High Septal (RVHS) position. In order to fairly compare the outcomes of these two different lead positions this study has been designed as a 'randomized', 'blind' trial. This means that the group which patients will be entered into will be chosen at random and patients will not be told which group they are in. Patients will each have an equal (50:50) chance of being in either group. By carefully comparing the clinical differences between the two groups of patients, the study aims to prove whether or not there are additional benefits for patients when the RVHS lead position is used. All leads used in the study have been shown to be safe for patients and are available commercially for implantation. All of the implanting doctors involved in the study are experienced at implanting the pacemakers and leads that will be used in this study.

Interventions

OTHERRV lead placement site

Patients randomised to RV apical or high septal lead placement site

Sponsors

Medtronic Cardiac Rhythm and Heart Failure
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients with high grade AV block and sinus rhythm, scheduled to undergo dual chamber pacemaker implantation OR patients with high grade AV block and permanent atrial fibrillation, scheduled to undergo single chamber ventricular pacemaker implantation. * Patients aged 18 years or older.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients indicated for an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator or Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy. * Patients following junctional ablation. * Patients with a Myocardial Infarction within three months prior to enrollment. * Patients that received bypass surgery within three months prior to enrollment. * Patients that had a valve replacement within three months prior to enrollment or patients with a mechanical right heart valve. * Patients where a right ventricular lead cannot be placed i.e. complex congenital heart disease. * Patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. * Patients with acute coronary syndrome, unstable angina, severe mitral regurgitation and/or hemodynamically significant aortic stenosis. * Previous implanted pacemaker or cardioverter defibrillator. * Known paroxysmal atrial fibrillation or a documented episode of atrial fibrillation prior to enrollment. * Patients on amiodarone therapy within the last six months prior to enrollment. * Terminal conditions with a life expectancy of less than two years. * Participation in any other study that would confound the results of this study. * Psychological or emotional problems that may interfere with the volunteer's ability to provide full consent or fully understand the purposes of the study. * Pregnant patients or patients who may become pregnant during the time-scale of the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Intent to Treat Cohort).At 2-year follow-up
Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Per Protocol Cohort).At 2-year follow-up

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Incidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)At 2-year follow-up
Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Per Protocol Cohort)At 2-year follow-up
Incidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)At 2-year follow-up
Worsening of Heart FailureAt 5-year follow-up (study extension)Worsening of heart failure can be defined as: 1. Heart failure-related hospitalization requiring intravenous heart failure therapy, or 2. Emergency department visit for heart failure requiring intravenous heart failure therapy, or 3. Any other visit in which the patient presents with signs or symptoms consistent with heart failure or heart failure exacerbation or marked decline in ejection fraction \<35%, and intravenous heart failure therapy is required or titrate therapy. 4. CRT-P or CRT-D upgrade.
Echocardiographic Measures of Left Ventricular DyssynchronyAt 2-year follow-upNo analysis has been done for this section since that variable was not collected during the study.
Incidence of StrokeAt 5-year follow-up (study extension)
Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Intent to Treat Cohort)At 2-year follow-up
6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Per Protocol Cohort)At 2-year follow-up
All Cause MortalityAt 5-year follow-up (study extension)
6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Intent to Treat Cohort)At 2-year follow-up

Countries

Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

Partecipants initially assessed for eligibility were 248 of whom 8 were excluded before the randomization due to the following causes: * 4 failed inclusion/exclusion criteria * 2 cheanged medical condition resulting no longer eligible * 1 had a non-pacemaker procedure * 1 the site was aware of his/her randomization code in the envelope

Participants by arm

ArmCount
RV Apex
RV lead placement site: Patients randomised to RV apical lead placement site
120
RV High Septum
RV lead placement site: Patients randomised to RV high septal lead placement site
120
Total240

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicRV ApexRV High SeptumTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
95 Participants101 Participants196 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
25 Participants19 Participants44 Participants
Age, Continuous73.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.1
74.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
74.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5
Region of Enrollment
Australia
64 participants64 participants128 participants
Region of Enrollment
New Zealand
12 participants14 participants26 participants
Region of Enrollment
United Kingdom
44 participants42 participants86 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
47 Participants32 Participants79 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
73 Participants88 Participants161 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
6 / 1200 / 120
serious
Total, serious adverse events
78 / 12081 / 120

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Intent to Treat Cohort).

