Skip to content

Specialized Pacing for Patients With Congenital Heart Disease

A Randomized Trial of Closed Loop Stimulation After Epicardial Pacemaker Implantation for Congenital Heart Disease

Status
Terminated
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03361189
Enrollment
4
Registered
2017-12-04
Start date
2021-05-09
Completion date
2021-11-03
Last updated
2023-01-20

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

Conditions

Bradycardia Sinus, Congenital Heart Disease

Keywords

Congenital heart disease, Pacemaker, Sinus node dysfunction

Brief summary

The closed-loop stimulation (CLS) algorithm is a novel sensor-based technology that relies on the change in myocardial systolic impedance for modulation of the heart rate during physical and emotional stress.3 The pacing algorithm has been shown to be highly effective for a wide range of clinical scenarios. Despite the fact that congenital heart disease (CHD) patients are likely to derive significant benefit in terms of functional ability and aerobic capacity using this novel technology, the CLS system has not been adequately studied in this population. As many CHD patients also undergo epicardial placement of pacing systems at the time of concomitant cardiac surgery, CLS has been less often utilized in this population given almost no data in the setting of surgical electrode placement. The present study intends to examine the benefits of the CLS algorithm in the CHD population, employing the use of epicardial pacemaker systems in the study protocol.

Detailed description

Sinus node dysfunction is highly prevalent among patients with congenital heart disease, manifesting as resting bradycardia or chronotropic incompetence. As children and adults with congenital heart disease are now expected to have increasing life-expectancy; with well over 1 million adult patients currently living in North America,1 issues such as mental health, acquired comorbidities and their impact on overall cardiovascular health have assumed increased scrutiny. It is now understood that objective measures of aerobic capacity, such as peak VO2, peak VE/VCO2, and heart rate reserve predict all-cause mortality for adult patients with congenital heart disease. As the chronotropic response during exercise is a key determinant of aerobic capacity, improvement in sensor-based technology for heart rate support is expected to have a significant impact on functional capacity and longevity in this population. Some forms of congenital heart disease, such as single ventricle physiology after the Fontan population are especially likely to benefit, as cardiac output is determined almost exclusively by heart rate during exertion due to limited ability to augment cardiac stroke volume.2 It is also becoming increasingly clear that sedentary behaviors are highly relevant to overall cardiovascular health in the general adult population. Adult patients with congenital heart disease are at especially high risk for sedentary behavior as a result of 1) chronic restriction for physical activities based on ill-founded medical advice, 2) chronotropic incompetence resulting from prior surgical palliations and hemodynamic stressors, and 3) overestimation of physical activity. 5.0 Enrollment/Randomization Patient Enrollment: The treating physician will identify potential subjects with a previously implanted pacemaker and present a brief overview of the study; if the subject is interested, the study will be described in detail. Informed consent will be obtained by the investigator after discussing the study, including the voluntary nature of participation and notification the subject can withdraw at any time. Ample time for questions and answers will be allowed. The investigator will give the subject and his/her legal guardian the opportunity to take the consent home to think about it more, with the option to call or meet with the investigator to ask additional questions. If the subject and/or his/her parent/legal guardian agree to participate, the investigator will ask them to sign a written, informed consent and assent. A copy of the assent and consent will be given to the subject and/or his/her parent/legal guardian. Randomization Procedure: This will be a single-blind placebo-controlled randomized crossover study with 2 treatments: CLS-on versus CLS-off (accelerometer only). Each enrolled patient will receive both treatments for 3 months. The order of treatments will be randomized 1:1. Randomization There will be a 50:50 randomization, with half the subjects randomized to CLS-on then CLS-off, and half randomized to CLS-off then CLS-on. Subjects previously receiving rate-responsive pacing with CLS that are randomly selected to CLS-on will continue with the identical programmed parameters. For subjects not previously receiving rate-responsive pacing with CLS that are randomly selected to CLS-on nominal programming will be utilized with a base rate of 60 beats per minute. Subjects will then initiate treatment A (CLS-on or CLS-off) in a blinded fashion. At 3 months, subjects will undergo testing. After 3 months of treatment A, subjects will be reprogrammed to treatment B. Tracking of physical activity with the device accelerometer will continue during this period. After 3 months of treatment B, repeat testing will be repeated. Patients will be followed during both treatment phases per usual clinical routine. Patients who experience significant symptoms (extreme fatigue, debilitating palpitations, or other clinically relevant symptoms) will be evaluated by their treating physician. Subjects that have any adverse events during treatment A will discontinue treatment A and immediately crossover to treatment B. Subjects with events during treatment B will be removed from the study and unblinded. Further treatment will be determined by the treating physician.

