Skip to content

Safety and the Effects of Isolated Left Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Bradyarrhythmias

Randomized Clinical Study to Assess the Safety and the Effects of Isolated Left Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Bradyarrhythmias

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01717469
Acronym
SAFE-LVPACE
Enrollment
12
Registered
2012-10-30
Start date
2012-06-30
Completion date
2017-06-30
Last updated
2012-11-06

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

Conditions

Arrhythmias, Atrioventricular Block, Bradyarrhythmias, Cardiovascular Disease, Ventricular Dysfunction

Keywords

Pacemaker, Pacemaker implantation, Coronary sinus, Ventricular dysfunction, Right ventricular pacing, Left ventricular pacing

Brief summary

Previous experimental and clinical studies have consistently suggested that right ventricular (RV) apical pacing has important adverse effects. Ventricular pacing, however, is required, and cannot be reduced in many patients with atrioventricular block. The SAFE-LVPACE study is a randomized controlled trial that compare the effects of conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing vs. left ventricular (LV) in patients with AV block.

Detailed description

Over the past several years, there has been growing concern over the significant deleterious effects of RV pacing, including electromechanical dyssynchrony, proarrhythmia and development of heart failure (HF). However, it remains unclear whether pacing-related ventricular dyssynchrony can translate into significant LV structural changes and produce important clinical impairment in an average pacemaker population with compromised AV conduction. Alternatively, left ventricular pacing has been shown to minimize ventricular dyssynchrony and to improve symptoms and prognosis in patients with mild to moderated systolic HF and prolonged QRS duration. This randomized controlled study is been conducted to compare the effects of conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing vs. left ventricular (LV) in patients with AV block. The hypothesis is that isolated LV pacing through the coronary sinus can be used safely and provide greater hemodynamic benefits to patients with AV block and normal ventricular function who require only the correction of heart rate. Specifically, the investigator aims are to evaluate the safety, efficacy and the effects of left ventricular pacing using active-fixation coronary sinus lead-the Attain StarFix® Model 4195 OTW Lead, compared to right ventricular pacing in patients with implantation criteria for conventional pacemaker stimulation.

Interventions

DEVICELeft ventricular pacing through coronary sinus tributaries (Attain StarFix)

Left ventricular pacing in patients with bradycardia

DEVICERight ventricular pacing (Medtronic)

Conventional right ventricular pacing in patients with bradycardia.

Sponsors

Duke University
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Sao Paulo
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Older than 18 years * Pacemaker initial implant by transvenous approach * Presence of AV block * Presence of atrial fibrillation / atrial flutter with slow ventricular response * Left ventricular systolic function \> 0.40 * Subject agreed to participate and signed the consent form

Exclusion criteria

* Absence of venous access * Impediment of venous access due to presence of intracardiac defects * Impediment of venous access due to presence of tricuspid valve prosthesis * Need for radiotherapy in the chest * Presence of chest deformity * Pregnancy * Life expectancy of less than one year * Contraindication to administration of iodinated contrast (creatinine \> 3.0) Unable to attend the follow-up appointments

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Surgical successParticipants will be evaluated during the perioperative period and during the hospital stay, an expected average of 2 daysSurgical success: absence of complications

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Echocardiographic and Clinical compositeParticipants will be evaluated at 6 and 24 months after PM implantationEchocardiographic: ventricular dysfunction Clinical composite: all mortality, cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization, heart failure

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of LifeParticipants will be evaluated at 6 and 24 months after PM implantationQuality of life: improvement on quality of life scores measured by three questionnaires: 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), a disease specific questionnaire for pacemaker patients (Aquarel) and Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF).

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Primary ContactRoberto Costa, MD PhD
rcosta@incor.usp.br55-11-2661
Backup ContactKatia R Silva, RN PhD
katia.research@gmail.com9195978619

Outcome results

None listed

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