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Intent to Treat Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
RV ApexChange in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Intent to Treat Cohort).-2.29 percentageStandard Deviation 10.5
RV High SeptumChange in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Intent to Treat Cohort).-3.43 percentageStandard Deviation 8.4
p-value: 0.4347two-sided z-test
Primary

Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Per Protocol Cohort).

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Per Protocol Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
RV ApexChange in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Per Protocol Cohort).-2.04 percentageStandard Deviation 10.4
RV High SeptumChange in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction From Baseline to 2 Years (Per Protocol Cohort).-3.60 percentageStandard Deviation 7.8
p-value: 0.338two-sided z-test
Secondary

6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Intent to Treat Cohort)

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Intent to Treat Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
RV Apex6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Intent to Treat Cohort)391 meters
RV High Septum6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Intent to Treat Cohort)395 meters
p-value: 0.9719Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Per Protocol Cohort)

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Per Protocol Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
RV Apex6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Per Protocol Cohort)385.5 meters
RV High Septum6 Minute Hall-Walk Distance (Per Protocol Cohort)426.5 meters
p-value: 0.8779Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

All Cause Mortality

Time frame: At 5-year follow-up (study extension)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
RV ApexAll Cause Mortality14 participants
RV High SeptumAll Cause Mortality11 participants
Secondary

Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Intent to Treat Cohort)

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Intent to Treat Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
RV ApexBrain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Intent to Treat Cohort)138.2 picograms per milliliter
RV High SeptumBrain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Intent to Treat Cohort)111.3 picograms per milliliter
p-value: 0.0525t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Per Protocol Cohort)

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Per Protocol Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
RV ApexBrain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Per Protocol Cohort)176.6 picograms per milliliter
RV High SeptumBrain Natriuretic Peptide Levels (Per Protocol Cohort)110.8 picograms per milliliter
p-value: 0.1852t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Echocardiographic Measures of Left Ventricular Dyssynchrony

No analysis has been done for this section since that variable was not collected during the study.

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: No analysis has been done for this section since that variable was not collected during the study

Secondary

Incidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Intent to Treat Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
RV ApexIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)56.47 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 22.61
RV High SeptumIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)24.11 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 14.99
p-value: 0.2257Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Incidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)

Time frame: At 5-years follow-up (study extension)

Population: Intent to Treat Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
RV ApexIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)17.73 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 11.95
RV High SeptumIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Intent to Treat Cohort)63.83 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 36.82
p-value: 0.8868Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Incidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)

Time frame: At 5-year follow-up (study extension)

Population: Per Protocol Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
RV ApexIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)62.75 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 36.21
RV High SeptumIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)18.61 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 16.61
p-value: 0.6151Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Incidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)

Time frame: At 2-year follow-up

Population: Per Protocol Cohort with data available

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
RV ApexIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)40.98 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 20.04
RV High SeptumIncidence of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Recorded by the Pacemakers (Per Protocol Cohort)6.66 minutes per dayStandard Deviation 4.29
p-value: 0.548Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Incidence of Stroke

Time frame: At 5-year follow-up (study extension)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
RV ApexIncidence of Stroke5 participants
RV High SeptumIncidence of Stroke6 participants
Secondary

Worsening of Heart Failure

Worsening of heart failure can be defined as: 1. Heart failure-related hospitalization requiring intravenous heart failure therapy, or 2. Emergency department visit for heart failure requiring intravenous heart failure therapy, or 3. Any other visit in which the patient presents with signs or symptoms consistent with heart failure or heart failure exacerbation or marked decline in ejection fraction \<35%, and intravenous heart failure therapy is required or titrate therapy. 4. CRT-P or CRT-D upgrade.

Time frame: At 5-year follow-up (study extension)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
RV ApexWorsening of Heart Failure19 episodes
RV High SeptumWorsening of Heart Failure17 episodes

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 7, 2026