Interventions

DEVICEClosed loop stimulation

Closed loop stimulation is a physiologic, rate-adaptive pacing algorithm.

DEVICEStandard rate response

Standard rate response is an algorithm to increase heartrate based on movement

Sponsors

Biotronik, Inc.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
University of California, Los Angeles
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

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

Intervention model description

Patient Enrollment: The treating physician will identify potential subjects with a previously implanted pacemaker and present a brief overview of the study. Informed consent will be obtained by the investigator after discussing the study, including the voluntary nature of participation and notification the subject can withdraw at any time. The investigator will give the subject and his/her legal guardian the opportunity to take the consent home to think about it more, with the option to call or meet with the investigator to ask additional questions. If the subject and/or his/her parent/legal guardian agree to participate, the investigator will ask them to sign a written, informed consent and assent. Randomization Procedure: This will be a single-blind placebo-controlled randomized crossover study with 2 treatments: CLS-on versus CLS-off (accelerometer only). Each enrolled patient will receive both treatments for 3 months. The order of treatments will be randomized 1:1.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
14 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Congenital heart disease • Simple, moderate, or complex congenital heart disease * Adolescent or adult age group (age \>14 and \<65 years) * Significant sinus node dysfunction * Atrial pacing percentage \>70%11 * Intrinsic dysfunction resulting from congenital lesion or cardiac surgery * Secondary sinus node dysfunction due to antiarrhythmic drug therapy * Existing, fully functional pacemaker or ICD with CLS capability * Epicardial or transvenous route of pacemaker implantation

Exclusion criteria

* Unable to complete cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) * Contraindication to CPET * Decreased mental capacity or known psychiatric disorder * Congestive heart failure, NYHA cass IV * Total atrial tachyarrhythmia burden \>20%

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Blunted or Unchanged Effect of Mental Stress on Heart Rate3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 monthsHeart rate in response to mental stress during each intervention; a math test was performed during autonomic testing
Heart Rate Response During a 48-hour Assessment Period3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 monthsAverage heart rate as measured by Holter monitor for 48 hours during each intervention

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Average Oxygen Consumption During Each Intervention3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 monthsOxygen uptake as determined by cardiopulmonary gas exchange during a stress test under 4 conditions: Sitting/standing 60 seconds Kettlebell walking 110 seconds Stairs 176 seconds Sweeping 62 seconds
Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-363 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 monthsQuality of life as assessed by SF-36 questionnaire following each period of intervetion. SF- 36 investigates the standard of quality of life through a general health assessment and not specific to a particular disease, age or treatment group. It is a 36-item questionnaire measuring 8 domains \[physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health (role physical), bodily pain, general health, energy, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional health (role emotional), and emotional wellbeing\]. Each domain score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores reflecting better health-related functional status.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
CLS-On Followed by CLS-Off
Subjects in this arm will be programmed to CLS-on to received closed loop stimulation-based pacing for 3 months, followed by a standard rate response for 3 months. Closed loop stimulation: Closed loop stimulation is a physiologic, rate-adaptive pacing algorithm. Standard rate response: Standard rate response is an algorithm to increase heartrate based on movement
2
CLS-Off Followed by CLS-On
Subjects in this arm, will be placed in a standard rate response for 3 months, followed by CLS-on to received closed loop stimulation-based pacing for 3 months. Closed loop stimulation: Closed loop stimulation is a physiologic, rate-adaptive pacing algorithm. Standard rate response: Standard rate response is an algorithm to increase heartrate based on movement
2
Total4

