Skip to content

RV Septal Versus Minimized RV Pacing in Sick Sinus Syndrome

Comparison of Right Ventricular Septal Pacing to Minimized Right Ventricular Septal Stimulation in Patients With Sick Sinus Syndrome

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01477138
Acronym
VOTE
Enrollment
126
Registered
2011-11-22
Start date
2011-07-31
Completion date
2013-12-31
Last updated
2011-11-22

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

Conditions

Sick Sinus Syndrome

Keywords

Sick Sinus Syndrome, Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy, Pacemaker, Artificial, SSS

Brief summary

Background: * Potential negative effects of pacing in the RV-apex are well documented * However, study results comparing septal / RVOT-pacing versus RV-apical pacing controversial. * The optimal pacing mode in SSS (DDDR versus AAIR) is unclear, as the DDD (R) mode with an AV delay ≤ 220 ms should be the preferred pacing mode, according to the DANPACE trial \[DANPACE, ESC 2010, Stockholm\]. Aim: \- to evaluate chronic effects of proven right ventricular septal compared to minimized right ventricular septal pacing in patients with SSS Inclusion criterion: -Pacemaker indication according to current guidelines: sick sinus syndrome (SSS) Exclusion criteria: * Life expectancy \< 2 years * Age \<18 years * Noncompliance with regard to participation in the study * Pregnancy * AV block ° 2 and higher * Permanent atrial fibrillation * Heart failure NYHA III and IV, reduced LV-EF \<40% * ICD indication * Acute coronary syndrome. PCI or CABG \<3 months * Heart transplant * Placement of septal RV electrode is not possible Study design: * Prospective, monocentric, randomized, double-blinded * Run-in phase: for weeks AAI \[R\]-DDD \[R\] * Randomization: two groups A) septal right ventricular chamber pacing: mode DDD \[R\] versus B) Reduction of unnecessary ventricular pacing: AAI \[R\]-DDD \[R\]. * FU: 6 and 12-months Primary endpoints: -LV ejection fraction and end-systolic LV volume after 12 months. Secondary endpoints: -LV end-diastolic volume, TAPSE, parameters of dyssynchrony (SPWMD, LV-PEP, IVMD), AF-burden, % ventricular pacing, CPX: peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2), VO2 AT, VO2/HR, VE/VCO2 slope; QoL scores (SF-36) after 12 months. Statistics/sample size estimation: In order to detect a difference in LVEF of 5% and for LV-ESV of 5 mL between the 2 groups after 12 months: * 90% power/alpha 5%: 84 patients per group * 80% power/alpha 5%: 63 patients per group * 10% for compensation of drop-outs / patients lost of follow-up. Two-sided 5% type 1 error Analysis intention-to-treat and based on the finally programmed pacing mode. Material * PG: market released dual chamber pacemakers with the ability to pace AAI(R) -DDD(R) * pacing leads: market-released standard active electrodes * RV electrode: septal verified under multi-level screening (RAO/LAO) and ECG (LBBB narrow \<150 ms / inferior axis)