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyPacemake replacement01
Overall StudyReceived heart transplant10

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicCLS-On Followed by CLS-OffCLS-Off Followed by CLS-OnTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
2 Participants2 Participants4 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
2 Participants2 Participants4 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
2 Participants2 Participants4 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
2 participants2 participants4 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
1 Participants2 Participants3 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 40 / 4
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 40 / 4
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 40 / 4

Outcome results

Primary

Heart Rate Response During a 48-hour Assessment Period

Average heart rate as measured by Holter monitor for 48 hours during each intervention

Time frame: 3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 months

Population: Participants with interpretable Holter monitor data under both interventions

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
CLS-OnHeart Rate Response During a 48-hour Assessment Period74 beats per minute
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Heart Rate Response During a 48-hour Assessment Period73 beats per minute
Primary

Number of Participants With Blunted or Unchanged Effect of Mental Stress on Heart Rate

Heart rate in response to mental stress during each intervention; a math test was performed during autonomic testing

Time frame: 3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 months

Population: One participant completed autonomic testing

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
CLS-OnNumber of Participants With Blunted or Unchanged Effect of Mental Stress on Heart RateHeart rate blunted1 Participants
CLS-OnNumber of Participants With Blunted or Unchanged Effect of Mental Stress on Heart RateHeart rate unchanged0 Participants
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Number of Participants With Blunted or Unchanged Effect of Mental Stress on Heart RateHeart rate blunted0 Participants
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Number of Participants With Blunted or Unchanged Effect of Mental Stress on Heart RateHeart rate unchanged1 Participants
Secondary

Average Oxygen Consumption During Each Intervention

Oxygen uptake as determined by cardiopulmonary gas exchange during a stress test under 4 conditions: Sitting/standing 60 seconds Kettlebell walking 110 seconds Stairs 176 seconds Sweeping 62 seconds

Time frame: 3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 months

Population: Only one participant completed stress tests, due to COVID restrictions, equipment and staffing issues

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
CLS-OnAverage Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionKettlebell walking1.02 liters/minute
CLS-OnAverage Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionSitting/Standing1.01 liters/minute
CLS-OnAverage Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionStairs0.82 liters/minute
CLS-OnAverage Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionSweeping0.78 liters/minute
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Average Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionSweeping0.80 liters/minute
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Average Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionSitting/Standing1.04 liters/minute
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Average Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionKettlebell walking1.10 liters/minute
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Average Oxygen Consumption During Each InterventionStairs0.87 liters/minute
Secondary

Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36

Quality of life as assessed by SF-36 questionnaire following each period of intervetion. SF- 36 investigates the standard of quality of life through a general health assessment and not specific to a particular disease, age or treatment group. It is a 36-item questionnaire measuring 8 domains \[physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health (role physical), bodily pain, general health, energy, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional health (role emotional), and emotional wellbeing\]. Each domain score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores reflecting better health-related functional status.

Time frame: 3 months after the start of each intervention, a total of 6 months

Population: Two participants completed SF36 assessments

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Physical functioning95 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Role physical100 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Bodily pain90 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36General health67.5 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Energy/vitality47.5 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Social Function100 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Role emotional100 score on a scale
CLS-OnQuality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Emotional wellbeing86 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Emotional wellbeing84 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Physical functioning92.5 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Energy/vitality47.5 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Role physical100 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Role emotional100 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Bodily pain85 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36Social Function100 score on a scale
CLS-Off (Standard Rate Response)Quality of Life as Assessed by SF-36General health42.5 score on a scale

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