Detailed description

Background: * Potential negative effects of pacing in the RV-apex are well documented * Asynchronous ventricular activation * reduction of systolic and diastolic LV function * Experimental data: histological changes * Asymmetric LV hypertrophy and thinning * However, study results comparing septal / RVOT-pacing versus RV-apical pacing controversial: * Acute versus chronic * Small number of cases, uncontrolled, unblinded, * Brief periods of observation in the cross-over design (3 months) * RVOT often summarizes different stimulation sites: high RVOT, lateral, septal. Actually only limited data with proven septal stimulation * No objective performance assessment (CPX) * Assessment of alternative stimulation site previously RVOT versus RV-apex, * ventricular pacing compared to ventricular pacing, then tested a potential harm to another * The question of the optimal pacing mode of patients with SSS (DDDR versus AAIR) appears to be open again. While in Germany, two-chamber systems with AAI \[R\] mode with ventricular back-up are used, should the DDD (R) mode with an AV delay ≤ 220 ms be the preferred pacing mode, according to the results of the DANPACE trial for patients with SSS \[DANPACE, ESC 2010, Stockholm\]. Aim: \- to evaluate chronic effects of proven right ventricular septal compared to minimized right ventricular septal pacing in patients with SSS Inclusion criterion: -Pacemaker indication according to current guidelines: sick sinus syndrome (SSS) Exclusion criteria: * Life expectancy \< 2 years * Age \<18 years * Noncompliance with regard to participation in the study * Pregnancy * AV block ° 2 and higher * Permanent atrial fibrillation * Heart failure NYHA III and IV, reduced LV-EF \<40% * ICD indication * Acute coronary syndrome. PCI or CABG \<3 months * Heart transplant * Placement of septal RV electrode is not possible Study design: * Prospective, monocentric, randomized, double-blinded * Run-in phase: 4 weeks AAI \[R\]-DDD \[R\] * ECG, PM-interrogation, echocardiography, performance diagnostics, CPX, QoL questionnaire * Randomization: two groups 4 weeks (between 3 to 6 weeks) after implant A) septal right ventricular chamber pacing: mode DDD \[R\] versus B) Reduction of unnecessary ventricular pacing: AAI \[R\]-DDD \[R\]. * FU: 6 and 12-months * ECG, Holter-ECG, PM-interrogation, echocardiography, performance diagnostics, CPX, QoL questionnaire * Extension of follow-up if possible Primary endpoints: -LV ejection fraction and end-systolic LV volume after 12 months. Secondary endpoints: -LV end-diastolic volume, TAPSE, parameters of dyssynchrony (SPWMD, LV-PEP, IVMD), AF-burden, % ventricular pacing, CPX: peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2), VO2 AT, VO2/HR, VE/VCO2 slope; QoL scores (SF-36) after 12 months. Blinding: * Patient compared to the pacing mode * Physician: offline analysis of echo and CPX blinded to the pacing mode Statistics/sample size estimation: In order to detect a difference in LVEF of 5% and for LV-ESV of 5 mL between the 2 groups after 12 months: * 90% power/alpha 5%: 84 patients per group * 80% power/alpha 5%: 63 patients per group * 10% for compensation of drop-outs / patients lost of follow-up. Two-sided 5% type 1 error Analysis intention-to-treat and based on the finally programmed pacing mode. Material * PG: market released dual chamber pacemakers with the ability to pace AAI(R) -DDD(R) * pacing leads: market-released standard active electrodes (eg. BSCI FineLine 4470 and 4471) Implantation * Transvenously * RA-electrode: if possible, short atrial conduction time * RV electrode: septal verified under multi-level screening (RAO/LAO) and ECG (LBBB narrow \<150 ms / inferior axis)

Interventions

PROCEDUREpacemaker implantation, AAI(R)-DDD(R) versus DDD(R)

Indication for pacemaker implantation: sick sinus syndrome in conformity with the current guidelines. Only market-released CE certified 2-chamber cardiac pacemakers and electrodes are used. The implantation is done according to the applicable standards. Active RV-lead is positioned on the right ventricular septum.

Sponsors

Klinikum Nürnberg
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Pacemaker indication according to current guidelines: sick sinus syndrome (SSS)

Exclusion criteria

* Life expectancy \<2 years * Age \< 18 years * Noncompliance with regard to participation in the study * Pregnancy * AV block ° 2 and higher * Permanent atrial fibrillation * Heart failure NYHA III and IV, reduced LV-EF \< 40% * ICD indication * Acute coronary syndrome. PCI or CABG \< 3 months * Heart transplant * Placement of septal RV electrode is not possible

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
end-systolic LV volumeat randomisation and after 12 months
left ventricular ejection fraction (LV-EF)at randomisation and after 12 monthsTTE, Simpson, biplane

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
peak VO2, VO2 AT, VO2/HR, VE/VCO2 slopeat randomisation and after 12 monthsCPX: cardiopulmonary exercice testing
quality of life-scoresat randomisation and after 12 monthsSF-36
TAPSEat randomisation and after 12 months
% ventricular pacingat randomisation and after 12 months
LV end diastolic volumeat randomisation and after 12 monthsTTE
AF burdenat randomisation and after 12 months
echocardiographic parameter of dyssynchronyat randomisation and after 12 monthsTTE, SPWMD, LV-PEP, IVMD

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Primary ContactDirk Bastian, Dr.med
dirk.bastian@klinikum-nuernberg.de+499113982989
Backup ContactNatalia Rohr
natalia.rohr@klinikum-nuernberg.de

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026